PUT TITLE HERELeading Student Achievement

Mary Jean Gallagher

Assistant Deputy Minister Student Achievement Division

Chief Student Achievement Officer of Ontario

Ministry of Education

Reach Every StudentMinistry of Education – Goals

• High levels of student achievement

• Reduced gaps in student achievement

• Increased public confidence in education

Reach Every Student – Four Pillars of Student Achievement/Student

Success

• Literacy• Numeracy• Program Pathways and Supports• Community, Culture and Caring – Character Education,

Parent Engagement, Student Voice, etc.

Student Achievement

• The work that we do…

• Together!

Primary (Grade 3) Junior (Grade 6)

◊ Girls ▲ All Students ■ Boys x ESL/ELL Students ж Special Needs Students

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Perc

ent o

f stu

dent

s at

Lev

els

3&4

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Per

cent

of s

tude

nts

at L

evel

s 3&

4

Reading

Primary (Grade 3) Junior (Grade 6)

◊ Girls ▲ All Students ■ Boys x ESL/ELL Students ж Special Needs Students

Writing

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Perc

ent o

f stu

dent

s at

Lev

els

3&4

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Per

cent

of s

tude

nts

at L

evel

s 3&

4

Mathematics

5 8 5 7

6 4 6 66 8 6 9 6 8

5 9 5 8

6 5 6 66 8 6 9 6 9

5 85 5

6 36 6

6 9 6 8 6 7

2 52 7

3 22 9

3 13 5 3 5

3 9 4 0

5 0 5 1 5 35 6

5 8

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 1 / 0 2 2 0 0 2 / 0 3 2 0 0 3 / 0 4 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Y e a r

Perc

ent a

t Lev

els 3&

4

A l l s t u d e n t s G i r l s B o y s S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n E S L / E L L S t u d e n t s

54 53

5760 61

5961

55 55

60 6062

6062

52 5256

60 59 5860

1618

20 21 21 2123

35 35

4144

46 47

51

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/2007 2007-08

Year

Perc

ent a

t Lev

els

3&4

All students Girls Boys Special Education ESL/ELL Students

Primary (Grade 3) Junior (Grade 6)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-Feb 02-Mar 03-Apr 04-May 05-Jun 06-Jul 07-Aug

Reading Writing Math

Year-over-Year EQAO Test ResultsFrench Language Boards

Closing Gaps: Reducing the Number of Underperforming Elementary Schools

6%5%5%

7%

19%

14%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Schools with less than 34% of students achieving levels 3 and 4 in Grade 3 Reading

22

11

16

17

14

19

13

5

7

10

5

11

0

5

10

15

20

25

Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing Grade 3Mathematics

Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing Grade 6Mathematics

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Stu

de

nts

at

Le

ve

l 1

an

d b

elo

w

2002-03 2007-08

Raising the Bar: English Language StudentsReduction in Percentage of Students Achieving at the

Lowest Level in EQAO Assessments

20

11

14

11

10 1010

4

8

4

3

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing Grade 3 Mathematics Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing Grade 6 Mathematics

2002-03 2007-08

Raising the Bar: French Language StudentsReduction in Percentage of Students Achieving at the

Lowest Level in EQAO Assessments

Getting to 75 – Almost there!EQAO Assessment Results - 2008

  

Reading Writing Mathematics

Proportion of students  Level 3 or

higher

Difference between Level

3 and 2.7 to 2.9

Level 3 or higher

Difference between

Level 3 and 2.7 to 2.9

Level 3 or higher

Difference between

Level 3 and 2.7 to 2.9

English language Boards Grade 3 61% 12% 66% 20% 68% 14%

Grade 6 66% 13% 67% 18% 61% 14%

French-language Boards Grade 3 60% 16% 74% 14% 62% 17%

Grade 6 75% 13% 80% 11% 78% 12%

Getting to 75 - Almost there!Breakdown of Students Within Level 2

Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing Grade 3 Math

% of Level 2 Students Achieving Scores from 2.7 to < 3

46%

69%

56%

Getting to 75 - Almost there!Breakdown of Students Within Level 2

Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing Grade 6 Math

% of Level 2 Students Achieving Scores from 2.7 to < 3

54% 64

%

48%

Moving Student Achievement from 2.7 to 3

What is different about student achievement now?

• The number of students scoring below level 2 has reduced significantly. Of those in level 2, the number that are scoring just below level 3 (at or above 2.7, below 3) is large. This provides a significant opportunity to raise levels of student achievement and to further motivate the system to do so.

• These students perform well on less demanding reading comprehension tasks such as, “Understanding explicitly stated information in a reading selection”, or “conventions of language”.

Common Themes in Effective Schools

• Organizational Culture

• Focus

• Leadership

• Assessment and Use of Data

• Links Beyond the School

Lessons Learned

Ministry of Education – SupportsLeadership Development• For Teacher Leaders• For SEF & SS Leaders• For Principals• For Senior Administration• For PAL

Developing Expertise • in Gathering, Analyzing and Interpreting Data – Misa

Leaders

Resources K – 12

• Monographs, Newsletters• DVDs, Webcasts• Differentiated Instruction Kits• ELL Guides• Guides to Effective Instruction for literacy and

math

Ministry of Education - Supports

Engagement

• Student

• Parent

Ministry of Education - Supports

Ministry of Education - Supports

School Effectiveness Framework – Student Success Action Planning Framework

• Setting Goals Collectively• Promoting Professional Learning Communities• Distributive Leadership• Accountability for Results

Going Forward – Continuity, Ingenuity, Synergy

• Collaboration and continuity in our approach to K-12 student achievement and capacity building

• Increasing partnerships to leverage improvement among neighbouring boards and schools

• More support for boards with low performance across elementary and secondary schools

• More supports for low performing and static schools • More classroom-based instructional and assessment

supports through coaching in differentiated instruction, teaching learning critical pathways

Leadership Activities in LNS• Capacity-building series – webcasts and monographs

- Each webcast has a leadership component that addresses the work of supervisory officers, principals and/or teacher leaders

• Leading Student Achievement project (LSA)- LSA involves networks of learning to support the instructional leadership role of

the principal• Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP)

- OFIP is a whole-school approach to school improvement that focuses on distributed leadership• Leader-to-Leader

- A commitment by Premier McGuinty to personally engage a small number of elementary principals in discussions about successful practices as well as the challenges that schools face when trying to improve student achievement

• School Effectiveness Framework (SEF)- The SEF provides province-wide criteria for effective instruction and outlines what leaders

need to do to support instruction and pedagogy

“I slept and dreamed that life was happiness.

I awoke and saw that life was service.

I served and found that in service, happiness is found.”

Tagore