1. Lincoln County High School REDUCING NOVICE IN EOC BIOLOGY Donita Brock donita.brock@lincoln.kyschools.us Brittany Cox brittany.cox@lincoln.kyschools.us

2.  LCHS has an enrollment of approximately 1056 students.  The community is very rural with 61% of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch.  12.6% of students qualify for special education services. WHO ARE WE?

3.  In 2011 LCHS was identified as a priority school.  By definition priority schools perform in the bottom 15% of schools in the state. WHERE DID WE START?

4.  2012-2013 Biology EOC scores  Novice: 28.5%  Proficient: 19%  Distinguished 1.1%  2012-2013 GAP  Novice: 33.2%  Apprentice: 52.7%  Proficient / Distinguished: 14.1% WHERE DID WE START?

5.  Named Proficient/ Progressing School following 2013-2014 test scores.  Ranked in the 88 th percentile of schools. WHERE ARE WE NOW?

6. Biology EOC Scores 2013-2014 year.  Novice: 18.5%  10 percentage point decrease in one year.  Proficient: 30.2%  11.2 percentage point increase in one year  Distinguished: 6%  4.9 percentage point increase in one year WHERE ARE WE NOW?

7. Biology GAP EOC Scores 2013-2014 year.  Novice: 22.2%  10 percentage point decrease in one year.  Apprentice: 46.8%  5.9 percentage point decrease in one year  Proficient /Distinguished: 31.0  16.9 percentage point increase in one year WHERE ARE WE NOW?

8.  Biology EOC Scores 2014-2015 year.  Scores are still embargoed.  Based on preliminary data, we are very excited to see the official school report card! WHERE ARE WE NOW?

9. Designing and Implementing systems THE PATH WE'VE TAKEN

10.  New department leadership.  Focus on depth instead of breadth of learning.  New assessment system.  Structured units.  Integration of high-yield strategies.  Focus on meeting the needs of all learners.  Data driven instruction. WHAT CHANGED IN 2013-2014?

11. FOCUS ON DEPTH OF LEARNING

12. "We should reduce the content contained in most standards documents by about 50 percent- even more in language arts. It stands to reason that if we have fewer standards but teach them in adequate depth, students will learn more, retain more, and learn to think. And test scores will take care of themselves." p. 44 (SCHMOKER, 2011)

13.  To focus on depth over breadth of learning we identified power standards.  Power standards are the highest priority standards within a curriculum. FOCUS ON DEPTH OF LEARNING

14.  Less pressure to cover the vast content in limited time.  Increased time to teach to mastery level and remediate when necessary.  Increased intentionality in lesson planning, unit planning, and assessment.  Facilitate focused and meaningful data monitoring. BENEFITS OF POWER STANDARDS

15. 1.Prior to initial unit planning each Sub-PLC member reviewed the End-of-Course Blue Print to inform decisions 2.Each Sub-PLC member chose what they felt to be the most essential standards for that unit of standards. 3.During Sub-PLC meetings, each teacher presented the standards they identified. 4.Power Standards were selected based on consensus and discussion. 5.As a final step, the instructional time allotted to each topic was compared to the Biology EOC End of Course Test Blueprint to insure alignment. STRATEGY FOR CHOOSING POWER STANDARDS CONTINUED

16. ASSESSMENT AND UNIT STRUCTURE

17.  Each power standard is formally assessed at least three times during a unit.  Pre-test baseline  Learn Check  Unit Exam  Students have the opportunity to remediate and retake assessments. ASSESSMENTS

18.  In order to reflect the rigor of the EOC, all assessment questions are challenging and utilize high-level vocabulary terms.  Integrating quality core assessment items and mirroring quality core language is a non- negotiable.  Retakes may be different multiple choice assessment items, written assessment items, or a performance based assessment. BUILDING ASSESSMENTS

19. HIGH-YIELD STRATEGIES AND MEETING THE NEEDS OF ALL LEARNERS

20.  In Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement (2001) Marzano and Pickering identify strategies that universally improve student achievement.  High-Yield Strategies  Identifying similarities and differences  Summarizing and note taking  Nonlinguistic representations  Cooperative learning  Setting objectives and providing feedback  Reinforcing effort and providing recognition  Questions, cues, and advance organizers HIGH YIELD STRATEGIES

21.  Using at least one high-yield strategy to teach each power standard became a non-negotiable.  High-yield strategies were chosen as part of common planning during Sub-PLC work IMPLEMENTING HIGH-YIELD STRATEGIES

22.  Our primary high yield strategy was setting high goals for all of our students.  We determined that our population would be best served by strategies that were:  visual  anchored in the real world  conceptual  vocabulary focused  encouraged deeper content processing through writing. TAILORING HIGH-YIELD STRATEGIES TO OUR POPULATION

23. To maximize student engagement we organized lessons using the 4 essentials of a lesson plan (Schmoeker, 2011). 1.Learning Target 2.Teaching/Modeling/Demonstrating 3.Guided Practice 4.Formative Assessment ORGANIZING STRATEGIES FOR INSTRUCTION

24.  Growth Mindset  "No matter what your ability is, effort is what ignites that ability and turns it into accomplishment" (Dweck, 2006)  Served all student populations.  Test Control Strategies  Developed with other sophomore level teachers  Students attack questions through a set routine to promote confidence and accuracy. TEACHING STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS

25. DATA DRIVEN INSTRUCTION

26. We collected various types of data including:  Baseline Data  Formative Assessments  Learn Check Data  Unit Assessment Data  Projects  Authentic Writings  Interim Assessment Data  Student Plus/Deltas DATA COLLECTION

27. All data was examined in the Sub-PLC using the 5 data questions 1.What does the data tell us? 2.What does the data not tell us? 3.What are causes for celebration? 4.Red flags? 5.What are our next steps? MAKING SENSE OF THE DATA

28.  Standards were retaught at whole class level if a minimum of 70% of students did not demonstrate mastery.  Data determined pacing and informed future strategy selection.  Identification and filling of instructional gaps. DECISIONS FROM DATA

29. TARGETED INTERVENTION

30.  Intervention needs determined by assessment data.  Instructional targets determined by data trends.  Additional vocabulary support.  Small group hands on work to fill the gaps. RED ZONE

31. REFLECTING ON PRACTICE

32.  Makato Yoshida developed a process in Japan in which teachers continually improve the quality of their instruction they provide their students.  Goal: not only to produce an effective lesson, but also to understand why and how the lesson works to promote understanding among students.  Form a team  Decide on target/skill  Plan lesson  Observe lesson - observe students only  Meet as a team to reflect  Plan Lesson 2 and start process over LESSON STUDY

33.  Assessment Data Analysis  Student Feedback Analysis  Sub-PLC Teachers Feedback Analysis UNIT CRITIQUES

34.  Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.  Marzano, R., & Pickering, D. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development  Schmoker, M. (2011). Focus elevating the essentials to radically improve student learning. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD.  Yoshida, M. (1999). Lesson study [Jugyokenkyu] in elementary school mathematics in Japan: A case study. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (1999 Annual Meeting), Montreal, Canada. REFERENCES