Curriculum Coordinators Council – September 30, 2013
PAIUCC Meeting Notes
Thursday, September 19, 2013
PVAAS Update; JenRoss and JoanPerekupka, PVAAS Core Team Members
PVAAS was released – September 18, 2013
What’s happening each month?
Webinars for all LEAS
Keystone reporting – growth and projections
Introduction to PVAAS webinars
New features
October:
Over 116 Fall onsite sessions. We are doing 2 per day
for these school and district sessions.(IU1 – Oct. 15th & Nov. 7th)
Webinars continue into October
October 30 – introduction to PVAAS
October 31 – Keystone reporting
November –
Onsite Fall sessions finish up
PILOT teachers specific reporting –
November 11 – released first to school and district administrators
6 webinars scheduled to help the administrators understand the reports
There will be no preview ahead of time – but certainly join the webinars.
Announced all the trainings and the onsite sessions and place.
Each IU has a date in December or January where we will be out to do training for Teacher Specific Pilot folks. These trainings are ONLY for the folks who participated in the PILOT.(IU1 training is January 10, 2013)
Teams are encouraged to come. One training at each IU, but one in the morning and one in the afternoon. IU’s are asked to handle their own registrations.
January – June
STATEWIDE IMPLEMENTATION-
The Guide is posted on the PVAAS website
Within the guide – there is an LEA implementation checklist
This list is based on the things learned by folks in the PILOT. Be sure that people have this in their hands.
This booklet announces all the training dates.
3 dates in January for anyone – Preview of PVAAS Teacher Specific Reporting
February –
Training on the rostering process –
8 – 3 hour webinars offered throughout the month
Timelines, roles and responsibilities of teachers,principals and district admin.
Live guided tour of the web-based system
Resources for each roll in the guide.
March –
9 - Live face to face sessions – same as the webinars at the three PATTANS across the state.
April 28– June6
RTTT charter schools must participate in the rostering
IU’s must participate
June –
IU Building capacity session
KEYSTONE TOPICS:
Continuing to get a lot of questions about the keystone reporting
Which students will be included ?
Enrolled in a Keystone-related course in SY12-13.
If they were not enrolled in the course in SY12-13 then they will not be included.
What is a Keystone Related Course?
It is the course that triggers the students to take the Keystone exams. LEA’s make that decision because school districts offer that content in a variety of ways.
It is different from last year to SY13-14
For this school year 13-14 that course must be identified in the PIMS. LEAS must designate that this school year in PIMS.
However, this past school year – it was important that the course was bubbled in – or on-line that course had to be designated. IF districts didn’t do that – then PVAAS would not have known that the student took the course.
Which Students are included?
IF the students took the Keystone in the Summer of 2013 testing window – even if they took the course in the 12-13 school year – those students were not included in the Value Added Report –
Why? Because those reports are there to give districts the information about the effectiveness of their courses and their systems. Because the data was not available soon enough.
The students who took the course in the summer – are not included.
DO not know how they will be included in this next school year.
What if students had some type of supplemental instruction? Are those students included.
It goes back to what is that supplemental instruction – it depends on the LEA and what they are doing. Some districts are having students repeat the course as their supplemental instruction.
Those students who are taking supplemental instruction a few times a week - then they will not be included.
Clarification – student takes the course in the Spring – are students required to take the Keystone in the Spring? (because districts
IN SY 13 -14 if a student is enrolled in a Keystone course – the student must take the Keystone at the end of that course.
Some districts received a letter from Kristin about who has Keystone reporting and who does not –
On Monday, 16, 2013 September – letters went out to some LEAs from Kristin Lewald.
There are some districts who will not have a Keystone report in at least one of the courses.
The reason was because there was a mismatch between the number of students who took the Keystone Exam and a very different number of students enrolled in the course.
So schools who had 0 or less than 11 students who were enrolled in the course.
Tomorrow Kristin will give us a letter that the districts have received so you can see what that looks like.
Districts were not given an opportunity to correct any data.
Now – this is an opportunity for districts to know this and correct that for next year. Because in SY 13-14 they will be using the bubble ------
PVAAS ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT –
Different this year
As of October 1 – all LEAs can use the staff template file to upload staff they want to accessPVAAS
District should edit and confirm the accounts listing..
Districts could do this now – to make the rostering process go much more smoothly than later.
We did receive administrative accounts in August. But we will check on the intent of that list.
Currently enrollend/GIEP
This is different this yerar
LEAs no longer need to submit files of currently enrolled students directly to SAS EVAAS
These date files can be submitted to PIMS….
Districts do not need to do this
For districts with high moility – they will want to do this monthly
WHICH TEACHERS WILL RECEIVE PVAAS TEACHER REPORTING?
On November 11 – the release to PILOT district and PILOT school admin
December 2 – Teacher will receive
How can you help?
An excel spreadsheet was emailed to each IU
Be sure this gets to your LEAs
IU’s and the ESEA Waiver: Amy Morton, CSIU
We are reverting to only Title 1 schools
Takes us from 3200 schools to 1900 schools
Elimination of AYP – and so many ways to meet it rendered it useless. So many ways to do this – a lot of schools could make AYP and have dismal scores.
Subgroup of 40 – the old way ---
In federal accountability – only two groups
Historically underperforming (IEP, ED, ELL)
And All Students
In past all schools received some type of designation –
Under the new – 75% of the schools won’t get a designation – (because we could not come up with names in PDE)
PA went to a minimalist approach –
Only the highest and lowest Title 1 schools will get a designation
AMO – by school
First AMO is All Students
Second AMO is Historically Underperforming
Third AMO is graduation rate is used for Title I high schools, and attendance for schools that do note graduate seniors.
If you have a high school – attendance is still important
Fourth AMO is test participation
Everything still gets reported – but for accountability it is the two groups.
For accountability it only counts once for that purpose.
For reporting it counts multiple times.
Federal Title 1 School Designations
If not a title 1 school – should say not applicable
Once you are a focus or priority school – you are in it for three years –
Some background information –
Every year, since 2002, the state must present an accountability workbook to the federal government –
Once the designations are made – there is not an appeals window. But you can submit an exception –
This is a work in progress – and once it comes out – it will be interesting to see how everyone reacts because we have never done it before.
Federal accountability reports are available on the SPP website.
Cybers and charters are getting a SPP – (only RTTT of these schools will be required to compete teacher evaluation)
If I were a superintendent – I would want to be sure that all my guidance counselors had a list of all these schools and their scores.
Cybers and Charters are already a choice – the fact that the default school is the public school causes these above schools as a choice.
Why didn’t the Federalgovt allow us to use the SPP?
We were at the point that we thought they would say yes.
Finally on the last conference call – drop the SPP or change it.
PDE said – not changing it.
Then you can’t use it –
Fed said – you can’t use it because the graduation rate is only 2.5%.
So what does it need to be?
17%
Why?
Because that is the lowest we have approved.
If you are reward high achievement or reward high progress there is no year delineation.
If you refer to the waiver – you have to have a school improvement plan done and 3 year of implementation.
This is in the waiver.
Comp. Planning Update; Jill Neuhard, CAIU
Tinyurl – hrrp://tinyurl.com/CP-PDE-Home
Has great resources
Also has a Phase list
Phase 1b has changed – they are now Phase 3
This list was update in April
Systems in Schools – guiding questions handout
Jeff Byremput this document together to guid and steer where we are going (CP is mentioned 5 times in the waiver).
Districts will still be required to complete:
Ed tech
Teacher Induction
Professional Ed piece
Special Education
Because of the waiver – this may be a good time to change the focus from where it has been to what this document suggests. Any and all changes – edits – that make sense to you is welcome and hugely important.
The idea is that there is a diagnostic checklist to indicate what you do or don’t use.
Root Cause Analysis – has not been in previous documents –
One last thing – talking about anticipated changes
With the chapter 4 changes –
Strategic planning is totally removed from the language
Are we still required to do Comprehensive Plans
The answer is yes
Note the core foundations section
Those sections will be markedoptional with the changes.
We are hearing anticipated adoption January
CDT Update; Cindy Mierzejewski, Berks IU
On the edirect site – materials
Under documents
12-13 CDT
And
13-14 CDT
Both have good resources
The thoughts on the modules –
Take all the trainings and put them into modules.
Modules allow you to break down information to best fit your audience.
The document on the site takes all 8 modules and explains the content.
All modules have the resources for each of the modules.
Modules 7 and 8 are directed at specific audiences:
Module 7 – is directed to the technology aspects. For example – setting up test sessions, connecting
Module 8 – specifically designed for the building principals – how to implement
All of these modules are on the eDirect site –
One to One conferencing supports:
Templates for each of the content areas for each of the CDT. How students could self-analyze their CDT data.
Received good feedback on these resources.
These can be adapted for any developmental/grade level.
Registration for the CDT field testing – the window is open
For grades 3-5
CDT will be operational for grades 3-5 for May 2014 (spring)
Some schools have used the CDT for end of year placement etc.
You may have noticed that the Math reporting categories have changed to align to the Core Standards. Those changes are not reflected in the demos etc.
Interactive Look at Common Core Resources*Jean Dyszel, PDE Consultant
Adapt, adopt, or adjust –PDE decided that it would be good to have a “model” curriculum.
How do we role this out to districts, how do we help them decide how to use this resource?
Also – we would like to develop an FAQ. What are some things that districts need to know – or what types of questions would I want to know?
Who wrote this? (for example)
What is it?
What isn’t it?
Background:
We started with a group of about 100 people. Prek- 12.
A range of folks with experience in working with standards and that they have familiarity with the then called “PA Common Core Standards.”
Start of the journey was – let’s unpack the standards.
Secondly – we produced a multi-paragraph introduction – what this big picture looks like.
Then we broke into grade level groups.
Had a discussion on focus standards. What are focus standards? Are they standards of mastery? Introduction? What exactly does this mean?
Then in grade level groups –
We identified focus standards preK-12.
Once identified, the focus standards –
We came together in two groups: Math and ELA prek-12
In the two groups we decided what the focus standards look like prek-12.
If it’s not a focus standard – then what is it?
Focus is explicit teaching --- change of shift.
Important standards --- preview, etc.
Other standards – perhaps repetitive etc.
This was a big discussion – and interesting debate. Focus standards in Mathematics--- a challenge to identify the focus standards
Developed grade level summaries
Developed grade band summaries
The intent is when the districts are rewriting curriculum – it would help them look at their instruction and what resources would we need.
We took pages and pages of standards –
What is ELA?
What are those big ideas prek-12?
At the bands – what does this look like?
Then what does it look like at the grade level?
Then come back as a large group – does this make sense?
It was invaluable having teachers in the mix. Because teachers saw the shift and the value ---
PA Core Standards Chart they created
Green – focus standards
Yellow – important standards
Red – changes in shift
Question from the group: If we focus on the focus standards – does it prepare the students better? The eligible content was sometimes the final decider.
At this point, all of the focus standards are from the eligible content.
Just because they are green – it doesn’t mean that there are more assessment questions – however it could be on the assessment.
A lot of districts are looking at their curriculum and looking at the eligible content and be sure that they are teaching what the kids need to know.
The next step of the group was to take the focus and important standards and create modules. These modules are skill based.
From module conversation – we used a nice template to create our module development.
Every module will have a grade-level description.
Suggested time line
Title
Overview
Objective
Focus standards in the module are delineated
Misconceptions/proper conceptions
Concepts/Competencies…
Assessments
Even used some LDC language
Tied in the PSSA scoring guide – linked to the portal.
Sample tasks – for particular genres of writing.
Also added a list of more formative assessments and what that might look like in each module.
The most important work –
Elements of Instruction/suggested strategies –
What could a teacher use to do this work.
And how they can formally assess those items.
Important for the “writers” was the “end user.” This offers for a brand new teacher – how can I be sure my students will get what they need? For a veteran teacher – I know the PA Core Standards are more rigorous – how can I embed them?
Differentiation –
Included this work was strong
Interdisciplinary Connections –
Looked at how it would look in a variety of content area. To make this visible to the teachers.
Here is Jean’s thinking --- after next week we can share the grade level summaries, the focus and important standards, the module map, and perhaps module 1 in every grade is looking pretty good.
She will figure out how to get the information to us.
Another important piece;
When these go live, they are not static.
If you like the template –
The new template is modifiable and more usable and readable.
For example – if you work in a district and they like essential questions you can adapt the document.
Are the long term transfer goals included?
They are permeated within the document. But we did not include them explicitly.
How would you explain the difference of this and the voluntary model curriculum?
The VMC is snips and snatches. This is a full year of work.
Feedback: there is a link to a feedback form on the moodle. Please take some time and provide input on the meeting. So we can better prepare for the next face to face meeting.
School Performance Profile;
SPP – where to find resources? On the SAS portal in the SPP PLC. Currently on PDE Homepage – right side, bottom of page.
Next week – there will be a “soft” release of the SPP to the districts.
There are many calls from SAT folks and AP folks – Districts are showing higher than their data suggests they should be.