building expertise 2016 june 15-17, 2016 annual ... · annual international marzano conference june...

BUILDING EXPERTISE 2016 Annual International Marzano Conference

June 15-17, 2016

©2016 Learning Sciences International 1

The Turnaround Model for

School Improvement

Betsy Carter, PhD.

Use this slide for large graphics or charts.

If you need more room, use a blank slide.

4.0 Participants will be able to:

• Resolve challenges that accompany a change of vision

3.0

Participants will be able to:

• Prioritize within a new vision of leading, collaborating, teaching and

learning to improve student learning in turnaround schools

2.0

Participants will be able to recognize or recall specific vocabulary, including:

• rigor, taxonomy, student autonomy, growth mindset, instructional model,

Participants will be able to:

• identify the critical components of leading second order change

• describe collaboration that results in student achievement

• articulate the shift in teaching for change

• explain how students learn differently

1.0 With help, partial success at level 2.0 content and level 3.0 content

0.0 Even with help, no success

A New Vision


June 15-17, 2016


A NEW VISION OF

LEADING

Prepare for Second

Order Change

Identify barriers that have been institutionalized.

Prepare for Second Order Change

Teachers as Leaders

• Growing leaders

• Emerging leaders

• Release responsibility


June 15-17, 2016


Leadership Team To Do Doing Done

Continuous Improvement Planning

Turnaround

Analysis

CURRENT Differences

SIMILARITIES Transformation Differences

Leading

A NEW VISION OF

COLLABORATING


June 15-17, 2016


Research says. . .

A high level of teacher collaboration

significantly improves student achievement.

A high functioning PLC focused on the right work will act, in essence, as a kind of knowledge-generation system for teachers.

Did You Know? Your School’s PLCs Have a Major Impact, Lindsey Devers-Basileo

Accuracy

Growth

ACT TRACK PLAN

PLCs – Teacher Teams

PLCs – Teacher Teams

ACT CYCLE

• Examining Student Evidence

• Short-cycle to Mid-cycle data

comparison

• Personalized Student Actions

• Problem-solving

• Shared responsibility

RESULT

More students hit the learning

target/standard

GROWTH CYCLE

• Team learning identified during

the ACT cycle

• Team “chooses” professional

development

• Progress through the Growth

phases together

RESULT

More students hit the learning

target/standard


June 15-17, 2016


Joyce and Showers (2002)

Staff

Development

Knowledge

(thorough)

Skill

(strong)

Transfer

(implementation)

Theory 10% 5% 0%

Demonstrations 30% 20% 0%

Practice &

Feedback 60% 60% 5%

Peer Coaching

or Collegial

Support

95% 95% 95%

Turnaround

Analysis

CURRENT Differences


Leading

Collaborating

A NEW VISION OF

TEACHING


June 15-17, 2016


Standards-Based Classrooms:

Shift Required

Teacher Centered Student Centered Student Centered

with Rigor

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Teacher Centered Student Centered

•

•

•

•

•

•

Traditional Classroom Student Centered

Classroom Student Centered Classroom

with Rigor

Teacher is working harder than the students. Students mostly “passively” learn from the teacher.

Students learn from teacher and discuss with each other.

Students are working “harder” than the teacher. Students actively learn from each other, asking difficult questions and pushing on the learning.

High engagement comes from the teacher personality/actions

Engagement comes from group work

High engagement due to the cognitive complexity of performance task and group work

Teacher questions students typically with lower order questions and limited autonomy

Teacher directs students and discussions flow through the teacher with low autonomy

Students question each other with higher order questions and high autonomy

Teacher’s knowledge is visible. Teacher does the majority of the talking.

Student engagement and compliance is visible

Student thinking and learning is visible. Student thinking and conversations dominate the lesson.

Traditional Classroom Student Centered Classroom Student Centered Classroom

with Rigor














June 15-17, 2016




with Rigor















with Rigor







Time and energy spent on management routine

Routines allow for productive group work

Routines are sometimes not noticeable because students are self-motivated due to the complexity of thinking with their peers

Teacher leads Teacher facilitates, students participate compliantly

Students lead and facilitate learning. Teacher provides guidance and resources.

Tasks typically only require retrieval and comprehension

Tasks typically only retrieval and comprehension

Tasks scaffold to analysis and utilization of knowledge

Students sit in rows or in groups without significant interaction

Students sit in groups or go to centers but the tasks are not rigorous

Group interaction on higher level tasks are at the center of the lesson



with Rigor







Time and energy spent on management routine

Routines allow for productive group work

Routines are sometimes not noticeable because students are self-motivated due to the complexity of thinking with their peers

Teacher leads Teacher facilitates, students participate compliantly

Students lead and facilitate learning. Teacher provides guidance and resources.

Tasks typically only require retrieval and comprehension

Tasks typically only retrieval and comprehension

Tasks scaffold to analysis and utilization of knowledge

Students sit in rows or in groups without significant interaction

Students sit in groups or go to centers but the tasks are not rigorous

Group interaction on higher level tasks are at the center of the lesson


June 15-17, 2016


Marzano Taxonomy

1.877.411.7114 | MarzanoCenter.com © 2015 Learning Sciences International

Turnaround

Analysis

CURRENT Differences


Leading

Collaborating

Teaching


June 15-17, 2016


A NEW VISION OF

LEARNING

Student Teams

• Learn from each other

• Question each other

• Lead & facilitate

learning

• Student thinking &

talking at the center

“Autonomy is the ability to take charge of one’s own learning.”

Henri Holec, 1981

Goal: Student Autonomy


June 15-17, 2016


Student Evidence

STUDENT RESULTS

TEACHER ACTIONS

Turnaround

Analysis

CURRENT Differences


Leading

Collaborating

Teaching

Learning

What do they have to say?


June 15-17, 2016


Prioritization Matrix

EF

FO

RT

IMPACT Low

Low

High

High

Big Wins

• Building capacity holds

staff

• Desire to be part of

something bigger that is

happening and moving

• Honors staff ability to

problem solve and think

CYCLE 1

CYCLE 2 CYCLE 3

Year 1

Secondary

Schools Only

Year 2

Year 3

Essentials Pathway: Intensive Implementation Model

Designing

Implementation

Teach to

Reach (TTR)

for Core

Instruction C4I

Year 2 Kickoff

(half-day)

Core

Instruction

C4I

PLC Team

Facilitation

C4I

Teaming for

Rigor

(half-day) C4I

TTR for

Deepening

Core

Instruction C4I

Monitoring

for Learning

C4I

PLC Team

Facilitation

C4I

Facilitating

Complex

Learning C4I

Deepening

Core

Instruction C4I

PLC Team

Facilitation

C4I

Instructional

Decision

Making

C4I


June 15-17, 2016


Monograph

Teaching for Rigor

MarzanoCenter.com/Essentials

Resources

Betsy Carter, PhD

[email protected]

http://www.marzanocenter.com/essentials


June 15-17, 2016


MarzanoCenter.com

LearningSciences.com

1.877.411.7114

building expertise 2016 june 15-17, 2016 annual ... · annual international marzano conference june...

Documents