1. ISLN-FEBRUARY (JANUARY) 2016 Materials can be accessed at http://www.terryrhodes1science.com/ 1

2. AGENDA  Connection to December’s Open Space  Social Studies and Science Overview  Congruent Formative Assessments  CHETL  Debriefing

3.  Kentucky’s Academic Standards  Characteristics of Highly Effective Teaching and Learning – CHETL  Assessment Literacy  Leadership

4. Pausing Paraphrasing Providing Data Posing Questions Presume Positive Intentions Putting Ideas on the Table Paying Attention Norms of Collaboration

5. Social Studies Review/Update Jacqueline Coleman

6. Last month…  Professional learning focus (perspectives, MCF, professional learning vs. professional development)  Collaboration / time to refine inquiry unit  Create PLC Priority Plan (department/school/district)  What does your PLC need moving forward?  What resources/protocols can you utilize?  Are the PLC priority plans vertically aligned within your district? This month…  Lesson models (Washington Co Middle & Mercer Co High) – SS CHETL Analysis  Breakout Sessions  Questions, Sources, Tasks  Refine PLC Priority Plans  Begin creating 2 nd Inquiry Unit  Student work from 1 st unit will be analyzed in February  Goal = SSTLN participants will create 2 inquiry units to build state-wide repository for all teachers to access

7. SCIENCE REVIEW/UPDATE Terry Rhodes 7

8. Professional Development vs Professional Learning Effective PLC’s Dr. Pruitt PE Struggles Task Development PLC Priority Plans Electronic Toolbox Phenomenon: Does all phenomenon have to be phenomenal?? Experiencing Science as students Collaborative work Analyzing tasks and student work Formative Assessments 8

9. STLN ONLINE TOOL BOX

10. Modification Protocol

11. Year at a Glance

12. CONGRUENT FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS MODULE #2 12 JESSAMINE COUNTY SCHOOLS Implementing the JCS Recipe for Success

13. LEARNING TARGET formative assessments Analyze the quality of formative assessments and determine if they are congruent with the lesson’s learning target. 13

14. WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY ABOUT FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT? “... improved formative assessment helps low achievers more than other students and so reduces the range of achievement while raising achievement overall.” 14 Inside the Black Box, Black & Wiliam

15. WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY ABOUT FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT? Typical effect sizes of the formative assessment experiments were between 0.4 and 0.7.  An effect size of 0.4 means that the average pupil involved in an innovation would record the same achievement as a pupil in the top 35% of those not so involved.  An effect size gain of 0.7 in the recent international comparative studies in mathematics5 would have raised the score of a nation in the middle of the pack of 41 countries (e.g., the U.S.) to one of the top five. 15 Inside the Black Box, Black & Wiliam

16. JCS RECIPE FOR SUCCESS 16

17. WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY ABOUT FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT? Formative assessment practices involve: actionable feedback to students (the ultimate users of assessment information) student self-analysis (the ultimate users of assessment information) questioning (that creates an opportunity for students to think & express their ideas) adjustment of instruction 17

18. WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY ABOUT FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT? IF our formative assessments aren’t measuring the right thing to begin with, the practices and techniques won’t have much impact. Intentional focus on congruency is critical. 18

19. WHAT IS CONGRUENCY? ALIGNEDCONGRUENT portion directly related to a portion of the standard or target but may not cover all parts or get to the required depth intentional relationship -intentional relationship between ALL parts of the standard or target and the activities and assessments within a lesson/unit progression of learning targets throughout the unit should scaffold to the appropriate level intended by the standard -progression of learning targets throughout the unit should scaffold to the appropriate level intended by the standard 19

20. LET’S ANALYZE A FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT FOR CONGRUENCY 20

21. TWO GUIDING QUESTIONS congruent 1.Is the formative assessment congruent with the learning target? best choice 2.Is the formative assessment task the best choice to measure student mastery of the learning target? 21

22. TARGET- METHOD MATCH 22

23. F.A. ANALYSIS FOCUS LESSON “I Do It” 23

24. F.A. ANALYSIS GUIDED INSTRUCTION “We Do It” 24

25. F.A. ANALYSIS COLLABORATIVE WORK “You Do It Together” 25

26. REVIEW OF LEARNING TARGET formative assessments Analyze the quality of formative assessments and determine if they are congruent with the lesson’s learning target. 26

27. F.A. ANALYSIS INDEPENDENT WORK “You Do It Alone”  Use the formative assessment you brought with you today  Analyze the quality of the formative assessment and determine if it is congruent with the learning target. 27

28. F.A. ANALYSIS INDEPENDENT WORK “You Do It Alone” 28 Talk to your table partner - Why do the formative assessment need to be based on a target within the standards?

29. FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING 1F: Designing Student Assessments 3D: Using Assessment in Instruction 29

30. F.A. “LOOK FORS” IN THE FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING Underline or highlight up to 5 classroom “look-fors” critical to effective formative assessment practices. 30

31. CHETL CONNECTIONS  Read the section of CHETL that corresponds with the number at the top of your handout.  Highlight those characteristics that:  were demonstrated from the teacher perspective  you experienced from the student perspective.

32.  Join others at the poster with the number on your handout.  Discuss and record the connections you found.  Recorder – person whose first name begins closest to A  Reporter – person whose first name begins closest to Z CHETL CONNECTIONS

33. Content Area CHETL Documents Arts and Humanities CHETL Career and Technical Education CHETL English/Language Arts Library Media Mathematics Practical Living and Career Studies Science Social Studies Technology World Languages Links to Content-Specific CHETL Documents

34. DEBRIEF AND EVALUATION 34 Next meeting is March 23 Make-up date is April 20 Please complete the evaluation