Title: Pre-Conference Presentation A Major Grant Empowers PDS Initiative
1Pre-Conference Presentation A Major Grant
Empowers PDS Initiative
Thursday, March 29, 2007 130pm - 430pm
- PRESENTERS
- Georgia State University
- Dr. Gwen Benson, Dr. Dee Taylor, Dr. Bill
Curlette, Dr. Susan Ogletree, Dr. Susan
McClendon, Dr. Brian Williams, - Dr. Joseph Feinberg, and Patsy Terry
- Atlanta Public Schools
- Qualyn McIntyre
- Partnership Schools
- Will Bradley and Vivian Randolph/Woodland MS,
Carolyn Hall and Karen Ross/ Kimberly ES, - Andrew Foster/Meadowcreek HS
2Opening Remarks Dr. Gwen Benson and Dr. Dee
Taylor
3Transitioning into Professional Development
Schools An Urban University and Urban School
Systems ModelPDS2 Professional Development
School Partnerships Deliver Success
GRANT 5.8 million/ 5 years/ US Dept. of
Education RECIPIENTS GSUs College of Arts and
Sciences and College of
Education GOAL To partner with our urban
school systems Atlanta City Schools, and
Fulton, Gwinnett, and DeKalb Counties to Create
Professional Development Schools (PDS).
4Expected Outcomes
- Increased production and retention of new
teachers (especially underrepresented groups) - Increased student achievement
- Professional renewal for all PDS participants
5Transitioning into Professional Development
Schools An Urban University and Urban School
Systems ModelPDS2 Professional Development
School Partnerships Deliver Success
PDS Model Sample
6PDS Organizational Chart
7GSU Dean of the College of Education
Donna Lowry Interview with Dean Colarusso
8PDS Promises How to Stand and Deliver
9(No Transcript)
10University Faculty asked
- How do we access schools for
- possible research?
11Research Department asked
- How to ensure effective evaluation and not
over-assess
12School Administrators asked
- How will PDS translate into increased student
achievement? - How will PDS be a presence in my school without
being invasive to school routine?
13School Faculty asked
- How will PDS support my professional development
and funding of my university classes? - Will I be compensated for my work?
14Inquiry Projects
- Inquiry Project Overview
- Inquiry Projects help to facilitate the ongoing
professional learning and to incorporate the
recommendations of Nation Council for
Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) to
engage in continuous learning and self study
(NCATE, 2001) the university implemented Inquiry
Projects in 2000. - The Inquiry Project involves schools forming
study groups to explore topics of interest or
concern. The process normally involves a
selection of the topic through either a review of
the school Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools (SACS) report or a survey of the faculty
followed by a literature review to further
explore the topic. - Surveys of the faculty, parents, or students may
also be conducted to gain additional insight.
Faculty members from the university serve as
members of the inquiry teams or as resources as
needed during the inquiry process. Schools are
encouraged to implement finding of the inquiry
projects within their school and to share their
findings with the other schools in the PDS
network.
15Inquiry Projects Input From University and
School-Based Coordinators
- Elementary Level
- Inquiry study could provide teacher empowerment,
shared responsibility, equal voice, and a moral
booster - Problem solving with the goals of personal,
professional, and community growth - Use of natural resources such as staff,
community, and university - Facilitate the school as a learning community in
the following ways - Staff feels connected/vested
- Professionalism
- Improve student achievement
- Systematic approach to solving/addressing
problems - Middle School Level
- Grassroots on issues that are important
- Learning environment for teachers and students
- Implement change at the school level
- Issues are addressed and maybe solved
- Direct effect on instruction
- Collaboration among teachers (and administration)
- Create a sense of community
- Individual Reflection
- High School Level
16The State asked
- How will PDS ensure the training and retention of
teachers dedicated to urban education?
17The Federal Funders asked
- How will you show the funds are rendering results?
18GSU Graduates/First Year Teachers asked
- Am I prepared for teaching?
1st Year teacher, Katie, of Nesbit ES
19The PDS Design Team asked
- How do we keep the many stakeholders onboard and
motivated while turning that PDS passion into PDS
action?
20PDS Research Dr. Bill Curlette and Dr. Susan
Ogletree
21 Evaluation Approaches Measurement
Research Linked
Data Lessons Learned from Evaluation
First Year of Implementation
22Overview of Evaluation Presentation
- 1. Evaluation Approaches and Research Design
Including Output and Outcome Measures - First Year Implementation Data Summary
- Formative Evaluation (Process) Recommendations
23Evaluation Approaches and Design Evaluation
Approaches
- Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) Model
(Stufflebeam) Four Evaluations - Logic Model (Wholey, Patton) Flowchart with
Rational (Often Best Practices) - Utilization Focused (Patton) Higher
Utilization if involve Stakeholders
24Logic Model
Note Arrows Represent Major Relationships
25Context Demographics of Participating School
Systems
School District Total Enrollment Students on Free/ Reduced Lunch African American Latino White
Atlanta Public Schools 50,536 71 87 4 8
DeKalb Co. Schools 97,282 61 77 7 10
Fulton Co. Schools 74,041 33 39 9 42
Gwinnett Co. Schools 134,761 34 23 18 37
Governors Office of Student Achievement (2005).
State of Georgia Annual Report Card on K-12
Public Schools. Online Link (APS
Presented) http//reportcard2005.gaosa.org/k12/dem
ographics.aspX?ID761ALLTestKeyEnRTestTypedem
ographics
26Input Overview of Intervention
- SCHOOL LEVEL INTERVENTION
- -- Grant support
- -- 12 to 15 University Faculty Coordinators
- -- School Interns
- Arts Sciences faculty involved
- Scholarships (40 per year for students in three
Univ.) - Needs Evaluation
- Summer Retreats - PDS goals and school strategic
plan - -- Educational Support for K-12 Teachers
Pathways - --Teacher Support Specialist Training
- Courses for K-12 teachers
- Resources Books materials from the PDS2 Grant
- Evaluation Coordinators in each School System
27Quasi-Experimental Design
- Entries in the cells are outcome measurements
such as CRCT, Constructed Response and Student
Surveys - Schools are matched on free and reduced lunch,
ethnicity, and previous academic achievement
Baseline Year 2005
School Systems 12 PDS Schools E M H 12 Comparison Schools E M H
Atlanta
DeKalb
Fulton
Gwinnett
28Baseline Equality of PDS and CS on CRCT for ELA
- PDS and CS Graph Plotting Proportions of Students
in a School in Basic Category by School on CRCT
2004-05 Reading and English/Language Arts
29 Process and Product Evaluation Measurement
Instruments
- 41 Item Student Survey in grades 4, 8, 11
- 133 Item Paper and Pencil Teacher Survey for
teachers in grades 4, 8, 11 - Internet Survey for all Teachers (approx. 15
background items and 95 items on PDS Fidelity of
Implementation Survey) - Georgia CRCT and HSGT Statewide Achievement Tests
(multiple choice only) - Constructed Response Exercises for Student
Achievement (open ended responses) in grades 4,
8, 11 - Principal, Teacher, and Student Interviews
30Example of Constructed Response Exercise
- Madison pulled her winter jacket tightly around
her. She tried to make herself feel warm by
thinking about the cozy fireplace back at her
house. Just then, Madison noticed her mothers
friend, Mrs. Russell, pull up in her car. Mrs.
Russell looked at her soaking wet, cold neighbor
and said, My goodness, Madison, you look like
you really need a ride home! Madison happily
got in and thanked Mrs. Russell. Then Madison
began to tell Mrs. Russell how she had ended up
in that soggy situation. - Had Madison expected that type of weather?
- How do you know?
- Write a paragraph to explain what you think
happens next.
31 Linked Data Example
- Relationships of CRCT to Student Survey Items
(Home Internet Access and Hours of Homework/Week) - Linked Georgia Department of Education
Achievement Data to Student Survey Data From PDS2
Grant - Research Coordinators in Schools have access to
student records and provide New ID
32CRCT Science Means by Home Internet Access and
Hours of Homework/Week Example of Linking
33Teacher Composite Survey Item 41(Feedback
Provided to Each School)
- Overview Professional Development Needs
- ESOL inclusion
- Training on IEP
- Motivation techniques for special needs children
- Cooperative learning strategies
- Leadership skills and team building
- Classroom management techniques
- Integrating technology in the classroom
- Language training (e.g., Spanish Vietnamese)
- Time management and organizational skills
- Differentiated instruction
342. First Year Implementation Data Summary
Professional Development Schools and Comparison
Schools
35Teacher Retention
New Teacher Retention in Same Schools for Atlanta Public Schools New Teacher Retention in Same Schools for Atlanta Public Schools New Teacher Retention in Same Schools for Atlanta Public Schools
Schools New Teachers in 2003-2004 cohort returning in 2004-05 (2 yr retained) New Teachers in 2003-2004 cohort returning in 2005-06 (3 yr retained)
PDS 14/16 or 87.5 7/16 or 43.8
CS 12/17 or 70.5 7/17 or 41.1
36Essentially no difference between PDS and CS
schools at baseline and no difference after year
1 (except for homework hours)
Student and Teacher Data from Survey of Teachers
and Students in Grades 4, 8, and 11 in both PDS
and CS
37Students Self-Reported Efficacy for English
Math
Group Statistics
- I am certain I can master the skills taught in
this class. (English, Math) - Scale 1 (Strongly Disagree) 4 (Strongly Agree)
- No practical difference between the PDS and
Comparison Schools
Subject Group N Mean SD SE
English Year 1 Comparison PDS Schools 801 621 3.26 3.22 .675 .649 .024 0.26
English Year 2 Comparison PDS Schools 777 1201 3.27 3.27 .637 .658 .023 .019
Math Year 1 Comparison PDS Schools 763 599 3.23 3.20 .736 .728 .027 .030
Math Year2 Comparison PDS Schools 739 1122 3.25 3.19 .735 .710 .027 .021
38Table 9 Teacher Self Efficacy for Year 1
Compared to Baseline Year(Measured on a 6 point
scale with higher scores indicating more
efficacy. No statistically significance
difference between means.)
Baseline Baseline Baseline End of Year 1 End of Year 1 End of Year 1
Subscale N Mean SD N Mean SD Difference
PE PDS PE CS 94 66 4.67 4.61 .656 .721 93 64 4.60 4.66 .596 .716 -.09 .05
TE PDS TE CS 93 66 3.84 3.78 .951 1.05 93 64 3.97 3.88 .824 .948 .13 .10
Teacher Efficacy Scale has two sub scales
Teacher Efficacy scale (TE) and Personal Efficacy
scale (PE). Teacher Efficacy Scale essentially
showed no practical difference between the PDSs
and CSs.
39Academic Behavior Related to Homework During
Year 1
- Homework hours/week by group
- Beginning of Year 2, there was no statistically
significant association. Last year (baseline),
there was a statistically significant
association. Last year, more students in the
6-10 hour category of comparison schools reported
higher numbers of hours spent on homework. Note
that 83 of the students across both the PDS and
CS spent 2 hours or less per week doing homework
during year 1.
Homework Hours per Week During Year 1
lt1 hour 1-2 hours 3-5 hours 6-10 hours Total
Comparison Schools Count Expected Count 240 240.1 385 394.7 104 97.6 35 33.1 767 767.0
PDS Schools Count Expected Count 370 369.9 618 608.3 144 150.4 49 50.9 1182 1182.0
Total Count Expected Count 610 610.0 1003 1003.0 248 248.0 84 84.0 1949 1949.0
40Overview of Constructed Response Exercises
- Alternate way to measure student achievement
other than multiple choice tests 4 items given
in 4, 8, 11 grades - Two raters who were certified teachers judged
each item (interjudge agreement over 95) - A few high school year 2 items had some revisions
(but same items for both PDS and CS groups) - No statistically significant differences
results slightly favor PDS especially in science
41Constructed ResponseExercises
English / Language Arts English / Language Arts English / Language Arts
Mean SD Difference
Year 1 PDS 2.32 1.22
Year 2 PDS 2.54 1.37 0.22
Year 1 CS 2.32 1.29
Year 2 CS 2.43 1.38 0.11
42Constructed ResponseExercises
Mathematics Mathematics
Mean SD Difference
Year 1 PDS 1.78 1.16
Year 2 PDS 2.38 1.49 0.60
Year 1 CS 1.92 1.21
Year 2 CS 2.51 1.43 0.59
43Constructed ResponseExercises
Science
Mean SD Difference
Year 1 PDS 1.83 0.968
Year 2 PDS 2.04 1.12 0.21
Year 1 CS 1.79 1.08
Year 2 CS 1.88 1.16 0.09
44Student Achievement Using Georgia CRCT in Science
and Mathematics in PDS and Comparison Schools
forFirst Year of Implementation Across Systems
45Methodology
- Quasi-experimental design used with Matching on
achievement and demographic variables - Data set included 26,529 students
- Mathematics and science scaled scores were
dependent variables on CRCT HSGT - Change in Statewide Curriculum from Quality Core
Curriculum (QCC) to Georgia Performance Standards
(GPS) during study. ELA scores not comparable
from baseline to year 1. - Year, treatment, and ethnicity were independent
variables
46Evaluation Questions
- 1. How does the PDS2 model affect mean student
achievement in mathematics and science as
measured by the CRCT and HSGT? - 2. Are there significant differences in mean
achievement test scores between PDS2 feeder
pattern schools and control schools?
47Evaluation Questions 1 2
- Expected no increase in academic achievement in
PDS2 schools. - There was no significant difference between
baseline and Year 1 PDS2 schools or between PDS2
schools and comparison schools data in academic
achievement in content or by racial/ethnic group.
There was some variation among schools.
48Evaluation Question 3
- From the baseline year to the end of the first
year, how many PDS2 and comparison schools have
changed their Adequate Yearly Progress status and
in what direction? - Expected there to be more PDS2 schools meeting
AYP. - While there were shifts in the schools that made
or did not make AYP, there was no overall change.
Two schools, one PDS and one comparison, were
going into their 6th year of failure. There was
variation was among schools.
49Evaluation Question 4
- Is there a mean difference between ethnic groups
on the scaled scores of the CRCT and HSGT for
mathematics and science? - Expected a narrowing of the achievement gap.
- Academic gaps were identified between
ethnicities. However, in this data set there was
no statistically significant closure of the gaps.
50Evaluation Question 5
- From the baseline year CRCT and HSGT to the end
of the first year within a given ethnic group, is
there a mean difference in scaled scores on the
CRCT and HSGT for mathematics or science? - Expected there to be an increase in the mean
difference for ethnic groups in scaled scores. - While no significant mean differences were
found, there was a slight increase in all of the
ethnic groups means.
51Evaluation Question 6
- From the baseline year CRCT and HSGT to the end
of the first year within a given ethnic group, is
there a correlation between the proportion
passing change on the CRCT and HSGT for
mathematics or science and Hedgess g effect
size? - A small positive correlation was expected.
- There was no correlation between the scale score
changes and proportion changes based on the cut
score for passing. Was lack of correlation due to
randomness or actually no relationships? In
either case, reporting both change score measures
is needed.
52Policy Implications
- GA DOE only reports pass rate based on
predetermined cut scores (Reporting method
encourages teachers to teach to the bubble). - NCLB This Research Suggests Dual Reporting of
Both Year to Year Differences in Pass Rates and
Year to Year Differences in Mean Scaled Scores
is Needed
53Discussion of CRCT Results
- Difficult to obtain difference in achievement
test scores over systems - reform rarely occurs
in a short period of time (Southern Regional
Education Board, 2006) - Give consideration to the level of development of
the PDS Takes many years to fully implement PDS
programs
543. Formative Evaluation (Process)
Recommendations
- 1. Revise the Implementation from School - wide
to both School-wide and more focused through
Teacher-Intern - Professor (TIP) Groups - 2. Employ PDS Differential Implementation
Fidelity Inventory (PDS DIF-I) - 3. Use both pass rates on achievement tests
(meeting AYP) and scaled scores - 4. Continue refining the partnership in the areas
of evaluation and research
55Process (Formative Evaluation) Result after
first year is to suggest Teacher-Intern-Professor
(TIP) Groups
- Several Cooperating Teachers with student
teaching Interns meet with university professor
twice each month Agrees with recommendation
of External Evaluator - Extending Internship to one year under
consideration - Mini-Grants for TIP Group Project (e.g., Action
Research) - TIP Group aligns with NCATE PDS Standards
- Mixed methods research study is being planned
56PDS Differential Implementation Fidelity
Inventory (PDS DIF-I)
- How much differential implementation constitutes
fidelity of implementation? - 95 Items for Teachers responded to with Yes,
No, or Unsure. - During the last year
- 1. I worked with university faculty who were
interested in my research questions. - 2. I provided feedback to a university about
curriculum and teacher education.
57Conclusions for System-Wide Formative Evaluation
Moving Ahead
- Teacher-Intern-Faculty Level of PDS
Implementation due to result across Four School
Systems Essentially No Change in Student
Achievement although Some Schools Increased and
Some Decreased during the first year of
implementation. - Interest in PDS Grant Program Increased (e.g. 38
increased in students taking Constructed Response
Exercises, additional schools became PDS schools).
58Conclusions for System-Wide Formative Evaluation
Moving Ahead
- PDS Differential Implementation of
Fidelity-Inventory created and will be used to
better describe PDS Interventions - Recommend not only proportion passing but
reporting of mean scaled scores on Internet - Partnership activities are increasing
59Kimberly Elementary Ms. Carolyn Hall, Ms. Karen
Ross, and Dr. Brian Williams
60L. O. Kimberly Elementary School
- An urban elementary school with a population of
406 students in grades pre-kindergarten through
fifth grade. - 87 free and/or reduced lunch
- 99 of our students are African-American
- 36 mobility rate
61L. O. Kimberly Elementary School
- L.O. Kimberly has achieved distinction as a
Distinguished Title I School by achieving
Adequate Yearly Progress for the fourth
consecutive year.
62L. O. Kimberly Elementary School
- At L. O. Kimberly Elementary School the students,
parents, and staff are committed to ensuring that
each child reach 100 proficiency in
Reading/Language Arts and Math on the CRCT by
school year 2013-2014.
63L. O. Kimberly Elementary School
- Our Atlanta Public School targets include
- Increasing the percent of students scoring in
the upper quartile (75-100) on the CRCT. - Reducing the percent of students scoring in the
lower quartile (0- 25) on the CRCT.
64L. O. Kimberly Elementary SchoolPDS Goals
2006-2007
- Tutoring Program
- Homework Help-Reading/Math
- Professional Development
- Collaborative Lesson Planning (Science and Math)
- Parental Involvement
- Math/ Science Workshops
65L. O. Kimberly Elementary School Fourth Grade
Research Project 2006
- In 2006, The survey indicated that the teachers
wanted the following professional development to
enhance student achievement.
- Pedagogical - focused on differentiation,
critical thinking, concept-based unit planning,
and teaching diverse learners - Personal Growth - focused on time management and
organization - Integrating Technology - focused on integrating
technology in the classroom - Institutional Issues - adequate time to study
standards during planning and teacher issued
laptops
66L. O. Kimberly Elementary School Fourth Grade
Research Project 2007
- In 2007, The survey indicated that the teachers
wanted the following professional development to
enhance student achievement.
- Pedagogical - focused on writing effective lesson
plans, and organizational strategies - Content - training on teaching all content areas
in the allotted time during the day - Institutional Issues - more planning time without
interruptions, flexibility with lesson planning
and teaching methods teacher issued laptops
67L. O. Kimberly Elementary SchoolMathematics
Science Preparation
- Collaborative Lesson Planning
- Grade level teams meet to collaboratively plan
math and science lessons together. The teachers
then observe the delivering of the lesson.
Teachers then meet again to discuss the lesson. - Science Professional Development
- Grade level teams meet to discuss and learn about
best practices in science teaching.
68L. O. Kimberly Elementary SchoolMathematics
Science Preparation
- Science Co-Teaching
- Teachers work with the PDS liaison to teach
engaging science lessons to students. - Distribution of Science Resources
- Science resources (e.g. microscopes, simple
machines, rocks) were moved from a central
location and distributed to teachers throughout
the school.
69L. O. Kimberly Elementary SchoolMathematics
Endorsement
- Presently, we have ten teachers enrolled in the
Math Endorsement course that GSU teaches at our
school. - Eight teachers from other APS school also
participate in the course. - All of the Math Endorsement participants will
participate in a PRISM study to evaluate the
impact of the endorsement on math instruction.
70L. O. Kimberly Elementary SchoolParent
Initiatives
- Muffins for Mom
- Donuts for Dad
- Science Fair Parent Workshop
- Father-Daughter Dance
- Parent Math Science Workshops
71L. O. Kimberly Elementary SchoolTutoring Program
- Stinger Academy
- Great Leaps Fluency Program
- GSU Student interns
72Woodland Middle Mr. William Bradley, Ms. Vivian
Randolph, and Dr. Susan McClendon
73Woodland Middle School A Title I and
Professional Development School
Home of the Wolverines Where Teaching and
Learning Come First William W. Bradley,
Principal2816 Briarwood Boulevard East Point,
Georgia 30344 404-346-6420
Nestled in a residential neighborhood, only a few
minutes from Kimberly Elementary, is Woodland
Middle School where there is a definite focus on
teaching and learning. Woodland is the only
school in Georgia where all faculty and support
staff are members of professional learning and
cross-career learning communities. Just three
years ago, Woodland was the only school in the
Fulton County School District in
Needs-Improvement Year Four. With its urban
population, high poverty and mobility rates and
low test scores, Woodland was on the brink of
restructuring by the state. Today, Woodland is
progressing as one of the better urban middle
schools in the state and is on the verge of
distinction.
74About the Fulton County School System Where
Students Come First
- Founded in 1871, the Fulton County School System
is one of the oldest and largest school districts
in Georgia. With a focus on student achievement
and a commitment to continual improvement, Fulton
has earned a reputation as a premier school
system. This long history of excellence is
evidenced by the many state and national honors
bestowed on Fulton's schools, staff and students. - The system serves the area of Fulton County
outside the city limits of Atlanta. In addition
to unincorporated areas, Fulton County Schools
serve the cities of Alpharetta, College Park,
East Point, Fairburn, Hapeville, Mountain Park,
Palmetto, Roswell, Sandy Springs and Union City. - As the fourth largest school system in Georgia,
Fulton has more than 11,000 full-time employees,
including more than 6,100 teachers and other
certified personnel, who work in 90 schools and
15 administrative and support buildings. During
the 2006-07 school year, more than 82,600
students will attend classes in 53 elementary
schools, 18 middle schools, 12 high schools, two
open campus high schools, and five charter
schools. Two elementary schools operate on
year-round calendars.
75Abbreviated ProfileFulton County Schools
- The 10 Key Performance Indicators below are the
districts standardized metrics for evaluating
and comparing schools, grade levels, NCLB
Subgroups, and more. - Student Attendance and Enrollment Totals
- Total enrollment 82, 936
- Average daily attendance (year-to-date) 96.1
- Students chronically absent(percentage)
5.3 - Students chronically tardy (percentage) 5.1
- Limited English Proficient (percent of
enrollment) 6.0 - Special education programs (percent of
enrollment) 12.0 - Student Academic Performance
- CRCT Mathematics Summative Results 06 (
proficient grades 1-8) 87.0 - CRCT Literacy Summative Results 06 ( proficient
grades 1-8) 91.0 - CRCT Social Studies Summative Results 06 (
proficient grades 3-8) 91.0 - CRCT Science Summative Results 06 ( proficient
grades 3-8) 81.0
76Target Comparison Schools Demographic Data
Attendance Enrollment
Mobility, ED, F/R Lunch
77 Comparison Of Summative CRCT Assessment Data
Target Grade Level Performances 06
784 Year Comparison of Summative CRCT Assessment
Data Mathematics
794 Year Comparison of CRCT Summative Assessment
Data L/A Reading
80Academic Indicator Writing Pre-Test Results
81Academic Indicator Writing Results
82Professional Learning Collaborative Model
83The Surveys
- WWIS What Works in Schools (ASCD, Bob Marzano)
- SAI Standards Assessment Inventory
- PDS Constructed Response Ratings Teacher
Needs Survey - FCS Staff Satisfaction Parent Perception
Surveys
84The surveys said to implement curriculum
standards more effectively we needed
- extended planning collaboration time
- time with mentors
- time to observe colleagues
- training to develop better formative and
summative assessments linked to Georgia
Performance Standards (GPS) in the CRCT format - professional development related to GPS
85We responded to curriculum needs by . . .
- Revising and increasing planning schedule
- Assigning mentors to all new teachers
- Hiring instructional coaches in mathematics
literacy - Moving to a higher stage of implementation of our
Professional Learning Community (PLC) - Creating eight Cross-Career Learning Communities
( CCLC) - Implementing a balanced assessment program
- Applicable PDS Standards
- Learning Community
- Collaboration
- Accountability
- Resources
- Diversity Equity
86Weekly Planning Schedule
- The planning block is 90 minutes for all
- teachers.
- Monday Team Planning
- Tuesday Subject Area Collaborative/Personal
Planning - Wednesday Parent Communication
- Thursday Grade Level Planning
- Friday Professional Development
87What is in the works. . . for curriculum
- Deeper understanding of new curriculum (GPS)
- Use of state portal, Georgia Standards.Org
- Increase use of Student Assessment Management
System (SAMS) data to drive instruction
- Applicable PDS Standards
- Learning Community
- Collaboration
- Accountability
- Resources
- Diversity Equity
88Surveys also revealed . . . our professional
development needs
- courses in reading, mathematics, and writing
- strategies for meeting the learning needs of a
diverse student population - opportunities for certification in additional
areas - strategies for implementing technology in the
classroom - opportunities to practice hands-onclassroom
strategies prior to implementation
89We responded to professional development needs
by..
- Reading ESOL Endorsements
- Pathways
- Urban Masters Program
- Local Professional Development
- Focus on Mathematics- Teachers, Student, Parents
- Applicable PDS Standards
- Learning Community
- Collaboration
- Accountability
- Resources
- Diversity Equity
90What is in the works for professional development
- Development of deeper more effective teacher
toolboxes - Teaching observation and collaboration rounds
- Teacher Writing Assessment
- Summer Institute
- Ending with the beginning in mind
- Applicable PDS Standards
- Learning Community
- Collaboration
- Accountability
- Resources
- Diversity Equity
91(No Transcript)
92(No Transcript)
93(No Transcript)
94Break-Out Session 1
- Discussion Stations
- Higher Education Faculty
- Evaluations and Research
- Grant Details
- PDS Elementary
- PDS Middle
95Meadowcreek High School Mr. Andrew Foster and
Dr. Joe Feinberg
96Meadowcreek High School
- Profile
- 2,150 Students
- Diverse Student Population 29 African
American 47 Latino/Hispanic 6.8 White 14.4
Asian 2.2 Other - 74 Free/reduced Lunch
97Meadowcreek High School
- Collaboration Goals
- Teacher Mentoring/Induction
- GSU Intern Mentoring/Induction
- Staff Development/Continuing Education
98Meadowcreek High School
- PDS Goals
- New teacher orientation
- NCATE/PDS Standards I, II, III, IV, V
- Mentoring relationships
- NCATE/PDS Standards III and V
- Support teams
- NCATE/PDS Standards II, III and V
- Workshops and training for beginning teachers
- NCATE/PDS Standards I, II, III, IV, V
- Workshops and training for mentors
NCATE/PDSStandards I, II, III, IV, V
99McCoSS Meadowcreek Catalysis of Students
SuccessA Georgia State University PDS Program
- Rationale
- Research Teacher retention/turnover (Graziano,
2005) - Professional development (Wood, 2002)
- Purpose
- To provide a systematic structure of support for
beginning teachers/pre-service teacher - First Year Teachers/Pre-Service
- Teachers New to Meadowcreek
- To increase retention
100McCoSS Meadowcreek Catalysis of Students
SuccessA Georgia State University PDS Program
- Program Overview
- New Teacher/PDS Orientation
- Mentorship Program
- The N.E.S.T. (New Educators Support Team)
- Mentoring
- Reflection
- Release time
- Collaborative learning community
101McCoSS Meadowcreek Catalysis of Students
SuccessA Georgia State University PDS Program
- Workshops and Training for beginning teachers
- Staff Development
- Professional Learning
- After school and Saturday Sessions
- Support Teams
- Evaluation
- Formal
- Walk-thru
- Peer evaluations
102McCoSS Meadowcreek Catalysis of Students
SuccessA Georgia State University PDS Program
- Roles and Responsibilities
- Support Structure
- Mentor
- 2. New/Beginning Teacher
-
- 3. Principal
-
- 4. Mentor Coordinator
- 5. Steering Committee
103McCoSS Meadowcreek Catalysis of Students
SuccessA Georgia State University PDS Program
- Components of Meadowcreeks Induction Program
- Orientation Program with Introductions and
Presentations of the following - MHS community (maps and demographics)
- Key personnel
- Policies and procedures
- School and district improvement goals
- PDS Goals and Objectives
- Induction Program
- Mentor program structure and expectations
- Overview of expectations, evaluation and
procedures, classroom management
104McCoSS Meadowcreek Catalysis of Students
SuccessA Georgia State University PDS Program
- Regularly scheduled meetings
- Curriculum and Lesson Planning
- Classroom Management
- Observations
105Atlanta Public SchoolsQuayln McIntyre
106Commitment to Retention
- Comprehensive Induction
- University/District/Site Support
- Continual Professional Learning
- University Partnerships
107Induction Professional Learning Teacher
Retention
- Induction
- Teacher Mentors (Teacher Support Specialist
Endorsement) - Retired Teacher Mentors
- Cross Career Learning Communities (CCLC)
- Professional Learning and Development
- Content Specific Endorsements
- CCLC
- Professional Learning Units (PLU)
108Professional Support PathwaysMs. Patsy Terry
109Professional Pathway 1 Endorsement
Opportunities
- ESOL (P-12)
- Teacher Support Specialist
- Mathematics (P-5)
- Reading (P-12)
- Science (P-5)
- Endorsement program participants will receive
PLUs (Professional Learning Units) only. - ONE endorsement per district
- Courses can be taught in school districts/
- PDS clusters cohorts must have 12-15 students
minimum
110Professional Pathway 1 Endorsement
Opportunities
- Current Endorsements
- ESOL Endorsement at Dunwoody Springs ES (Fulton)
- Reading Endorsement at Woodland MS (Fulton)
- ESOL Endorsement at Cross Keys HS (DeKalb)
- Math Endorsement at Kimberly ES (APS)
111Professional Support Pathway 2 Pathway Scholars
- Masters, Specialist, or Ph.D.
- Persons Eligible for Pathways II funding support
include the following PDS educators (teachers or
administrators) who are NEW applicants who gain
acceptance in graduate programs PDS educators
who are currently enrolled in GSU graduate
programs and those who wish to use funding
support toward courses of study. - Student must be accepted into a specific program
of study before applying for Pathway Scholars
funding. Fulfill all entrance requirements. - See GSU on-line college catalogue for available
programs at www.gsu.edu - Pathway II Scholars are selected by the principal
of the PDS school. Once selected, scholars apply
online for the Pathway II funding support and
complete GRA application procedures. - GRA scholars are matched with GSU faculty with
similar research interests. - Amount of funding per person 2,000
- Commitment during summer semester 20 hours per
week (i.e., GRA research-related time commitment)
as a GRA _at_ 2.5 appointments - Tuition waived for up to three courses (in
addition to the required GRA course) - Must pay students fees, and show proof of health
insurance - Number of slots per the 4 PDS districts 15
distributed to 4 districts - (3) per APS, DCSS,
GCSS (6) for FCSS (any unused school slots can
be used by other PDS principals within the
district)
112Professional Support Pathway 3Alternative Prep.
Programs
- Target audience Career Changers, Teachers
seeking High Quality Certification - Available Certifications
- Masters Special Education Certification (EPSE)
- TEEMS (MSIT)
- Urban Alternative Prep Program (ECE)
- Must be accepted into the appropriate GSU program
(entry level only), and meet all entrance
requirements. - Scholarships for these programs are limited and,
therefore, not guaranteed. Scholarships are
service repayable. - Courses taught in PDS school districts/PDS
cluster schools and/or on GSU campus. - Applications available during summer semester
113Professional Support Pathway Chart
Professional Pathway 1 Endorsement Opportunities Professional Support Pathway 2 Masters, Specialist, or Ph.D. Pathway Scholars Professional Support Pathway 3Alternative Prep. Programs
ESOL (P-12) Teacher Support Specialist Mathematics (P-5) Reading (P-12) Science (P-5) Endorsement program participants will receive PLUs (Professional Learning Units) only. ONE endorsement per district Courses can be taught in school districts/ PDS clusters cohorts must have 12-15 students minimum Contact Person Dr. Dee Taylor dtaylor29_at_gsu.edu Persons Eligible for Pathways II funding support include the following PDS educators (teachers or administrators) who are NEW applicants who gain acceptance in graduate programs PDS educators who are currently enrolled in GSU graduate programs and those who wish to use funding support toward courses of study. Student must be accepted into a specific program of study before applying for Pathway Scholars funding. Fulfill all entrance requirements. See GSU on-line college catalogue for available programs at www.gsu.edu Pathway II Scholars are selected by the principal of the PDS school. Once selected, scholars apply online for the Pathway II funding support and complete GRA application procedures. GRA scholars are matched with GSU faculty with similar research interests. Amount of funding per person 2,000 Commitment during summer semester 20 hours per week (i.e., GRA research-related time commitment) as a GRA _at_ 2.5 appointments Tuition waived for up to three courses (in addition to the required GRA course) Must pay students fees, and show proof of health insurance Number of slots per the 4 PDS districts 15 distributed to 4 districts - (3) per APS, DCSS, GCSS (6) for FCSS (any unused school slots can be used by other PDS principals within the district) Contact Person Patsy Terry pterry_at_gsu.edu Target audience Career Changers, Teachers seeking High Quality Certification Available Certifications Masters Special Education Certification (EPSE) TEEMS (MSIT) Urban Alternative Prep Program (ECE) Must be accepted into the appropriate GSU program (entry level only), and meet all entrance requirements. Scholarships for these programs are limited and, therefore, not guaranteed. Scholarships are service repayable. Courses taught in PDS school districts/PDS cluster schools and/or on GSU campus. Applications available during summer semester Contact Person Tracye Moore tmoore_at_gsu.edu
114Break-Out Session 2
- Discussion Stations
- PDS High School
- Induction
- Evaluation and Research
- Budget
- P-12 School-Based Partners
- Grant Details
115Conclusion Discussion Session
116Thank You for Your Participation!
- Contact Information
- Dr. Gwen Benson gbenson_at_gsu.edu
- Dr. Dee Taylor dtaylor29_at_gsu.edu
- Dr. Bill Curlette wcurlette_at_gsu.edu
- Dr. Susan Ogletree sogletree1_at_gsu.edu
- Dr. Susan McClendon scrim2_at_gsu.edu
- Brian Williams bawilli_at_gsu.edu
- Dr. Joseph Feinberg mstjrf_at_langate.gsu.edu
- Patsy Terry pterry_at_gsu.edu
- Qualyn McIntyre - qmcintyre_at_atlanta.k12.ga.us
- Will Bradley bradley_at_fultonschools.org
- Vivian Randolph randolph_at_fultonschools.org
- Carolyn Hall chall_at_atlanta.k12.ga.us
- Karen Ross kyross_at_atlanta.k12.ga.us
- Andrew Foster andrew_foster_at_gwinnett.k12.ga.us