D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development

Overview

Critical ReflectionsThis assignment has several purposes. First is gives you the opportunity to explore, in-depth, some facet of instructional leadership you have learned or reviewed during each week of instruction and second, it gives you the opportunity to develop critical thinking and writing skills. You should incorporate a minimum of two outside references. Each reflection should be between 1-2 pages in length as per the formatting guide below.

Each week you will submit the required reflection using this template. You will add weekly reflections to the template and submit the final document with all 5 reflections to Bb and to Tk20.

1. Use APA 6th edition for formatting2. Use double-space 12 font, left justify3. Academic reflections should be written in a scholarly, professional, formal manner

Scholarly Reflection Grading Rubric Criteria Possible Points

Reflection Content Related to Weekly Topic 40Critical Analysis of the Topic 25Application of Critical Analysis to Current Employment 25Mechanics 5References 5

Total Points 100

Content:40 Points: The reflection demonstrates excellent development of the topic and focuses on relevant details. Clearly explained examples support the claims and the topic is well discussed and supported with research.26-39 Points: The reflection contains adequate evidence to support its claims such as anecdotal experience, but will benefit from more research or from more specific development of relevant points.13-25 Points: The reflection has some development but lacks sufficient evidence or contains irrelevant details that do not develop a clear sense of purpose.12 or fewer Points: The reflection needs more details on every level (main ideas, related ideas, and specific ideas).

Critical Analysis:25 Points: The reflection contains a strong argument of pros-cons or in-depth discussion of benefits or negative impacts of the topic to the field of instructional leadership and instructional supervision. 16-24 Points: The overall structure of the reflection is clear, but the analysis requires further

1

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development

development.

10-15 Points: The reflection has one main idea with little development or discussion related to pros-cons or benefits-negative impacts to the to the field of instructional supervision.9 or fewer Points: Paragraphs are not organized around a critical analysis of the topic and the structure of the paper is difficult to follow.

Application to Current Employment:25 Points: The reflection contains a discussion of the topic and how it can be applied to the current employment of the student. Or a discussion is provided on how the topic can be implemented by the student at his/her campus to improve instruction. 16-24 Points: The overall structure of the reflection is clear, but the application is weak and requires further development. 10-15 Points: The reflection has little development or discussion related to the application to his/her campus to improve instruction. 9 or fewer Points: Application of the topic is lacking or difficult to follow.

Mechanics:5 Points: The reflection demonstrates mastery over sentence structure, sentence completion, structure, variety, word choice, and punctuation.4 Points: The reflection displays evidence of good control over mechanics. Occasional wordiness, punctuation errors, pronoun references, modifiers may be problematic.1-3 Points: Mechanics are problematic; sentence fragments, comma splices, word usage errors, and/or excessive wordiness detract from the readability of the reflection.0 Points: The reflection lacks basic control over mechanics and contains substantive proofreading errors.

References:5 Points: The reflection contains a minimum of two references per reflection from the research literature. APA formatting of every reference is without error. 4 Points: The reflection contains a minimum of two references from the research literature. Less than three APA formatting errors are noted. 1-3 Points: The reflection contains a minimum of two references from the research literature. More than three APA formatting errors are noted. 0 Points: The reflection has less than two references or the amount of errors in the formatting totals more than six.

2

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development

Using the following criteria, complete your weekly reflections.

1. Use APA 6th edition for formatting2. Use double-space 12 font, left justify3. Academic reflections should be written in a scholarly, professional, formal manner4. You should incorporate a minimum of two outside references per Reflection topic.5. Each reflection should be between 1-2 pages in length as per the formatting guide below.

Why is ILD Important?

With the demands of standardized testing, No Child Left Behind, IDEA, and state and local

expectations for academic achievement and improvement, schools face many diverse challenges

that require effective leadership. While teachers strive to provide relevant academic goals,

collaborative learning, and student engagement in the classroom, effective principals are needed

to facilitate and supervise programs and staff, manage facilities and financial resources, mentor

high-quality staff, communicate and collaborate, and advocate for learning to address the diverse

needs and promote student success. In fact, research shows that “leadership is second only to

teaching among school-related factors as an influence on learning” (Mitgang, 2012, p. 3). In

addition, research indicates that “less effective teachers tend to leave under an effective

principal, while more effective teachers tend to leave when the school is taken over by an

ineffective principal” (Hull, 2012, para. 7). Recognizing the importance of an effective

instructional leader requires aspiring principals to be able to establish and support the systems

that stress quality student learning.

Quality student learning can be supported when instructional leaders structure learning

environments that address the key concepts of the ILD Framework. These key concepts are

3

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development learner-centered, high expectations, collaborative, and continuous improvement. When education

is learner-centered, teachers seek background information about students, provide a variety of

assessments, monitor objectives, accommodate for learners’ needs, create hands-on relevant

experiences, and maintain a safe and orderly class environment. High expectations can include

consistency in expectations, equitable opportunities, self- reflection, positive reinforcement,

maximized student on-task time, and engaging lessons. Examples of collaboration are leadership

opportunities, shared decision-making, community engagement, clear communication, and

support with professional development. The last concept, continuous improvement, can entail

researching and implementing new programs, responding to test results, recognizing ineffective

school procedures, fostering community partnerships, differentiating in the classroom, promoting

student accountability, creating growth plans based on data, encouraging staff communication,

and shared decision-making.

Although these key concepts help guide the school culture, instructional leaders should

always be striving for improvement. From the e-campus workshop, a diagram illustrating a

framework for Instructional Leadership Development for School Improvement was presented.

This model illustrated that the environment should have a learner-centered setting where high

expectations are emphasized, designed collaboration driving continuous improvement, and

decisions guided by ethics and integrity to ensure honesty, fairness, and respect for individual

differences (Using ILD Framework for Student Improvement, 2014). These components are

interconnected, making it possible for stakeholders to accept responsibility for student success.

In conclusion, effective principals have a measurable impact on student achievement in

numerous ways; “A highly effective principal can increase his or her students’ scores up to 10

percentile points on standardized tests in just one year” (Hull, 2012, para. 5). Recognizing that

today’s instructional leaders are required to do more than manage, they need “…training that

4

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development prepares them to lead improved instruction and school change…” (Mitgang, 2012, p. 11).

Effective leaders must be familiar with the data-driven ILD framework because their vision will

drive decisions that lead to quality learning, student achievement, and continual improvement.

Thinking at High Cognitive Levels

Concept-based Curriculum and Instruction for the Thinking Classroom (2007) discusses a

national need for schools to “engage students emotionally, creatively, and intellectually to instill

deep and passionate curiosity in learning” (Erickson & Tomlinson, p. 6). When curriculums are

designed using a concept-based approach, as opposed to a context-based model, students are

encouraged to integrate their own knowledge and experiences into the lesson, thus internalizing

it for deeper meaning. This higher-order thinking is crucial for their future success because,

when a learner possesses a deeper conceptual understanding, they are able to transfer the

knowledge to other real-world contexts (Erickson & Tomlinson, 2007). This conviction is

supported in McBain’s study (2011); “higher order thinking skills are valued because they are

believed to better prepare students for the challenges of adult work and daily life and advanced

academic work and higher order thinking may also help raise standardized test scores” (p. 2).

Conversely, Kilgore (2011) discusses the importance for all learners to be involved in high-level

thinking because “knowledge and skills are necessary but not sufficient elements of

understanding for long-term retention and achievement” (para. 17). If learning for all is

expected, then schools need to embrace a curriculum that promotes higher cognitive skill

development.

The Texas Depth and Complexity Model is a strategy that combines Bloom’s Taxonomy and

Erickson’s Structure of Knowledge to encourage curriculum planning for higher cognitive

5

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development development. Although Bloom’s Taxonomy has been incorporated into the curriculum since the

1950s, it has been primarily the teacher’s responsibility to interpret the educational goals and

encourage students to achieve higher order thinking skills through a systematic process (McBain,

2011). Yet, “results showed that only 41.66% of students had a sound knowledge of the six

levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy ranging from knowledge to evaluation” (McBain, 2011, p. 8).

Whereas Bloom’s Taxonomy encourages the tiered advancement of skill levels (knowledge,

comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation), it doesn’t necessarily create

complex thinking for lower-level learners. For this reason, Erickson’s Structure of Knowledge

(fact, topic, concepts, generalization/principles) is used to help curriculums create a conceptual

lens in which interactive synergy; “the mind to process information on two cognitive levels—the

factual and the conceptual” can be established (Erickson & Tomlinson, 2007, p. 10). In the Texas

Depth and Complexity Model, higher order levels are measured using Bloom’s Taxonomy on the

vertical depth side and Erickson’s Structure of Knowledge on the horizontal complexity side.

The charting of curriculums through this model inspires all students to perform higher order

thinking skills and the inductive transfer of concepts.

Students need to be challenged to not only learn facts and topics, but to also learn how to

apply them in real-world situations. This requires educators to emphasize questioning,

application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation through engaging, relevant, hands-on activities

aimed at generalization and principles. The benefits of moving from a fact-based curriculum to a

conceptual relationship are immeasurable; “cognitive capability can be developed practically on

a large scale in a reasonable amount of time, and it can produce the substantial amounts and

varieties of academic and social growth that are needed to reduce the learning gap” (Pogrow,

2005, p. 72). However, the teacher cannot be the only responsible stakeholder for student

achievement. For schools to be effective, it must be a united effort of all stakeholders. Therefore,

6

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development if all students are to learn, it is upon the instructional leader to work with stakeholders to

guarantee that resources, professional development, and decisions are made that create desirable

conditions to think at higher cognitive levels and make connections across the curriculum and

life.

Addressing Various Needs

“The new mission for public education can be stated simply: Learning for all, whatever it

takes” (Lezotte, 2010, p.1). It is reported that “by 2035, students of color will be a majority in

our schools, with increasing populations of children of immigrant and migrant families

expanding the presence of cultural diversity in schools” (Tomlinson, Brighton, Hertberg,

Callahan, Moon, Brimijoin, Conover, & Reynolds, 2003, p. 120). So if “learning for all” is

expected, how can it be achieved when students come from different backgrounds with diverse

learning needs?

The goal of “learning for all” requires schools to structure learning environments that

integrate key concepts from the Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment of Course Development

Model (CIA) and the Texas Depth and Complexity Model, design curriculums utilizing the

Backward Design Model, and offer differentiation in instruction in the classroom. To begin,

schools need to consider the crucial concepts of the CIA Model; quality student performance

occurs through the alignment of the curriculum, instruction, and assessments. When all three

components are aligned, students are more likely to learn because the instruction informs them

about the skills and concepts they need to know, understand, and demonstrate in their work. The

next step is to gauge whether the lessons are encouraging high cognitive skills as modeled in

Texas Depth and Complexity Model; is the learning environment student-driven by high

expectations and continuous improvement toward the synthesis and evaluation of principles?

7

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development This approach is important because it creates layers of knowledge that enable students to make

relationships across disciplines.

In order to create these layers, curriculums and lessons must be designed “backwards” so

students can understand the purpose of their learning and teachers can scaffold meaningful

formative and summative assessments. When using the Backwards Design Model, instructional

practices begin by identifying the desired results, then determining valid and effective

assessments, then guiding their planning and instruction to align with the goals. As Wiggins and

McTighe state; “Agreement on needed evidence of learning leads to greater curricular coherence

and more reliable evaluation by teacher” which is essential for long-term learning because the

“…teacher, student, and parent (gain) insight about what does and does not count as evidence of

meeting complex standards (n.d., p. 3).

The final step is differentiating instructional practices in order to address diverse student

needs. Differentiation necessitates that teachers assess the students’ interests and skill levels,

prepare the classroom for various methods of student interaction, deliver instruction through a

variety of collaborative strategies, pace the material and resources to meet students’ needs, and

align assessments so they support knowledge and learner-centered goals. When teaching is

individualized and responsive to the students’ needs, it can enhance student engagement,

increase the student’s self-confidence, and improve their abilities to transfer and apply concepts

(Tomlinson et al., 2003). These issues are essential for learning because, as Schunk and

Zimmerman (1997) disclose, “students who have a sense of self-efficacy are more willing to

participate, work harder and persist longer when they encounter difficulties, and achieve at a

higher level than students who doubt their learning capabilities” (p. 4). Although differentiating

instruction might require teachers to re-evaluate their teaching methods, when they implement a

8

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development variety of individualized guided practices before students are expected to work independently, it

creates a higher quality of education for all learners (Tomlinson et al., 2003).

As Lezotte (2010) states on page 2, “learning is no longer optional”; schools do not have the

choice whether they will address learning but they can choose how they will meet the learner

needs. Schools need to “develop classroom routines that attend to, rather than ignore, variance in

learner readiness, interest, and learning profile (Tomlinson et al., 2003, p. 121). In order to

effectively teach so students recognize the value of learning, schools must acknowledge and

address the wide variety of learner needs.

Developmental Supervision

An important part of an effective school is the developmental supervision of teaching staff.

This can be problematic because of teacher variances, such as years of experience, education and

training, differences in opinions, and life or work events. Add to this structure the varying levels

of development and effectiveness and it quickly becomes obvious that teacher evaluations should

be individualized. Just as educators strive to encourage individual student success through

differentiation in an open and safe environment, administrators should also customize their

approach to teacher evaluations (Fritz & Miller, 2003).

According to Fritz and Miller (2003) developmental supervision is “the match of initial

supervisory approach with the teacher or group’s developmental levels, expertise, and

commitment” (p. 18). A significant part of this process is accurately identifying the teacher’s

current stage and providing appropriate feedback and support so they can progress, or scaffold,

to the next stage (Smith, 2009). However, as Fritz and Miller (2003) mention; “If the

instructional leader lacks adequate knowledge of supervision and does not know how to meet the

needs of the teacher, then an unproductive working relationship may be established” (p. 15).

9

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development Therefore, it is important that the instructional leader is knowledgeable about the supervision

process in order to create a collaborative atmosphere that promotes effective improvement to “…

experience greater reward from the supervisory process” (p. 15).

The supervisory process begins with using the high-leverage points of informal observations:

walk-throughs, being involved in the planning process, reviewing samples of student work, and

informal conferencing, and linking it to the categories of Curriculum Instruction Assessment

(CIA) high expectations: thinking at high cognitive levels, addressing varied needs, assessing

student progress, and aligning learning objectives. This should be an ongoing process intended to

provide the teacher quality feedback so they can meet learner and school expectations.

The formal process of development supervision is comprised of seven steps. Step one is the

preconference; the principal meets with the teacher to share expectations and evaluation tools. It

also provides the teacher an opportunity to share relevant information such as student or

scheduling concerns, areas of strength, classroom demographics, and questions about the

process. Step two is data collection and involves a formal observation of the teacher in the

classroom where scripted specific facts about the teaching process can be recorded. Step three is

data analysis and includes objective investigation about the observation. It is important to include

examples of nonjudgmental, observable teacher and student behavior that can be charted on the

Texas Depth and Complexity Model. Step four is preparing for the post-observation conference.

The goal of the post-observation should be to clearly communicate objective information that

can be used for reflection and guidance of the development plan. During this stage, the appraiser

needs to be aware of their supervisory behavior approach (non-directive interpersonal,

collaborative, directive informational interpersonal) as the productivity of the conference could

hinge on the method used. Step five is conducting the post-observation conference. Once again,

10

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development the observer should consider how they will guide the meeting and offer developmental

suggestions. Step six is planning and conducting a follow-up conference, in order for the

appraisee to share their progress and review timelines in their development plan. It is also a

beneficial time for the appraiser to plan how they are supporting the appraisee before the

summative conference. The seventh, and final step is to conduct the summative conference. This

conference is a compilation of the collected data that can guide future developmental plans.

In conclusion, it is imperative to acknowledge that the type of support given to the appraisee

should be based on multiple evaluations and clear teaching standards because, as Smith (2009)

points out on page 9, the “supervisee may be in different stages simultaneously”. This sentiment

is reiterated in the Kyriakides, Creemers, and Antoniou (2009) article on page 13; “…

improvement of teacher effectiveness can be focused not on the acquisition of isolated

skills/competencies (Gilberts & Lignugaris-Kraft, 1997) but on helping teachers exercise and/or

develop types of teacher behaviour that are more effective than others”. Texas statutes, section

Teacher Appraisal TEC 21.351, 21.352, describes the appraisal process and criteria used to

evaluate teachers, which it is crucial because the teacher and the administration are the

foundations for student success. In the end, if the instructional leader is knowledgeable and

recognizes the importance of the teacher evaluation system, it can result in a program that

benefits all participants.

Professional Development

In the Instructional Leadership Development model, professional development is identified as

an essential part of creating a school culture that supports “learning for all”. However, if

professional development does not reflect the five critical levels of an effective plan:

11

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development participants’ reactions, participants’ learning, organization support and change, use of new

knowledge and skills, and student learning outcomes, it could be viewed as an ineffective

method to increase student performance; “the “one-shot” professional development that has been

widely criticized” (DeMonte, 2013, p. 23). Nevertheless, when professional development is

well-organized, carefully structured, and purposefully directed, it has “…the power to improve

teaching and enhance student learning” (p. 3).

This facet is imperative to the continuous improvement process, because “no improvement in

effort has ever succeeded in the absence of thoughtfully planned and well implemented

professional development” (Guskey, 2009, p. 497). In order to have meaningful professional

development, there are several components to consider. The first component is the purpose and

methods used for engaging in professional development opportunities. Professional development

should address student performances in relation to the specific school, provide help and feedback

to generic and content-specific skills, represent teacher knowledge, skills, and application, be a

cohesive part of the professional community and the school wide instructional program, offer

multiple opportunities for implementation, and include principal leadership (DeMonte, 2013).

Several methods are recommended to achieve these goals and create significant experiences for

teacher implementation. They include individual/self-directed learning, mentoring/coaching of

peers, group planning, instruction/training, inquiry/action research, and study groups.

The second component is to recognize that educators need to regularly meet “to explore

common problems and seek solutions based on shared experiences and collective wisdom”

(Guskey , 2009, p. 495). Opportunities should be continuous and long-term rather than sporadic

and short-term. The reasoning for this is twofold. First, “a review of research on the effect of

professional development on increased student learning found that programs had to include more

than fourteen hours of professional development for student learning to be affected”(DeMonte,

12

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development 2013, p. 4). Second, “teachers...will stick with practices that are familiar to them, incorporating

new ones gradually as they learn how they have worked for others and see how they work for

themselves (Quint, 2013, p. 37). Professional development can challenge teacher knowledge and

skills, as well as their beliefs, motivations, and ability to apply new knowledge to their particular

school and classrooms. Therefore, if a school is to improve, consistent teacher support, multiple

methods for application, and collaborative feedback are necessary.

Finally, without the guidance of the principal, forward movement and increased student

achievement might not be possible. Quint (2013) recognized this aspect; “The engagement of a

school’s principal, many experts believe, is critical to the sustained success of initiatives to

change instruction”. (Quint, 2013, p. 36). When professional development is thoughtfully

implemented and assessed in interrelated steps, it has the potential to develop collaborative

problem-solving experiences. In summary, professional development can no longer be simply

giving teachers information about teaching methodologies; it needs to influence classroom

practices to improve the quality of instruction.

Community Support and Partnerships

For schools to function effectively and continually improve student learning, they need

additional resources. One of these resources is community support and partnerships. These

partnerships not only bring together diverse individuals to represent a variety of issues, they also

help children succeed, academically and personally, in their community. Blank, Jacobson, &

Melaville (2012) acknowledge these benefits; “By sharing resources, expertise, and

accountability, community school partnerships can address challenges related to economic

hardship and create essential conditions for learning by concentrating on a single access point—

public schools—to effectively target their efforts” (p. 7). This can be accomplished when schools

13

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development and the community share a common vision, relationships and collaborative structures are

encouraged, open conversations about challenges and solutions are addressed, multiple data

sources are used as guidance, districts are empowered to sustain community-school relationships,

and community resources are incorporated (Blank et al, 2012).

In my state of residence, the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) has identified six

types of involvement to foster a strong community-school relationship where students can

maximize their potential. The first step is promoting parenting skills to support children as

students; “…the power of out-of school time is significant. Research shows that the quality of

home environments strongly correlates with students’ academic achievement and school

performance” (National Center for School Engagement, 2005, para 3). This aligns with the ILD

training recommendation of extending invitations to create meaningful involvement. Secondly,

CDE stresses that schools need to maintain regular and meaningful communication;

“Communication stressing student achievement rather than problems-centered discussions create

a more positive and open dialogue...” and “Families feel empowered as connected members of

the school community…”(2005, para. 8 & 9). Without effective two-way communication with

internal and external stakeholders, trust, belonging, and collaboration cannot be established

which can negatively affect student success. The third step involves recruiting and valuing

parental and community involvement; “… volunteering can have a significant impact on

students’ achievement in mathematics, reading, and language (2005, para. 11). Although this

step can require extensive commitment from the instructional leader and stakeholders, the

benefits of equitable, learner-centered partnerships are too strong to ignore. The fourth step

endorsed by CDE is recognizing the integral role that families and parents play in assisting

student learning; “Research indicates that when schools work together with families to support

14

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development learning, children tend to succeed not just in school, but throughout life” (2005, para. 14). For

this to occur, the instructional leader needs to provide the time and training to develop a

systematic decision-making process between internal and external participants where concerns

can be collaboratively addressed. This leads to the fifth step of the CDE recommendations;

involving the community in the decision-making process. As stated in paragraph 19, “This

involvement helps develop positive partnerships between parents and school staff. As a result,

student achievement and attendance, as well as parents’ self-esteem, can improve” (2005). The

sixth, and final, CDE step is identifying and using community resources; “Effective partnerships

are based on understanding the cultural, socioeconomic, health, social, and recreational needs

and interests of each school’s families” and “the quality of those connections influences

children’s school learning” (2005, para. 21 & 22). Once a systematic structure for community

partnerships is developed, it can have a strong effect on learning and the school environment.

Aside from local, state, and federal regulations and the desire of stakeholders to enhance

student learning, without the instructional leader’s guidance, community partnerships might not

exist. As Sanders (2003) points out; “Many studies in the community involvement literature site

the importance of effective principal leadership for successful school-community collaboration”

(p. 176). Through a multitude of community involvement opportunities, an effective principal

can help create relationships that enhance academic, social, and economic growth. In the end, if

schools are to produce well-educated students who are prepared for life, “…districts know they

must engage constructively with other stakeholders to achieve better outcomes” (Blank,

Jacobson, & Melaville, 2012, p. 22).

References

15

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development Blank, M. J., Jacobson, R., & Melaville, A. (2012). Achieving results through community school

partnerships, 1-36. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-

content/uploads/issues/2012/01/pdf/community_schools.pdf

DeMonte, J. (2013). High-quality professional development for teachers supporting teacher

training to improve student learning, 1-28. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://studentsmatter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/CAP_PDforTeachers.pdf

Erickson, H. L., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2007). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the

thinking classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Fritz, C., & Miller, G. (2003). Supervisory options for instructional leaders in education. Journal

of Leadership Education, 2(2), 13-27. doi: 10.12806/V2/I2/RF2

Guskey, T. R. (2009). What works in professional development? The Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7),

495-500. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

https://k12.wa.us/Compensation/pubdocs/Guskey2009whatworks.pdf

Hull, J. (2012, April). The principal perspective: Full report. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/principal-perspective

ILD Framework for Student Improvement. (n.d.). Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

https://ecampus.esc13.net/study.html?courseid=5804§ionid=36833&classid=31078

Kilgore, B. (2011, Winter). Differentiating instruction to promote rigor and engagement for

advanced and gifted students. Retrieved October 18, 2014, from

http://www.bertiekingore.com/rigor.htm

Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B., & Antoniou, P. (2009). Teacher behaviour and student outcomes:

Suggestions for research on teacher training and professional development. Teaching and

16

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development Teacher Education, 25, 12-23. Retrieved November 1, 2014, from http://www.pef.uni-

lj.si/ceps/dejavnosti/sp/2010-11-03/teaching%20and%20teacher%20education%202009.pdf

Lezotte, L. (2010). Transcript: Learning for all, whatever it takes. Retrieved October 12, 2014,

from https://ecampus.esc13.net/media_libraries/ILDOnline-

InstructionalLeadershipDevelopment_5804/s1p8LearningforAllWhateveritTakes.pdf

McBain, R. (2011, September). How high can students think? A study of student’s cognitive

levels using Bloom’s Taxonomy in Social Studies. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED524386.pdf

Mitgang, L. (2012). The making of the principal: Five lessons in leadership training, 1-34.

Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/school-leadership/effective-principal-

leadership/Documents/The-Making-of-the-Principal-Five-Lessons-in-Leadership-Training.pdf

National Center for School Engagement. (2005). What research says about family-school-

community partnerships. Colorado Department of Education, 1-3. Retrieved October 11,

2014, from

http://www.ndpc-sd.org/documents/2012ITS/family_school_community_partnerships.pdf

Pogrow, S. (2005). HOTS Revisited: A thinking development approach to reducing the learning

gap after grade 3. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(64), 64-75. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://pdk.sagepub.com/content/87/1/64.full.pdf+html

Quint, J. (2011, July). Professional development for teachers, 1-42. Retrieved October 11, 2014,

from http://www.mdrc.org/publication/professional-development-teachers

Sanders, M. (2003). Community involvement in schools. Education and Urban Society, 161-180.

17

D. Deming L20357497Week 4 ReflectionsEDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership Development

Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://olms1.cte.jhu.edu/olms/data/resource/1192/Sanders,CommunityInvolvementinSchools.

pdf

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory

competence. Educational Psychologist, 32, 1-20. Retrieved October 26, 2014, from

http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/D_Schunk_Social_1997.pdf

Smith, K. L. (2009). A brief summary of supervision models, 1-10. Retrieved October 11, 2014,

from

http://www.marquette.edu/education/grad/documents/Brief-Summary-of-Supervision-

Models.pdf

Tomlinson, C., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K.,

Conover, L.A., Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student

readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of

literature, 27(2/3), 119-145. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ787917.pdf

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (n.d.). Backward design; Why "backward" is best, 1-3. Retrieved

October 26, 2014, from http://www.edutopia.org/pdfs/resources/wiggins-mctighe-backward-

design-why-backward-is-best.pdf

18