KNOW THY IMPACT… IMPROVING

PERFORMANCE FOR STUDENTS WITH

DISABILITIES

Missouri Departmentof Elementary and Secondary Education

KNOW THY IMPACT…IMPROVING PERFORMANCE FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

A presentation for Special Education Administrator’s Conference September, 2014

TarTarA Conference Center

By the Office of Special Education, Missouri Department of Elementary & Secondary Education Pam Williams, Coordinator,

Special Education Services Ginger Henry, Director,

Effective Practices

Know Thy Impact—Making Learning Visible in Missouri

What are we doing?

Why are we doing it?

Why do we think it will work?

How can I get started?

Where are we going?

How are we getting there?

How are we doing?

Hattie, The Power of Feedback

What are we doing?

MISSOURI COLLABORATIVE WORK …

The critical elements to drive the improvement efforts necessary to bring about positive results for all students, but especially students with disabilities… High expectations Clear vision A few focused, high-impact goals Frequent progress monitoring Effective use of data Effective teaching/learning practices Collaborative teams focused on data

Missouri Collaborative Work (CW) Initiated in 2012-13 School Year Invited buildings in districts from all 9 RPDC regions Must have a measurable number of SWDs Not a Priority or Focus building Not in an unaccredited district Must be committed to collaborative implementation Work supported by regional center staff and grants

to participating buildings from Office of Special Education

Desired outcome from the Missouri Collaborative Work: Improved outcomes for all students, but especially for students with disabilities

Teachers and administrators will implement collaborative data teams to assist one another to: implement effective teaching/learning practices develop and administer common formative

assessments that measure the effectiveness of instruction and student mastery of learning objectives, and;

use data-based decision-making to guide team decisions about classroom learning and instruction.

What are the benefits of participation?

Aligned with Missouri Teacher/Leader standards and Missouri Learning Standards.

Builds a common language in the building. The collaborative process builds the capacity of the building to conduct

much of its own routine training and learning. Builds a toolbox of effective teaching/learning practices in each

building to which all teachers can demonstrate a high level of effectiveness.

All schools will get access to a pool of formative assessments aligned to the Missouri academic learning standards for use in subsequent years.

Additional funds help defray the costs of teacher time or substitutes. All content areas will likely benefit. If implemented with integrity, student achievement will increase at a

faster rate.

More benefits…

Supportive model—Weight Watchers Helps maintain focus Improves chances of implementing with high fidelity Outside support to help solve problems Will develop regional and state ability to share practices,

lesson plans, formative assessments, etc. which should cut down on time and costs for districts

Will contribute to building a scalable and sustainable model to improve outcomes for all students in all districts

CW District/building participation

9

Collaborative Work Participation Data by Year2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015*

A. Total Districts Participating 110 181 211B. Total Buildings Participating 267 356 358 1. Early Childhood Buildings 0 1 3 2. Elementary Buildings (excluding K-8 districts) 218 259 238 3. K-8 Districts only 1 1 11 4. Middle School Buildings 29 44 52 5. High School Buildings 19 51 54C. Total Student Enrollment (PK-12 (excluding K-8 districts) 134383 185384 175948 1. Students with Disabilities (PK-21 (excluding K-8 districts) 16902 22277 21607D. Total Student Enrollment (K-8 districts only) 570 538 1640 1. Students with Disabilities (K-8 districts only) 76 72 259E. Total Staff in Participating Buildings 9829 13457 12920 1. Regular Education Teachers 8080 11079 10642 2. Special Education Teachers 1360 1835 1766 3. Administrators 389 543 512

Percentage of Total State-wide Participating2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015*

Participated State Total % Participated Participated State Total% Participated Participating State Total % Participating

A. Total Districts Participating 110 560 20% 181 560 32% 211 560 38%B. Total Buildings Participating 267 2235 12% 356 2235 16% 358 2235 16% 1. Early Childhood Buildings 0 43 0% 1 43 2% 3 43 7% 2. Elementary Buildings (excluding K-8 districts) 218 1260 17% 259 1260 21% 238 1260 19% 3. K-8 Districts only 1 73 1% 1 73 1% 11 73 15% 4. Middle School Buildings 29 350 8% 44 350 13% 52 350 15% 5. High School Buildings 19 582 3% 51 582 9% 54 582 9%C. Total Student Enrollment (PK-12 (excluding K-8 districts) 134383 1024828 13% 185384 1026756 18% 175948 1024828 17% 1. Students with Disabilities (PK-21 (excluding K-8 districts) 16902 120381 14% 22277 120399 19% 21607 120381 18%D. Total Student Enrollment (K-8 districts only) 570 10903 5% 538 10775 5% 1640 10903 15% 1. Students with Disabilities (K-8 districts only) 76 1455 5% 72 1407 5% 259 1455 18%E. Total Staff in Participating Buildings 9829 80264 12% 13457 78164 17% 12920 78164 17% 1. Regular Education Teachers 8080 65980 12% 11079 63803 17% 10642 63803 17% 2. Special Education Teachers 1360 10921 12% 1835 10990 17% 1766 10990 16% 3. Administrators 389 3363 12% 543 3371 16% 512 3371 15%*Enrollment and staff counts projected based on 2013-2014 data

Data Source: Core Data, as of 6/2/2014

Increased

student learning

Classroom/ Building Educators

Regional Professiona

l Developme

nt

State Education

Agency

High quality professional development content, materials, and structures

Fidelity of delivery and content

Fidelity of implementation

Training and coaching

Shared learning

Effective teaching/

learning practices

Missouri Teaching/ Learning Packages

19 Learning Packages

Why are we doing this?

LET’S LOOK AT THE DATA…

Where we were & where we are…a look at the data

Department Vision

The vision of the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is to be one of the Top 10 states in performance outcomes by the year 2020.

• The vision of the Statewide System of Support is to provide essential supports for all Missouri districts and schools to succeed at levels which allow the state to reach its vision.

10 by 20 Plan Goals

All Missouri students will graduate college and career ready.

All Missouri children will enter kindergarten prepared to be successful in school.

Missouri will prepare, develop, and support effective educators.

The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education will improve departmental efficiency and operational effectiveness.

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

Percentage of students scoring at or above proficient

Area Grade % Proficient % Not Proficient

Rank

Math 4 41% 59% 24th

Math 8 32% 68% 33rd

Reading 4 34% 66% 22nd

Reading 8 35% 65% 20th

Science 8 40% 60% 18th

Performance of Subpopulations Communication Arts--MAP

Area Number Tested

Proficiency for Non-Subpop

Proficiency for Subpop

GAP

All 514,420 54.9%

Black 84,628 59.2% 32.9% 26.3%

IEP 66,117 59.1% 26.4% 32.7%

ELL 13,093 55.7% 23.0% 32.7%

Econ. Deprived

247,536 67.9% 40.8% 27.1%

Not Black, IEP, ELL, F/R

222,551 73.1%

Performance of Subpopulations Mathematics-MAP

Area Number Tested

Proficiency for Non-Subpop

Proficiency for Subpop

GAP

All 526,622 54.0%

Black 86,183 58.8% 29.7% 29.1%

IEP 64,724 57.5% 29.3% 28.2%

ELL 13,878 54.6% 31.8% 22.8%

Econ. Deprived

249,766 66.2% 40.6% 25.6%

Not Black, IEP, ELL, F/R

232,074 70.9%

And for all you World Cup fans:

How does the US stacks up academically on the PISA versus Soccer Rankings?

Why do we think this will work to accelerate student achievement?

2010

2015

2020

Why do we think this will work?

Recent research has shown us that there are some teaching/learning practices that are highly effective (Hattie, 2008 & 2011)

Moving Your Numbers work by National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) shows us there are certain effective practices that, when implemented deeply by teachers/leaders, will dramatically impact student performance

The Collaborative Work is aligned to the Missouri Teacher/Leader Standards and supports implementation of the Missouri Learning Standards

Where’s the evidence?.....

Recent research includes: Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-

analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. Hattie, J. (2011). Visible Learning For Teachers: Maximizing Impact

On Learning, Routledge. Hattie, J & Yates, G. (2014) Visible Learning and the Science of How

We Learn, Routledge. Google & Utube—John Hattie/Visible Learning National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO), Moving Your

Numbers. [PDF] Moving Your nuMbers Page 1. 2 Cover Moving Your nuMbers Five Districts

Share How They Used Assessment and Accountability to ... Page 3. MOVING YOUR NUMBERS ... www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/MovingYourNumbers.pdf - 711k - 2013-05-20 - Text Version

From____ to Great

Dr. John Hattie: Schools that doubled their performance followed a similar set of strategies that included:

Goal setting Analyzing student data Using formative assessments Collectively reviewing evidence on good instruction Using time more productively

John Hattie—”Visible Learning” “When investigating the continuum of achievement, there

is remarkable generality—remarkable because of the preponderance of educational researchers and teachers who argue for treating students individually, and for dealing with curriculum areas as if there were unique teaching methods associated with English, mathematics, and such. The findings from this synthesis apply, reasonably systematically, to all age groups, all curriculum areas, and to most teachers.”

What “some” teachers do matters—those who teach in a most deliberate and visible manner.

Hattie’s Eight Mind Frames for Educators:

1. My fundamental task is to evaluate the effect of my teaching on students’ learning and achievement.

2. The success and failure of my students’ learning is about what I do or don’t do. I am a change agent.

3. I want to talk more about learning than teaching.4. Assessment is about my impact.5. I teach through dialogue not monologue.6. I enjoy the challenge and never retreat to “doing

my best”.7. It’s my role to develop positive relationships in

class and staffrooms.8. I inform all about the language of learning.

Effect Size Effect Size is a common expression of the magnitude of

study outcomes for many types of outcome variables, such as school achievement. An effect size of d=1.0 indicates an increase of one standard deviation on the outcome (a standard deviation increase is typically associated with advancing children’s achievement by two to three years, improving the rate of learning by 50%, or a correlation between some variable and achievement of approximately r=0.50. In implementing a new program, an d=1.0 would mean that, on average, students receiving the treatment would exceed 84% of students not receiving the treatment.

Effect Size— pretend this is a standard curve

.40

Spaced vs. Massed Practice

(.71 effect size)

FeedbackRank 10th

.73 effect size

Reciprocal Teaching

(.74 effect size)

Assessment Capable Learners

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning. New York: RoutledgeHattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning for Teaachers. New York: Routledge

(1.44 effect size)

Off the Charts!

Moving your numbers…

Districts that have “moved their numbers” for all children have or are engaged in developing district-wide processes that allow for more collective use of relevant data to make smarter decisions, including the ongoing assessment of teaching and learning at the classroom, school, and district levels. These processes include the development, implementation, and ongoing use of teacher-developed formative assessments, and the use of grade-level/departmental/course, and vertical teams to collaboratively score these shared assessments and plan for shared instruction. They also include the use of building and district benchmark assessments. Fullan (2008) states that principals working directly with teachers in the use of data is more than twice as powerful as any other leadership dimension, and Leithwood and Jantzi (2008) found that the reliability for assessing student learning and district decision making was one critical characteristic of effective districts.

What Matters Most: Key Practices Guide, National Center on Educational Outcomes

What Matters Most: Key Practices Guide (National Center for Educational Outcomes)

Key Practice 1: Use Data Well

Key Practice 2: Focus Your Goals

Key Practice 3: Select and Implement Shared Instructional Practices

Key Practice 4: Implement Deeply

Key Practice 5: Monitor and Provide Feedback and Support

Key Practice 6: Inquire and Learn

Desired outcome from the Missouri Collaborative Work: Improved outcomes for all students

Teachers and administrators will implement collaborative data teams to assist one another to: implement effective teaching/learning practices develop and administer common formative

assessments that measure the effectiveness of instruction and student mastery of learning objectives, and;

use data-based decision-making to guide team decisions about classroom learning and instruction.

How can you get started? Participation in CW is currently limited to existing districts

and buildings, HOWEVER… RPDCs are all trained in the foundation pieces of the work—

Collaborative Data Teams Data-based Decision-making Common Formative Assessments

Your local RPDC can begin working with your district/building on these foundation pieces (this is the place to start anyway), THEN

In next few months the effective teaching/learning packages will be available in DIY form &/or facilitated by your RPDC

Can We Get It Done?

I always thought that record would stand until it was broken—Yogi Berra

For more information…

See “Where’s the Evidence” slide above

http://moedu-sail.org/

http://visible-learning.org/

http://movingyournumbers.org/what-matters-most

44

Questions?

Hattie—Visible Learning

INFLUENCE IMPACT

Ability grouping/tracking/streaming High Medium Low

Acceleration (for example, skipping a year) High Medium Low

Comprehension programs High Medium Low

Concept mapping High Medium Low

Cooperative vs individualistic learning High Medium Low

Direct instruction High Medium Low

Feedback High Medium Low

Gender (male compared with female achievement) High Medium Low

Home environment High Medium Low

Hattie—continued

INFLUENCE IMPACT

Individualizing instruction High Medium Low

Influence of peers High Medium Low

Matching teaching with student learning styles High Medium Low

Meta-cognitive strategy programs High Medium Low

Phonics instruction High Medium Low

Professional development on student achievement High Medium Low

Providing formative evaluation to teachers High Medium Low

Providing worked examples High Medium Low

Reciprocal teaching High Medium Low

Reducing class size High Medium Low

Hattie--continued

INFLUENCE IMPACT

Retention (holding back a year) High Medium Low

Student control over learning High Medium Low

Student expectations High Medium Low

Teacher credibility in eyes of the students High Medium Low

Teacher expectations High Medium Low

Teacher subject matter knowledge High Medium Low

Teacher-student relationships High Medium Low

Using simulations and gaming High Medium Low

Vocabulary programs High Medium Low

Whole language programs High Medium Low

Within-class grouping High Medium Low