illinois ascd common core standards symposium february 25, 2011 intasc model core teaching...
TRANSCRIPT
Illinois ASCD Common Core Standards Symposium
February 25, 2011
InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards: Toward a
New Vision of Teaching
Presenter
Circe Stumbo President, West Wind Education Policy, Inc.
Consultant to the Council of Chief State School Officers
877-354-9378 ext. 100
My focus is education policy and equity
Audience
How many of you…
… are teachers?
… are principals?
… are superintendents?
… are in your district’s central office?
... are with a Regional Office of Education?
…are in an institution of higher education?
What other roles are represented in the room?
Session Goals
Describe the current national policy context for teaching and leading in education
Preview revised InTASC core teaching standards as an instrument of education policy
Discuss implications of the core teaching standards
Consider next steps
NOTE
While policy is changing around learning, teaching AND leading, I am focusing on teaching
I will include implications for school leadership—I invite you to do the same
Policy Context: First Wave of
Standards-Based Reform
1992—Genesis of standards-based reform (Focused on standards for students)
Governors’ National Summit on Education (1989)
Goals 2000: Educate America Act (1994)
ESEA reauthorization in 1994 (IASA)
Setting of student content and performance standards
Why 1992?
Creation of the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC)
CA (assessment) and CT (support) joined forces within the Council of Chief State School Officers
42 states joined in consortium to write standards for new teachers
INTASC standards adopted or adapted by 38 states
INTASC standards became basis for initial certification/licensure and program approval
Policy Context: Second Wave of
Standards-Based Reform
2001—Second wave of standards-based reform (Accountability for student achievement by subgroup)
ESEA reauthorization in 2001 (NCLB)
Focus on disaggregating student data and attaching consequences
Focus on teacher quality was related to credentials—that teachers know the subject matter they are teaching
Policy Context: Possible Third Wave of
Standards-Based Reform
2009-10—Beginning of a probable third wave of standards-based reform (Educator effectiveness)
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (2009) (Race to the Top, State Fiscal Stabilization Fund)
State legislation
ESEA reauthorization in 2011?
Focus on teacher and leader effectiveness … as defined by student performance & other measures
Policy Context: Possible Third Wave of
Standards-Based Reform
Teacher Quality
What the teacher candidate or practicing teacher knows
Teacher Effectiveness
What the teacher candidate or teacher can do—and how well they do it
CCSSO’s State Consortium on
Educator Effectiveness (SCEE) Framework
Standards
The Common Core State Standards embody new expectations for students; standards-based teaching and leading policies are needed to provide student access and opportunity to meet the Common Core.
There is a need for unpacking and aligning the Common Core, the InTASC model core teaching standards, and the ISLLC 2008 standards for school leadership—and using the standards to drive transformation.
Educator Evaluation
Improving mechanisms for evaluation
a. New criteria for teacher and leader evaluation
b. New outcomes from evaluation (making evaluations matter)
Improve the effectiveness of evaluators (principals, external evaluators)
Change the consequences of evaluation
Caveat: Do not thwart opportunities for transformation
Discussion
Are these policy conversations impacting you? If so, how?
Have you been here before? If so, what is the same and what is different?
Standards for Teaching
Background
THEN:
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC)
NOW:
Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC)
Draft Core Teaching Standards
Of note:
Standards are research-based and based in professional wisdom
Standards are intended to be taken as a whole
Public comment period is closed; review and revision by the end of March
The goal is standards-based systemic transformation
Key Themes
A Collaborative Professional Culture
Improved Assessment Literacy
New Roles for Technology
A Focus on Next Generation Learners
Learners Have A More Active Role in Learning
Personalized Learning for Each & Every Learner
New Leadership Roles for Educators
Groupings
The Learner and Learning
Standard #1: Learner Development
Standard #2: Learning Differences
Standard #3: Learning Environments
Content
Standard #4: Content Knowledge
Standard #5: Innovative Applications of Content
Groupings
Instructional Practice
Standard #6: Assessment
Standard #7: Planning for Instruction
Standard #8: Instructional Strategies
Professional Responsibility
Standard #9: Reflection and Continuous Growth
Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration
Discussion
How are these draft standards themselves similar to or different from teaching standards in Illinois?
What’s are the implications for education policy?
Policy Implications
Aligning instruction toward the Common Core
Licensing and certification
Preparation
Induction and mentoring
Growth opportunities and supports
Evaluation and high stakes levers
Working conditions and system accountability
How can we measure teacher
effectiveness? Student Performance
Scores on statewide standardized exams
Value-added models (VAM)
Common assessments in each subject, yielding comparable results across classrooms
Federal investment in assessment consortia
• SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium
• Partnership for Readiness of College and Careers (PARCC)
How can we measure teacher
effectiveness? Limitations with using student performance
Untested subjects and grades (69% of teachers)
Multiple measures
VAM provides gross characterizations; requires years of data
Doesn’t measure everything we value in teaching
How can we measure teacher
effectiveness?
Professional practice, knowledge, judgment, and responsibilities
Based on standards
Multiple measures of teacher performance
Performance-based assessments for teachers
What weight do we give to different measures?
How can we measure teacher
effectiveness?
What is the relationship between teacher effectiveness and principal effectiveness?
… between teacher effectiveness and superintendent effectiveness?
… between teacher effectiveness and your effectiveness?
How is all of this measured?
Discussion
How is the use of teaching standards described here similar from the way standards are used in Illinois or in your district? How is it different?
Are you interested in considering or perhaps working on the adoption or adaptation of the new model core teaching standards in Illinois?
Discussion
Many of the predominantly rural states in the U.S. are calling upon the federal government to recognize their unique contexts in federal policymaking and regulation. What are the salient contextual factors in Illinois’ rural communities?
Next Steps
Sample Deep Dive Projects
Unpack and align the Common Core State Standards for students, InTASC core teaching standards, and the ISLLC-2008 leader standards
Work to develop innovative solutions to the challenges of equity and opportunity to achieve the standards
Outline state policy implications of the standards
Clarify what each set of standards means for the others
Sample Deep Dive Projects
Craft developmental continuums
aligned to the Common Core and updated InTASC and ISLLC standards
differentiate growth from novice to expert
incorporate roles leading to increasing leadership for individual educators and teams of educators
lead to rubrics, indicators, and assessments at key transition points
Sample Deep Dive Projects
Devise model state evaluation systems, including
defensible definitions of effective and highly effective teaching and leadership along the career continuums
formative and summative assessments
models for evaluator trainings
tools states can use to assess their systems against the standards.
Sample Deep Dive Projects
Develop a model infrastructure of integrated policies and practices to address and support teacher and leader career development, including
professional development
performance-based tiered licensure aligned to the standards
incentive systems
Sample Deep Dive Projects
Study the organization and practice of teaching and leading in turnaround schools
Lessons about professional collaboration
Lessons about the practice of teaching and leading
Next Steps
Go to www.ccsso.org/intasc to download standards and the companion policy paper
Check out CCSSO’s State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (SCEE) blog and shared files at www.ccsso.org/scee
For more info, contact [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected]
Thank You!
Additional Standard-by-Standard slides
Standard #1: Learner Development
The teacher understands how children learn and develop—recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas—and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.
Standard #2: Learning Differences
The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that allow each learner to reach his/her full potential.
Standard #3: Learning Environments
The teacher works with learners to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, encouraging positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self motivation.
Standard #4: Content Knowledge
The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners.
The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical/creative thinking and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.
Standard #5: Innovative Applications of
Content
Standard #6: Assessment
The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to document learner progress, and to guide the teacher’s ongoing planning and instruction.
Standard #7: Planning for Instruction
The teacher draws upon knowledge of content areas, cross-disciplinary skills, learners, the community, and pedagogy to plan instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals.
Standard #8: Instructional Strategies
The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to access and appropriately apply information.
The teacher is a reflective practitioner who uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students, families, and other professionals in the learning community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner.
Standard #9: Reflection and Continuous
Growth
Standard #10: Collaboration
The teacher collaborates with students, families, colleagues, other professionals, and community members to share responsibility for student growth and development, learning, and well-being.