Needs Assessment - EduGAINs



Needs Assessment |Board’s K-12 SMART Goal for Mathematical Literacy

• Specific

• Measurable

• Ambitious & Achievable

• Results Oriented

• Time Bound |Targeted Evidence-Based Strategies / Actions |Resources

|Professional Learning

|Monitoring |Responsibility | |

|Analyzed School Profiles, concluding that: |To engage students in higher level |Hire three family of schools-based math |Three math coaches for most needy |Request Provincial Math Coaches|Receive all draft school improvement plans|SEF Lead |

|Families of schools A, B, and C have the need and |mathematical thinking by focusing on one |coaches, Grades 4-10 and attach 200 |families of schools using: |to coach our coaches, work |by July 15th and offer feedback by mid |SSL |

|readiness conditions for targeting of resources |or more of the Mathematical Processes, by |teacher-release days to them for job-embedded|70% of our board’s Math/Literacy |directly with teachers in one |September, with monitoring in December and|Board Improvement Teams |

|EQAO scores at the board average in Grade 3, |June 2010, as measured by: |work |pocket of funding |particular high school, and |April | |

|significantly below average and stagnant in Grade 6, |Increase of 10 points in the proportion of|Family of Schools A |40% of our board’s Differentiated |support principals and leads in|Track who has received system data |SEF |

|and somewhat below but increasing in Grade 9 |questions responded to on assessments |Family of Schools B |Instruction pocket of funding |using Tinkerplots to update |training, and how often is it being used |SSL |

|6 of 10 principals have been actively involved in our |Increase of 5 points in the number of |Family of Schools C |A flexible portion of our SS |Class Profiles |By May 15th, interview principals in the | |

|Leadership Training Series (critical mass) |students achieving Levels 3 and 4 on |Provide 150 teacher-release days for |funding, depending on uptake of |Professional learning menu |three families of schools having math |SOs for K-12 Instructional|

|2 of these 3 families of schools have active |report card marks |mathematics in remaining six families of |release days |including: |coaches and in High School D, focusing on |Practices |

|cross-panel PLCs (critical mass) |Increasing number of opportunities for |schools for the professional learning menu |25% or more (depending on above) |Lesson Study |their roles in shifting instructional | |

|A new principal has been assigned to High School D, |students to practice answering open |Build system data capacity, including |of SS funding for professional |Demonstration classrooms visits|practices, and monitoring teachers’ and | |

|having lowest indicator data, and she is eager to work |response type questions, and to receive |appropriate uses of the Generic Rubric for |learning in mathematics for system|tied to coaching |students’ progress | |

|with the mathematics department |timely, personalized, oral feedback |Mathematical Processes, and research-based |leaders and teachers in other |Co-teaching |Track, and review by December 15th, March| |

|Across the board, students in Grades 3, 6, and 9 had |These goals apply to targeted schools |diagnostic tools |families of schools |Collaborative Assessment of |1st, and June 30th the active involvement | |

|difficulty solving both multiple-choice and |(approximately 25% of our schools). |Develop a board/system professional learning |Family of Schools Coaches spend |Student Learning (CASL) |of teachers in professional learning | |

|open-response questions requiring multi-step processes,| |menu which is accessible, differentiated, |85% of their time in their family |Math CAMPPP summer institute |focused on Mathematical Processes |Principals in all schools |

|particularly in the process of mathematical reasoning |In all other schools, we plan to improve |and focused on promoting evidence-based |of schools, and 15% on their own |Professional Learning for |Use of teacher-release days by December |including Summer School |

| |students’ higher level mathematical |strategies, relating to the Mathematical |professional learning and |Mathematics Leaders and Coaches|15th, March 1st, June 30th |Math Consultant |

|Analyzed the effectiveness of the various professional |thinking, by June 2010, as measured by: |Processes |board-level planning/work |(PLMLC) involvement by math |By May 15th, measure effectiveness of the | |

|learning models in shifting instructional practices |Increase of 5 points in the number of |Facilitate collaborative development of |Professional learning supports for|consultant and board-level math|various professional learning models in | |

|using teacher self-report surveys |students achieving Levels 3 and 4 on |school improvement plans, and alignment of |school leaders related to using |coaches |shifting instructional practices using | |

|Collaborative assessment PLCs, and our most engaged |report card marks |these with the board’s SMART Goals |Tinkerplots for data analysis | |teacher self-report surveys, as well as |School Review Team |

|teachers report the need to be able to track individual|Increased consistency and alignment of |Sharpen the instructional focus to | | |focus group interviews and classroom |All members of the School |

|student data other than report card and EQAO and have |cognitive demand of assessments across |“questioning as it relates to the | | |observation in the three families of |Improvement Teams |

|concerns around rubric-based assessments and their |mathematics courses and classes |Mathematical Processes, focusing on the | | |school having math coaches | |

|reliability for reporting | |important mathematics, and establishing | | | | |

| | |Math-Talk Learning Communities” | | | | |

|Needs Assessment |Secondary School’s 9-12 SMART Goal |Targeted Evidence-Based Strategies / Actions |Resources |Professional Learning |Monitoring |Responsibility |

| |for Mathematical Literacy | | | | | |

| |Specific | | | | | |

| |Measurable | | | | | |

| |Ambitious & Achievable | | | | | |

| |Results Oriented | | | | | |

| |Time Bound | | | | | |

|Chosen to receive a families of |To improve Grade 9 and 10 Applied |Principal coordinates opportunities for teachers to |One family of schools-based coach |Math CAMPPP summer institute in |Track, and review by May 1st, time spent on, and |Principal and |

|schools math coach since: |students’ use of reasoning and |work together and with the math coach to co-plan, |with 30 teacher-release days attached|August for 2 department members |self-reported effectiveness of, different forms |vice-principal |

|Traditionally high failure rates in |proving when problem solving, as |co-teach, co-assess with a focus on student reasoning |for this school |with release days for sharing in |and aspects of professional learning in shifting | |

|Grade 10 Applied, below-average |measured by: |Use ‘questioning’ as the main driver for co-planning |5 additional teacher-release days for|September |instructional practice | |

|Grade 9 EQAO scores |Students’ profiles updated |and focusing on reasoning to align with work in other |the board’s professional learning |Co-planning and co-teaching time |Interaction with each teacher about progress in | |

|Trend of low achievement for our |unit-by-unit with respect to the |departments |menu |for Grades 9 and 10 teachers with |focusing on reasoning and proving in problem | |

|current Grade 10 cohort |Thinking Category using task-specific|focus on important mathematics |Grade 9 and 10 Applied TIPS lessons |our math coach and each other |solving | |

|Principal’s active involvement in our|versions of indicators in the |evoke and expose student thinking |and assessments, and lessons adjusted|Collaborative Assessment of |CASL; one question focused on teaching through | |

|board’s Leadership Training Series |Generic Rubric for Mathematical |provide precise oral scaffolding and challenge on a |to focus on Reasoning |Student Learning (CASL) with our |problem solving for each term; teachers bring back| |

|Good working relationships developing|Processes |student-by-student basis |Professional Learning through |feeder schools |student samples and use an assessment tool (e.g., | |

|with one of our feeder schools |Increase of 10 points in the number |student as well as teachers posed |Collaborative Assessment Development |Grade 9 and 10 teachers to work |check-bric) collaboratively developed at beginning|Department Head of |

|During classroom rounds, principal |of student achieving levels 3 and 4 |Administrators in our family of schools identified |Package (Home Run Hitter and |with our math coach in the |of the year, focused on the Thinking category of |Mathematics |

|and vice-principal noticed that many |in the Thinking category in each |“Students increasingly explain and articulate their |Sunflower tasks) |effective use of technologies in |achievement; at end of term data disaggregated and| |

|students in Grade 9 and 10 Applied |semester 09-10 |mathematical thinking” as an indicator for classroom |Problems in TIPS Continua and |building student reasoning, using |analyzed | |

|math were not engaged in questions |Increase of 15 points in the number |rounds |Connections packages |TIPS resources |Gather student participation data regarding | |

|that require high-order thinking |of questions responded to in |Principal collaborates with the math department to |Representing Linear Growing Patterns |Math department time to practice |reasoning/Thinking related to technology use | |

|We are purposefully staffing Grades 9|assessments focused on reasoning and |identify other indicators for rounds from the Guide for|CLIPS |teaching through Problem Solving |Track number and type of questions in math classes| |

|and 10 Applied math |problem solving by the end of each |Administrators and Other Facilitators of Teachers’ |5 AirLiners for use with interactive |with Bansho | | |

|There is staff interest in continuing|semester 09-10 |Learning for Mathematics Instruction |whiteboards |Principal-led school-wide focus on|Use “Students increasingly explain and articulate | |

|to focus on ‘Questioning’ in 2009-10 |Consistency and alignment of |Use technology to support the inclusion of all students|JRME article on reasoning - A |‘questioning’ |their mathematical thinking” as a teacher |Teachers of Grade 9 and 10|

| |cognitive demand across grades, |(e.g., one student in a wheel chair, two students with |Modeling Perspective on Students' | |self-assessment tool / teacher peer observation |math |

| |courses, and classes of assessment |autism spectrum disorders, and several students with |Mathematical Reasoning About Data | |tool and as a student observation tool to plot |Board-level Math Coach |

| |questions addressing the Thinking |self image issues) | | |bi-monthly shifts/growth  |SERTs and ELL Resource |

| |category by June 2012 |Ask the coach to incorporate effective uses of the | | |Track use of CLIPS by gender, student achievement |teachers |

| | |newly purchased algebra tiles, AirLiners, and | | |levels, whole class vs student-by-student |Department Head |

| | |interactive whiteboards | | |application | |

|Needs Assessment |Teacher’s Grade 10 Applied SMART Goal|Targeted Evidence-Based Strategies / |Resources |Professional Learning |Monitoring |Responsibility |

| |for Mathematical Literacy |Actions | | | | |

| |Specific | | | | | |

| |Measurable | | | | | |

| |Ambitious & Achievable | | | | | |

| |Results Oriented | | | | | |

| |Time Bound | | | | | |

|My learning needs agenda: |In my first two-month SMART goal |I will increase the variety of ways my |Representing Linear Growing Patterns |I will join the Representing |I will determine the proportion of non |Teacher |

|I participated in a Lesson Study last year and learned |cycle, my goal is to engage all of my|class uses our interactive whiteboard to |CLIPS |Linear Growing Patterns CLIPS |responses to questions at the beginning and |SERT |

|a lot, so I’m eager to work with the same leader as a |students in Grade 10 Applied |demonstrate a variety of student thinking |Math Gizmos |Adobe Connect study group, and try|end of my first SMART-goal cycle. | |

|coach |mathematics in responding to |during consolidation. |Interactive whiteboard |these CLIPS on the interactive |I will use the descriptors of the Math-Talk | |

|I tried an interactive whiteboard last year, and see |higher-order thinking questions |Work with a coach on effective uses of the|Framework for Effective Uses of |whiteboard with my class. |Learning Community as a self-assessment tool| |

|the potential for student engagement, but I want the | |interactive whiteboard, and to help shift |Interactive Whiteboards in |I’ll ask my coach to help me |bi-weekly with a view to seeing |Teacher |

|help of a coach in doing this. | |my questions in ways that engage more |Mathematics teaching and Learning at |implement the CLIPS and Gizmos |shifts/growth as the year progresses | |

|My colleague shared some open questions with me last | |students |tmerc.on.ca |while I focus on reasoning with my|I will see if my coach or Department Head | |

|year, and I found that my students really responded | |Use AirLiners to provide access for my |Videos of Dr. Marian Small focusing |class. |could observe one or two of my lessons using | |

|well to those. I’d like to learn to develop more of | |student in a wheelchair, and probably |on open and parallel questions |I’ll watch the Marian Small video |the interactive whiteboard and provide | |

|that type of questions. | |others |1 or more AirLiners |with my department colleagues, and|feedback on student engagement, and use the | |

|I want to practice what I learned in PRIME training two| |Meet with the other teacher of Grade 10 |PRIME |collaboratively develop some |descriptors of the Math-Talk Learning | |

|years ago | |Applied at least once between my sessions |Numeracy Nets |questions with them. |Community as a peer observation tool and as |Department Head |

|I heard about Numeracy Nets in our cross-panel PLC last| |with the coach to co-plan, share, and | | |a student observation tool to plot where we |Coach |

|year and am interested to see if they are useful in | |align | | |are now with a view to seeing | |

|Grade 10 Applied | | | | |shifts/growth as the year progresses | |

| | | | | |Anecdotal data on the uses of CLIPS, teacher | |

|Early class profile: | | | | |and student challenges, and supports in | |

|14 boys and 8 girls | | | | |addressing challenges | |

|2 boys repeating | | | | | | |

|1 student in a wheel chair | | | | | | |

|Learner preferences: 7 kinesthetic; 2 oral; 13 visual | | | | | | |

|5 students from my Grade 9 class who are interested in:| | | | | | |

|environment, social equity, robots | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | | |Board-level facilitator of|

| | | | | | |the CLIPS Study |

| | | | | | |SST |

| | | | | | |SERT |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download