Upload
amberlynn-foster
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Madison Story
Vision into Reality – Inclusive, Collaborative and Culturally
Responsive Schools
Hope is “believing you
have both the will and the way to
accomplish your goals.”
-- C.R. Synder, “The Will and the Ways:Development and Validation of an IndividualDifferences Measure of Hope,”1991
Agenda Learning About Data Purpose, Collection
and Analysis to Create Change Understanding a Process from
Exclusionary Practices to Inclusionary Practices
Discovering Two Effective Change Models
Discovering Teaming Tools Planning for the Future
Outcomes
By the end of this session, you will be able to say…
I know how to use data to create a sense of urgency for my school.
I have several team tools I can begin using right away.
I can implement the change process. I have reflected on my own beliefs and values
relative to what I’ve learned today and identified needs for next year.
M & M Reflections….HandoutSelect 3 different colors of M & M’s, find a partner with the same color, and answer that question…once done, move to the next partner with another color until all three are used.
Weeds or Wildflowers…
Discuss the following: Partner #1 - Who are the weeds and
wildflowers in your school? Partner #2 - Why are they viewed
differently? Partner #3 - What would it take to have all
students viewed as wildflowers?
MMSD Profile Madison – population of 221,551 (State Capital & home of Univ. of Wisconsin)
School district enrollment of 24,268 (Sept. 2007 K-12 enrollment) Grades K-5 = 11,266 Grades 6 – 8 = 5,104 Grades 9 – 12 = 7,898
Special Education K-12 enrollment of 3,766 (15.52% of district enrollment)
ELL enrollment of 3,566 (14.51% of district enrollment)
Schools 32 elementary schools (grades K-5) average class size 13.41 11 middle schools (grades 6-8) average class size 21.3 4 comprehensive high schools – average class size 23.6
Alternative Schools/Programs 13 alternative schools/programs (early childhood programs and
alternative programs at the secondary level (6-12).
A Story of Change
Leading a comprehensive, multi-year improvement effort to become more
inclusive, collaborative and culturally responsive
It all began 10 years ago…
A growing group of parents were questioning our special education practices
Incoming Superintendent and Director concluded that change was needed
Beginning with a “vision” supported by core beliefs and values
Change = Becoming inclusive, collaborative and culturally responsive
Change process
Theory of change
Essential principles of change
Putting theory into practice
Plan of Improvement
So What Did This Change Represent?
Old System Categorical funding,
thinking, and organizational boundaries
Label, deficit driven Conflicting values, beliefs
(e.g., school placement) Negative language
New System Eliminate categorical
barriers Needs-based Build on strengths Share common values
and beliefs for all kids Language that is positive,
affirming and respectful
Significant Events 1997 – Incoming Superintendent and Director shared a
common vision for special education
1999 – Conducted focus group interviews to solicit thoughts, concerns and interests regarding the state of special education in MMSD
1999-2000 – A Report to the Superintendent outlined vision and recommendations from report
2000 – Comprehensive, Multi-year Professional Development Plan – retooling for change
2002 – Instructional Design
2003 – Race & Equity Work (Courageous Conversations)
2006 – Development of Culturally Responsive Checklist
Key Observations There is inter-relationship between the various
district improvement initiatives.
This remains a collaborative “work in progress”… the more we learn, the more we realize what we don’t know!
Easier to initiate change at elementary level
It is about taking risks and learning from our successes and failures.
Continuously examining our data remains essential to evaluating the success of our efforts.
DATA An important part of our story
Prevalence
Referrals/ placements
Least restrictive environment
Disproportionality
High school completion, attendance, suspensions, expulsions
MMSD Special Education Prevalence Rate
23,227 23,806 24,223 24,452 24,872 25,046 25,158 25,113 24,943
2,416 2,547 2,640 2,836 3,010 3,131 3,170 3,267 3,566 3,791
25,327
10.4% 10.7% 10.9% 11.6% 12.1% 12.5% 12.6% 12.9%14.2%
15.2%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
School Year
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
Pre
vale
nce
Rat
e
District Enrollment- using 3rd Friday - Sept. Spec Ed Enrollment -using 3rd Friday Sept.
Projected SE Prevalence Rate Actual SE Prevalence Rate
MMSD Special Education Prevalence Rate
25,087 24,893 24,966 24,888
4,089 4,232 4,269 4,181 4,250 4,188 4,202
24,71024,57624,490
16.3%17.2%
18.2%19.1%
20.0%
16.3%17.0% 17.1% 16.8% 17.2% 17.1% 17.1%
21.0% 21.9%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
School Year
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
Pre
vale
nce
Rat
e
District Enrollment- using 3rd Friday - Sept. Spec Ed Enrollment -using 3rd Friday Sept.
Projected SE Prevalence Rate Actual SE Prevalence Rate
cost savings: $9,669,291 savings for 06-07
K-12 Initial Referrals and Placements into Special Education
440 408 389328 327 314
280 255176
108 175
204 184 205216
160
194
219
80%
70%
64%62%
64%61%
56%61%
48%
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
98-99 99-00CCIS
00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07
School Year
To
tal S
tud
en
ts R
efe
rred
an
d P
laced
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Pla
cem
en
t as %
of T
ota
l Refe
rrals
Total Students Placed Total Students Not Placed Placements as a % of Total Referred
Attend Neighborhood School, 90%
Not Neighborhood
School - Parent Initiated Internal
Transfer, 6%
Not Neighborhood School - IEP
Placement, 4%
2007-2008
Special Education Enrollment (K-12) in
Neighborhood School
2005-2006
Neighborhood School
91%
Not Neighborhood School - Parent Initiated Internal
Transfer6%
Not Neighborhood School - IEP Placement
3%
Special Education K-12 Enrollmentby Least Restrictive Environment
(special education services outside general education classroom)
Substantially Separate
> 60%
Partial Inclusion21-60%
Full Inclusion < 21%
72%
12%
16%
2005-06 2007-08
Full Inclusion
< 21%
Partial Inclusion 21-60%
Substantially Separate
> 60%
68%
19%
13%
MMSD District and Special Education Enrollment
Comparison of 2002-03 and 2007-08
Ethnic Group
Special Education Enrollment
Special Education
PercentageDistrict
Enrollment District
Percentage
Percent of Ethnic
Group in SE
02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08
African American 1,526 1,582 34% 38% 4,764 5,653 19% 23% 32% 28%
White 2,311 1,890 52% 45%15,17
112,78
1 61% 52% 15% 15%
Hispanic 311 419 7% 10% 2,331 3,360 9% 14% 13% 13%
Native American 44 42 1% 1% 166 172 1% 1% 27% 25%
Asian 236 226 5% 5% 2,534 2,577 10% 10% 9% 9%
4,428 4,159 100% 100%24,96
624,54
3 100% 100%
Data
2006-07 School Year
ELLSpecial
Ed District
High School Completion 73.00% 81.00% 91.00%
Attendance 92.56% 90.50% 93.20%
Suspensionsper 100 students 14.5 24.7 11.3
Recom. for Expulsion 0.25% 1.26% 0.37%
Enrollment (K-12) 3,566 3,766 24,268
% of District Enrollment 14.51% 15.52%
Answer questions on the following page about data analysis in your school.
Think – Pair – Share:
Reflect on the data story just shared. What kinds of data do you use in your school or district to tell a story and create a sense of urgency?
What is the principal’s role in the development and sharing of data?
2002 The Beginning of the Instructional Design Model
Using inclusive practices Becoming collaborative
through the teaming process, and
Becoming culturally responsive to student needs
Today, Response to Interventions Provides Another Need for the Instructional Design Model RtI is the practice of:
High-quality instruction and interventions matched to student needs.
Monitoring the rate at which students learn and the level at which they perform.
Using student performance data to make decisions about instruction, goals, eligibility for special education programs and services, and other critical educational decisions across general, remedial, and special education.
Response to Intervention
Tier 3IntensiveIndividual
Intervention
Tier 2Targeted Interventions
15% of Students
Tier 1Core Instructional Practices
80% of Students
5%
Instructional Design
The MMSD Instructional Design Model…
The Instructional Design Model is the way we place students, use our adult resources, and deliver services to our students in a collaborative, inclusive manner.
The MMSD Elementary Instructional Design Model is based on three fundamental district concepts
Student engagement, learning, and relationships are equally important in their growth process.
Systematic, district-wide supports are critical to support changes in schools.
A collaborative culture in which adults share responsibility and embrace all students.
The expectation is that all three components of the Instructional Design must be present in all schools…. Inclusive practices for Special Education,
ELLs, and Title I eligible students
Class Placement through clustering
Collaboration through teaming
Beliefs…Why Promote Teaming for Inclusive Practices?
We bring services to students. It builds collaboration among staff. Easier to differentiate instruction to meet the
needs of all students. Human resources are used well. It builds the capacity of all teachers to work
with all students. Easier to establish relationships with all
students because conversations are about all students.
The expectation is that all three components must be present in all schools….
Inclusive Practices
Class Placement
Collaboration
And…
Resources are aligned and distributed based on this expectation (will be discussed later).
District support is available to support the change process.
What Does it Look Like?
Examples of the teaming process in elementary, middle, and high schools to support inclusive, collaborative, and culturally responsive classrooms
Class Placement Inclusive Beliefs
& Best Practices
Team Structures
Missing the team structure
Missing the class placement processMissing Inclusive
Beliefs and Best Practices
Sound Instructional Design
What does a School Using Inclusive Practices Look Like?
Integrated, heterogeneous classrooms, where all students belong, are successful and have their individual needs met by highly qualified teachers.
What does a School Using Inclusive Practices Look Like?
These highly qualified teachers know how to co-plan and co-teach together through collaborative teaming structures.
What does a School Using Inclusive Practices Look Like? Serves ALL students in the regular
education classroom, regardless of ability/disability, language, or educational need.
Brings services to students instead of pulling them out to a special program.
How Does the Instructional Design Model Work?
Characteristics:
Organized into teams.
Time for team meetings.
Common values, beliefs, and assumptions about teaching and learning.
Share a common vision for what the school will be like and have selected goals to help achieve the vision.
Teams are given significant responsibility contribute to decisions and work to implement agreed upon changes.
Teams plan and implement curriculum and assessments for students.
Teams use data to identify challenges and school-wide solutions
Teams know what other teams are working on through effective communication practices.
Students, teachers, and parents all know what the school is doing to improve.
Answer questions on the following slide about teaming structures in your school.
Learning Partners What team structures do you have in
place at your school?
How do your teams align with the characteristics just shared?
Do the teams support culturally responsive, inclusive practices for all students?
The Role of the School Leader is to Build Capacity of Teaming
Start with teams that are ready
Promote skillfulness and trust for change
Let go of authority…inspire change through beliefs
Build in accountability
Share learnings
Provide structure and support (Team planning and coordination handout)
Lambert, Leadership CapacityFor Lasting Improvement (2003)
Again, the expectation is that all three components must be present in all schools….
Inclusive Practices Class Placement Collaboration
And…resources are aligned and distributed based on this expectation
And…district support is available to support change
(Refer to the two allocation analysis handouts)
District Support and ResourcesAnalysis of Service Delivery Plan for MMSD Elementary Schools (2/5/08) - Revised May 2003
Purpose:
- Review of current design for planning. - Problem-solving adjustments to make during the school year. - Request for addl alloc
GUIDING PRINCIPLE ASSESSMENT STATUSMISALIGNMENT AND CAUSE OR REASON
ACTIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS
TIMELINE TO IMPLEMENT . . . .
Special education students are assigned to a regular education class.
Aligns Completely Aligns Partially Does not Align
Case management assignments are by grade or level, not categorical label.
Aligns Completely Aligns Partially Does not Align
Case management assignments are balanced by student need, type, and amount of special education service using a weight system.
Aligns Completely Aligns Partially Does not Align
District Support and ResourcesCurrent Special Education Staff Configuration
GradeRegular Ed
TeacherTotal # of Students
# CC Students
Special Education Teacher FTE
Caseload Number . . . . .
K
1
2
3
“People must learn themselves through
change.”
Linda Lambert
Building Leadership Capacity
in Schools (ASCD, 1998)
Begin with a Theory of Change
Managing Complex Change: (Lippett, Knoster, Ambrose)
VisionSkills
IncentivesResources
Action Plan
Refer to Handout
Implementing the Change Process(Michael Fullan)
Initiation-Planning
Implementation
Institutionalization
Success Factors of Change Projects~ Huberman and Miles and Fullan
InitiationLinked to high profile needClear model of implementationOne or more strong advocates
(staff and parents)Active initiation
Implementation CoordinationShared controlPressure and supportOngoing assistance Early rewards for teachers
Success Factors of Change Projects~ Huberman and Miles and Fullan
InstitutionalizationEmbeddingLinks to instructionWidespread useRemoval of competing prioritiesContinuing assistance
Success Factors of Change Projects~ Huberman and Miles and Fullan
One More Step for Classroom Change to Measure Success…Develop an ID Rubric
Inquiry Initiation Implementation Institutionalization
2006-07 Elementary Schools as a District(31 MMSD Elementary Schools)
02468
1012#
of S
choo
ls
Inquiry
Initi
atio
n
Implem
enta
tion
Insti
tutio
naliza
tion
Stages
2008-09 Elementary Schools as a District(31 MMSD Elementary Schools)
02468
1012
# of
Sch
ools
Inquiry
Initi
atio
n
Implem
enta
tion
Insti
tutio
naliza
tion
Stages
Next Steps…. Develop three cohorts of principals
(mixed schools) to meet monthly for the purpose of continuing the change process by improvingCollaboration Inclusionary PracticesCulturally responsive classrooms
For student success….
What are your next steps?
How does your district philosophically align with this model?
What are the apparent conflicts? If your district is not aligned, how can you
share this vision and work together to make this a reality?
Anyone too busy to reflect on one’s practice is also too busy to improve.Robert Garmston
Anyone too busy to reflect on one’s practice is also too busy to improve.
Robert Garmston