blog post action plan table update july 2011

8/6/2019 Blog Post Action Plan Table Update July 2011

1/5

OUTCOMES ACTIVITIES RESOURCES/RESEARCH

TOOLS NEEDED

RESPONSIBILITYTO ADDRESSACTIVITIES

TIME LINE Benchmarks/ASSESSMENT

Revisions toSIP/PIP based onmonitoring andassessments

Collection ofinitial campusdata/ analysisof qualitativedata to formbaselinecurricular andprofessionaldevelopmentgoals

Collected qualitativedata from1. STaR chart reports2. AEIS campus report

Collected quantitativedata from1. Staff survey data2. Campus Plan 2009-20103. Literature review

Analyzed data fromcampus data sources inorder to determinewhere technology goalsand studentachievement goals alignin the development ofthe Campus NeedsAssessment

TEA STaR chartreports, 2005-2010AEIS campusreport, 2010Literature reviewRaw staff surveydata collected viaSurvey MonkeyCampus Plan 2009-2010Campus NeedsAssessment

Researcher,campus principal,campusinstructionalleadership team

STaR chart andAEIS data analyzed

during instructional

leadership team

meeting on August

13, 2010; other data

analyzed during

goal team meeting

on August 19, 2010

Results were madeavailable to faculty

at first faculty

meeting on August

26; feedback was

accepted at that

time

Goals and prioritiesof PLC informational

meeting were

adjusted to reflect

needs assessed

from survey

analysis (expansion

of PD focus from

only SMART Board

lessons)

Creation ofPLC fortechnologyintegration intoexistingsciencecurriculum:creation ofSMART goaland actionplan for 2010-2011

Formed technologyintegration/qualityinstruction campus goalteam comprised of anadequate cross-sectionof staff members(classroom teachers,ESL, IR, inclusion)

All available data(see above),mission statementand SMART goaltemplates, districtscience curriculum,meeting kit (officesupplies, chartpaper)

Members of goalteam (includesresearcher)

During staff meeting

on August 16, 2010,

faculty membersjoined goal teams to

last a two-year term,

when possible

researcher was

made head of this

committee

Goal team will meet

monthly

All goal team

members remained

participants for theduration of the

research


2/5

Developmentof professionaldevelopmentframework fortechnology

integration intoinstructionalstrategies

1. Began with teammission statement andSMART goal2. Evaluates verticalalignment and selected

particular objectives tofocus on forcollaborative planning ofprofessionaldevelopment framework3. Consulted district PDrequirements andcampus scheduling toorganize framework4. Submitted scheduletemplate toadministration for

approval

Team missionstatement andSMART goal,Blackboard sciencecurriculum for

grades K-6, actionplan template,district PDrequirements,campus mastercalendar

Members of goalteam, campusadministrator-tor

August 19 and 26,

2010

Evaluation of

professional

development

framework by

campusadministrator

Professional

development

framework was

accepted by

campusadministrator with

only minor

adjustments to

calendar dates

Facilitatingsustainedprofessionaldevelopmentbased onframeworkschedule

Organized andfacilitated professionaldevelopment forcampus including:1. Effective utilization ofdocument cameras forparent communication2. Creating SMARTBoard lessons usingNotebook software3. Developing formativeassessment using theSMART ResponseSystem4. TechnologyProgressive Dinner(included: online rubricdevelopment, dropboxfunctions forstudent/teacher filesharing, gaming for

Computer lab time;teacher laptops,handouts for variousPD sessions,snacks forProgressive Dinner,SMART ResponseSystem remotes

Members of goalteam, campustechnologyassistant, districttechnologyfacilitator

1. October 7, 20102. December 2,20103. Part I: January13, 2011; Part II:February 24, 20114. May 2, 20115. Open labsessions scheduledfor the first Tuesdayof each month, 3:15to 4:00, beginningOctober 4, 2010and ending May 3,2011

Observations by

team members of

lessons involving a

new technology

implementation,

teacher self-

reflection, notes

from open lab

sessions

Adjustments made

to framework or PD

presentation as

needed in response

to concerns

revealed by

observations, open

lab sessions, or

teacher reflections

(shift of SMARTResponse to

coincide with early

dismissal date; split

of SMART

Response PD into

two sessions)


3/5

differentiation usingSMART Exchangetemplates, investigatingonline resources for aconstructivist math

classroom, introductionto data analysis withEdugence)5. Open lab sessions forspecialized assistanceand collaboration

Goal teamreflection andanalysis forpossibleadjustment ofactivities

Ongoing meetings ofgoal teams were held toshare/ exchange ideas,bring new data orquestions, and updatethe framework scheduleas needed

Lesson materialsdeveloped by teammembers or others;professionaldevelopmentfeedback forms,self-reflections fromteam members,input or questionsgenerated by staff,meeting kit

Members of goalteam

Meetings once per

six weeks

throughout the

school year

Plus/delta feedback

of sessions from PD

attendees,

reflections on

implemented

lessons, questionsand concerns from

staff, notes from

open lab sessions,

and assessment

data (as available)

was monitored and

analyzed for trends

and developing PD

needs

Adjustments made

to framework or PD

presentation as

needed in response

to concerns

revealed byobservations, open

lab sessions, or

teacher reflections

(more members

available at lab

sessions,

suggestions for

team teaching to

reinforce PD

concepts)

Assessment ofteachersatisfactionwithprofessionaldevelopmentframework and

Administered follow-upsurvey to campus viaSurvey Monkey;collected and analyzeddata

Prepared survey;raw collected surveydata

All faculty memberscomplete survey,members of goalteam

Survey approved by

Campus principal by

Friday, April 29,

2011: administered

to faculty May 2-6,

2011

Data collected from

staff surveys;

teachers results will

be analyzed for

levels of satisfaction

in PD framework,

Analysis will be

used to evaluate

progress toward

2010-2011 SMART

goal and next steps

for 2011-2012


4/5

technologyintegration intoinstruction

overall confidence

in utilization of

technology, and

levels of classroom

implementation

Evaluation oftechnology PDframework onstudentachievement

Analyzed formative andsummative assessmentdata for two gradelevels to evaluatedifferences in studentachievement betweenthose scoring highlevels ofimplementation andthose scoring low

levels ofimplementation

Formal studentassessment data(ADM reports fromMAP and Mockassessments),classroom dataprovided byteachers asformative andsummative

assessments

Members of goalteam, campusscience lead,campus principal

Analysis and

evaluation meeting

May 9, 2011

Formal student

assessment data

(ADM reports from

MAP and Mock

assessments),

classroom data

provided by

teachers from

second and fourth

grade (as per

results of staff

survey analysis)

including formative

and summative

assessments;

presentation of

findings to campus

instructional

leadership team

Analysis will be

used, along with

recommendations

from the campus

instructional

leadership team, to

evaluate progress

toward 2010-2011

SMART goal and

next steps for 2011-

2012

Developmentof updatedSMART goalfor 2011-2012school year

Utilized all data andanalysis to develop anew SMART goal fornext year; beganbrainstorming activitiesto achieve that goal

All collected data;SMART goaltemplate, meetingkit

Members of goalteam, campusprincipal

Meeting to be held

August 12, 2011

Submission of

2011-2012 goals

and action plans to

campus principal

and campus

instructional

leadership team


5/5

Collection ofinitial campusdata/ analysisof qualitativedata to form

baselinecurricular andprofessionaldevelopmentgoals

Collected qualitativedata from1. STaR chart reports2. AEIS campus reportCollected quantitative

data from1. Staff survey data2. Campus Plan 2009-20103. Literature reviewAnalyzed data fromcampus data sources inorder to determinewhere technology goalsand studentachievement goals alignin the development of

the Campus NeedsAssessment

TEA STaR chartreports, 2005-2010AEIS campusreport, 2010Literature review

Raw staff surveydata collected viaSurvey MonkeyCampus Plan 2009-2010Campus NeedsAssessment

Researcher,campus principal,campusinstructionalleadership team

STaR chart and

AEIS data analyzed

during instructional

leadership team

meeting on August13, 2010; other data

analyzed during

goal team meeting

on August 19, 2010

Results were made

available to faculty

at first faculty

meeting on August

26; feedback wasaccepted at that

time

Goals and priorities

of PLC informational

meeting were

adjusted to reflect

needs assessedfrom survey

analysis (expansion

of PD focus from

only SMART Board

lessons)

blog post action plan table update july 2011

Documents