This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Schools

Achieving Student Goals by Changing Adult Behavior

District Data Teams aims to change teacher behavior to improve student test results.

If there is one thing that the Greenwich Public School district (GPS) is not lacking, it is data - standardized tests of every sort, benchmark assessments and an abundance of numbers and metrics. There are so many numbers and figures, that the district has implemented a formalized system to analyze it all, but more importantly, to react to the story embedded within the numbers.

Throughtout the budget process that the district has just embarked on, you will hear the terms Strategic Improvement Plan and District Data Teams. What exactly is this "plan?" and what role do the "teams" play?

In the spring of 2009, the district started a process of designing and developing a “Holistic Accountability System” which sought to align all the various components of a student’s development process, both quantitative and qualitative, in order to enable each individual student to maximize their achievement and educational capabilities. This "holistic accountability system" was described in a May 14, 2009 District Data Team Report to the Board of Education as a system based on "student-centered accountability" which would not only include "academic achievement scores, but also specific information on the impact of curriculum, teaching and leadership practices."

Find out what's happening in Greenwichwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Thus, the Greenwich District Data Team (GDDT) was established in March of that year. The GDDT, now known as DDT, established two basic goals, both based on the GPS Mission and the Vision of the Graduate.

Goal 1: Each student will achieve mastery of a core body of knowledge and skills that reflects significant academic growth.

Find out what's happening in Greenwichwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Goal 2: Each student will demonstrate the knowledge, skills and dispositions necessary to effectively function in an interdependent global community.

The DDT then identified six foundational “Adult Actions” focused on improving student performance: ASSESSMENT, COLLABORATION, CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, TECHNOLOGY and SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL as outlined in the District Three-Year Strategic Improvement Plan 2009-2012 (updated 11/9/10.) 

Underlying all of these actions was  the District Data Team which was tasked with developing a three-year, comprehensive and coherent District Improvement Plan with would establish action plans and establish measures by which progress could be gauged. The purpose of the data teams is to work collaboratively to analyze the effect of their actions on identified student outcomes. 

The team laid out a multi-year plan to establish strategies, train staff, pilot programs and, in 2011-2011, roll out a fully-integrated process across the district, in each and every school, that would align data based improvement plans from the district level down to the individual student level.

The last update given to the Board of Education on the work of the DDT was given in January 2011, which included updates on the District's Strategic Improvement Plan (DSIP) and Adult Action Indicators.

Different data teams were established for each layer of the school district with the intention of creating plans that start at the district (macro) and then at each sub-level from School to Classroom then eventually to the Individual Student.

The data teams are considered critical to the success of the district. While being cited as being “research-based” and able to provide a coherent plan and approach throughout the district, their true impact is believed to be in the empowerment of teachers.

As noted by Interim Superintendent Roger Lulow at the Board of Education’s September 1 Work Session, the philosophy of the district has moved away from one which emphasized curriculum to one which is focused on the performance and impact of individual teachers.

The goals and actions established therefore are based upon establishing what adults can do which will make a difference in students’ performance. They do this by establishing both achievement and instructional priorities at each level. One of the strengths of this approach is that Instructional Data Teams can be established at a variety of levels - grade, programs such as ESL or ALP, content such as English or Social Studies or even an individual course such as Algebra 1.

In a mid-year update presented in January 2011, the sistrict reported that they had developed/ implemented data team performance rubrics, had provided training/support for Instructional, School And District Data Teams, worked on improving alignment between the District and individual School Strategic Improvement Teams. Training had been given to every level of the district, from elementary to the high school. 

The district has obtained further training from Dr. Mike Wasta, a recognized expert in using data to drive improvements. Wasta is a Professional Development Associate for The Leadership and Learning Center.  He served as Superintendent of Bristol Public Schools and is currently an external consultant for The Connecticut State Department of Education.

This is his third year working with the Greenwich Public School system. During the first year (2009-2010) he focused on instructional data; during the second year (2010-2011) it was the school data teams, and this year, it is about each individual school and implementing the strategies in their SIT plans. Wasta plans on visiting each school at least twice this year as well as twice with the District Data Team.

The current focus, according to Watsa is "what is it about our behavior that is driving the outcomes?" The action of the adults impacts these outcomes. There is a shift in thinking, that Wasta says may seem so obvious, but in fact is a very different approach. The adults are looking at themselves, not just the children. For example, the leading question changes from "why aren't the children reading at higher levels?" to "can we modify our teaching to achieve improved results?" This process is the same both in elementary and secondary schools.

According to Wasta, each school in the district is focusing on what practice will have the highest impact. At North Street School for example, while their writing and math scores have increased, their reading scores have remained flat. The school staff believes that by implementing small literacy groups, which will include small group instruction, reader workshops and guided reading groups across all grades K-5, they will be able to move the needle on reading.

Wasta says that the big picture here is to "focus on improving practice in service to children." He feels that as he enters his 3rd year in working with GPS, that the "intense focus on themselves (individually) and as a group" has yielded what he describes as "remarkable gains" in collaboration and other changes in adult behaviour. These changes in adult behavior are expected to result in improved student performance. 

District Data Teams are working hard to garner an increase in student achievement.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?