PROJECT LEARNINGNo longer scissors, glue and dioramas…

Spaghetti and Marshmallows Astrological signs Spaghetti and marshmallows Terri Steimer – Marshmallow

commissioner… 18 minutes!!! Why This Activity?

What is Project Learning?What it is NOT!!!

An additional demand

Scissors and glue Dioramas Necessarily long,

drawn out activities

What it is A strategy for

application An approach – a

way of thinking about instruction

Integrated instructional method

Project Based Learning is a teaching and learning model (curriculum development and instructional

approach) that emphasizes student-centered instruction by assigning

projects. It allows students to work more autonomously to construct their

own learning, and culminates in realistic, student-generated products.

What is project learning?

What, Why, Benefits

WHY????

The Homework “Project” Quadratic Equations Comma splices Table of Elements Civil War Reconstruction 4/4 vs. Cut Time Portrait drawing “Where’s the restroom” in four different

languages

From the Simple to the Extraordinary

Resources: http://www.hightechhigh.org http://www.edutopia.org/project-based-

learning http://pbl-online.org http://www.bie.org http://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/2010/

01/16/free-project-based-learning-resources-that-will-place-students-at-the-center-of-learning

http://lone-eagles.com/pbl.htm http://cell.uindy.edu/NTHS/PBLresources.php

EPIC – Generation iY Experiential Participatory Image Rich Collaborative

BREAK TIME…Ticket to break – 2 sentences on the Marshmallow Challenge

Standards Grading Paper Airplane Challenge

Does it Fly 1 – little or no sustained flight – “crash & burn” 2 – flies but not on a predictable path, or makes

an immediate turn 3 – sustained flight on some throws,

unpredictable performance, above average reliability

4 – flies straight and true for distance and speed

Standards vs. Traditional Grading??????????

The Elementary Report Card Learner Objectives Defined standards Separates effort and behavior from

mastery Can it work at the high school level?

STANDARDS-BASED GRADING (SBG)

A Case Study…Kinda

@MR_ABUD #TEAMPHYSICS

MOTIVATION FOR THE SHIFTMeaning of a grade

What you did vs. what you knowStudents motivated (by meaning of the

grade) to do assignments/tasksLike finishing the weekend chores checklistFocus on learning and mastery is lost

Students “make up” missing work at the end of a marking period for credit to help their grade

Without focus on learning for mastery, taking learning risks can be too costly

THE PROBLEMHow might we make a grade better represent what students know rather than what they did?

THE SOLUTIO

NAt least, it was an attempt at one…

THIS PLAN WAS DEVELOPED OVER CHRISTMAS BREAK & IMPLEMENTED AT THE START OF 2ND SEMESTER

Stopped checking in homework all together Previously was checked for “completion” (approach to assess student

attempt) Wrote standards for each unit (adapted from curriculum map

and state HSCEs) Written in student-centered “I statements”

Developed assessments that generated ostensible evidence of student learning on standards Linked individual assessments (and even individual questions) to one or

more standards Kept record of student scores on assessments Reported student assessment scores according to standards

Used an average of all assessment scores for a given standards Managed Scores in Microsoft Excel Created “Standards” in Pinnacle instead of assignments Input standards scores in Pinnacle

Calculated summative score & reported all standards and ratings to students separately from their report card

Actions Taken:

TRACKING PROGRESS WITH GRAPHS

TRACKING PROGRESS WITH TABLES

From: Frank Noschese’s blog post, “The Tower” (7/27/11)

GRADEBOOK BEFORETask Grade

Homework 1 10/10Homework 2 10/10Homework 3 10/10Quiz 2/10Homework 4 10/10Homework 5 10/10Test 15/50Homework 6 10/10Quiz 2 5/10Homework 7 10/10Project 95/100Test 2 30/50Overall Grade 227/290

( 78% | C+ | 8 )

THE SBG SCALE

Traditional (%)

14-Point Range

Letter SBG Rating

Proficiency Level with Standard

90-100 12-14 A 4 Exceeds proficiency80-89 9-11 B 3 Demonstrates proficiency70-79 6-8 C 2 Approaches proficiency60-69 3-5 D 1 Falls well below

proficiency<60 1-2 E 0 Lacks all proficiency

0 0 Z 0 No attempt made

Inspired by the 4.0 grade point average system, the rating system used in SBG simply assigns a numeric value to a level of proficiency.

Here is how it looks in comparison to how we are used to grading:

GRA

DEB

OO

KAF

TER

FINDINGS Students:

Agreed with SBG as a means to more accurately reflect what they know

Used the feedback from their SBG report to improve their understanding and strived for mastery (completed reassessments)

Stopped copying just to get assignments completed so they would “get [their] points” toward a grade

Shifted their focus from doing to learning Struggled with the adjustment to a different

grading approach that Did not readily see how to use SBG feedback, or

did not choose to use the SBG feedback Still asked, “what assignments am I missing that

my grade is so low?” Wished it had been implemented from day 1

COMPLAINTS & CRITICISMS OF SBG

Students: Cognitive dissonance with

regard to grading“What the formula” (WTF) moments occurred when students could not figure the calculation of their gradeSOLUTION: MORE TRANSPARENT PROCESS

Forces them to have to know itMany are used to being able to “fake it to make it” (the game of school)SOLUTION: START FROM DAY 1 & INTRODUCE PROCESS WITH AN INVITING EXPERIENCE

Mr. Abud, I was wondering what my grade is; it

says “approaching proficiency” a

bunch of times.

COMPLAINTS & CRITICISMS OF SBG

Parents: Not possible with Pinnacle to

see why their student has the grades on the standards that they doSearching for a missing “checklist” that

their student did not completeSOLUTION: STUDENTS KEEP TRACK

OF THEIR PROGRESSGrade lower than expected,

yet student “does their work”Parents used to having completion

accountability for students’ gradesSOLUTION: LETTERS HOME

EXPLAINING PROCESS

Perhaps my grade was artificially

inflated by all that copying I

did on my homework for completion…

CONCLUSIONS, REFLECTIONS, & RECOMMENDATIONS

Focus on learning, not just doing

Opportunity for improvement

Removes pressure of academic risk-taking

Connects grade to learning

Makes assessment and grading more transparent/relevant

Standards in gradebook instead of tasks

Starts from day 1 Students track their

own progress More formative

assessment Obtrusive Unobtrusive Student-generated

Rubrics Letter home to

explain process

Strengths (+) Changes (∆)

NEXT STEPS…FOR INTERESTED PARTIES

Consider How you ALREADY use rubrics to assess students What your performance objectives look like To what extent your assessments connect to your objectives The function of homework in your class (practice or chore)

Reflect on How often you have students wanting to make up missing

work for points but gain nothing from doing that work The extent to which a grade in your class truly reflects

learning Whether your students are motivated to learn or do What opportunities exist for students to recover from early

mistakes

ACTIONS YOU CAN TAKE TO TRY SBGThe following actions can be part of a small action research project

in your own classroom: Consider for an upcoming unit/chapter/lesson/project

Writing objectives in “I statement” language that connect to your content standards

Developing assessments (formative and summative) that make it easy to observe proficiency with the objectives

Adding a rubric to that assessment if it doesn’t already have one (omit components unrelated to objectives, e.g., 1” margins)

Creating proficiency rankings with explanations of each ranking level

Assessing students according to the rubric components Reporting students’ scores on the rubric and generating a

summative score as well Providing students a means to track their own

performance Debriefing the grading approach with your class

FINAL THOUGHTS SBG is not a replacement for a summative grade

It just gives more substantive meaning to that grade It is completely possible to implement with any

number of students in any content area It is best for teaching and learning It promotes formative assessment, feedback, and

student ownership over learning It can be done in a low-tech (paper grids / graphs)

or a high-tech way (Excel, Pinnacle, cloud-based apps)

It is more “fun” when you do it with others

RESOURCES

Always Formative Blog: http://bit.ly/ksFvZk

ActiveGrade – a cloud-based web app for SBG http://activegrade.com

Sample Classroom SBG Policy Handout http://bit.ly/nnAGly

SBG w/Voice http://t.co/MBvlgNM

US Dept. of Ed. SBG Resources http://1.usa.gov/lOgtWu

Frank Noschese’s Action-Reaction Blog http://fnoschese.wordpress.com/

GPPSS FORMAT FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHER EVALUATIONA guide to the new GPPSS teacher evaluation process

The Process Representatives from teachers’ union, building

administrators, and central office began meeting in winter of 2011

Established parameters and philosophies Examined various models and tools, with significant

focus on Marzano and Danielson teacher evaluation models

Developed a framework Developed an instrument to fit the framework Agreed on rubric Agreed on rating system based on rubric Implementation for 2011-2012

The Team Teachers:

Ranae Beyerlein – GPEA President

Dan Quinn – GPEA Executive Board

Chris Geerer Peter Signorello Nancy Nihem

Administrators Tom Harwood – Asst.

Supt. for HR Monique Beels –

Asst. Supt. for C & I Tim Bearden – North

Principal Mary Macdonald –

Barrett – Richard Principal

Mark Mulholland – Parcells Principal

Foundational Beliefs The committee established the following beliefs as

the basis for the new process: The goal of the instrument is collaboration to improve

instruction with the intent of improving student learning The instrument / rubric must define good instruction Multiple rating categories Adaptable Instrument Focus Observation Areas Locally established growth and measurement models Establish clear standards for effective performance Focus on evidence of planning & Preparation Focus on a variety of instructional methodologies

The Basis - Danielson Committee agreed upon Charlotte Danielson

domains and rubric as a basis for the process. Danielson’s Framework for Enhancing Professional Practice was published in the mid 90’s as a guide for improving instruction, and has been a standard ever since.

“A framework for professional practice can be used for a wide range of purposes, from meeting novices’ needs to enhancing veterans’ skills.” – Charlotte Danielson

Michigan Law – New Requirements

Among other things, key features of Michigan’s new legislation relative to teacher evaluation include: Mandate that all teachers and

administrators must be evaluated annually Evaluation must include measurement data

relative to student achievement Ratings must use the categories of

Ineffective, Effective, and Highly Effective

GPPSS New Format - Features Same process for on-cycle tenured

teachers and probationary teachers except for the # of required observations

Teachers and administrators reach mutual agreement on measurement tools

For some observations, walk-through visits can be substituted for longer formal visits

Clearly defined categories of effectiveness based on an established rubric

Process Initial meeting with all teachers being

evaluated to review process Email or personal notification to set goal-

setting meeting Teacher and evaluator agree on three

goals: an instructional goal from Danielson rubric Domain 1 or 3, Achievement Goal, A classroom environment / affective goal from Danielson Domain 2

Process (cont.) Teacher and Evaluator agree on

measurement tools for each goal. A variety of options are outlined in the instrument, and allowance is made for the teacher and evaluator to agree on a tool not listed as an option.

Classroom Observations Written Evaluation Completed

Process – Classroom Observation Requirements Probationary Teacher Minimum of 1 pre-scheduled

observation of 30 minutes or more in the teacher’s first month of teaching

Minimum of 1 un-announced observation of 30 minutes or more to occur in an agreed upon one week window within the teacher’s first four months of teaching and approx. 60 days after the first observation

1 additional un-announced observation of 30 minutes or more, OR 3 or more walk-through visits of ten minutes or more each

Tenured On-Cycle Teacher

Minimum of 1 pre-scheduled observation of 30 minutes or more

Minimum of 1 un-announced observation of 30 minutes or more to occur in an agreed upon one week window, OR 6 or more walk-through visits of a minimum of 5 minutes each

Evaluation Tool - Handout Focus Areas:

Admins will evaluate in at least ten total categories with a minimum of two per domain

Administrators will provide comments in the expandable table for each domain component used for evaluation

There is an opportunity for teacher comment within each domain

Administrators will comment on progress towards identified goals in the provided narrative space

Evaluation Tool - Rating Probationary Year 1 Effective = 100% of ratings in Rubric

columns 2-4 Probationary Year 2 Effective = 100% of ratings in

columns 2-4, 75% or more in columns 3 & 4 Probationary Year 3 Effective = 100% of ratings in

columns 2-4, 90% in columns 3 & 4 Probationary Year 4 Effective = 100% of rankings in

columns 3 & 4 Tenured Teacher Effective = 100% of rankings in 3 or

4. Any rankings in columns 1 or 2 result in an IDP For a rating of “Effective” or “Highly Effective”, a

teacher must have made measurable progress towards identified goals.

Interim Annual Evaluation Process for Off-Cycle Tenured Teachers Michigan law requires annual evaluation of

teachers and administrators. In GP tenured teachers will continue to be on a 3 year evaluation cycle. In interim years, the following process will be used: Email notification of assigned evaluator. Minimum of one un-announced classroom

observation of 30 minutes or more, OR 3 walk-through observations of 5-10 minutes each.

Teacher self-reflection on the year. Evaluator narrative summary of observations in

writing by May 31st.

Handouts Include: GPPSS Format for Effective Teacher

Evaluation Definition of Terms Teacher Evaluation Report Probationary and Tenured Checklists Domain rubric

Goal

The goal is effective, dynamic instruction that leads to growth in

student achievement. This is intended to be a collaborative

process built on a researched model to enhance professional practice.