Data Driver
Data Driver Learning team leader facilitates the use of research, assessments, and data for improvement, resulting in educators on the team successfully applying key learnings in their classrooms and documenting student progress related to the student learning goals.
Key Method Learning team leader synthesizes team’s key learnings and next steps from engaging in a collaborative inquiry cycle, and documents progress made in student learning.
Method Components Identify progress in student learning • Teams engaging in collaborative inquiry cycles use data and research to inform instruction, resulting in improvements in student learning. For this milestone, you will summarize an inquiry cycle, including the gains in student learning related to your team’s goal. You will make an explicit connection between the team’s use of data and research, resulting team actions, and student progress. • Review the artifacts you submitted for the micro-credentials that you have already earned in this strand (Assessor, Data Analyst, Goal Setter, Researcher), and the “next steps” that the team committed to as a result of the work towards each of these micro-credentials. Follow the thread of your team’s work (what happened when you implemented “next steps”?) and identify how it has resulted in gains in student learning (based on gains in grade-level average performance data).
Supporting Research §
“What Research Says about Collaborative Inquiry.” Educational Leadership 66.4 (2008): 87-88. Web. http://bit.ly/1U8HTnP
§
“Building Capacity to Transform Literacy Learning.” Literacy in Learning Exchange. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Mar. 2016. http://www.literacyinlearningexchange.org/sites/default/files/ncleshortlitreview.pdf
§
Venables, Daniel. “Introduction: Why Is (Working with) Data so Hard?” ASCD, n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. http://bit.ly/1pL4eMC
§
DuFour, Richard, and Robert J. Marzano. Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree, 2012. Print. http://amzn.to/1U0hUA6
§
Bambrick-Santoyo, Paul. Driven by Data: A Practical Guide to Improve Instruction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010. Print. http://amzn.to/24MSXvY
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
1
Resources §
Learning Team Leader Guide: How to Lead for Impact: A guide to support learning team leaders in facilitating effective professional learning communities. http://bit.ly/1Tnkxfw
§
PLC Coaching Plan (Sample): Possible coaching plan for PLC work during a unit or module of instruction. http://bit.ly/1SUFvmD
§
End of Unit / Cycle Assessment: A short survey for teams to assess their progress at the end of a unit or cycle http://bit.ly/1VXCySB
§
PLC Implementation Plan: A tool for planning the implementation of team goals. http://bit.ly/1rlpSZ8
§
PLC Ongoing Action Plan: A tool to record meeting agendas, notes, and team goals in order to support the process of continuous improvement. http://bit.ly/1puCTib
Submission Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria To earn this micro-credential, you must earn all of the following micro-credentials: Data Analyst, Assessor, Goal Setter, and Researcher. You must also receive a passing evaluation for Parts 1 and 3, and a “yes” for each of the criteria assessed in Part 2 below. Part 1. Overview questions (300-word limit for this section) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
What subject area(s) did your team focus on this cycle? What grade level(s)? What was your team’s student learning goal for this cycle? What standard does the goal address? To what extent did your team make progress related to the student learning goal? a. A great deal of progress was made and we met our goal! b. Good progress was made, but we did not quite meet our goal. c. Some progress was made d. Little or no progress was made
-
Passing: The response to overview questions clearly and thoroughly describes the team and the focus of the inquiry cycle.
Part 2. Evidence/artifacts Please submit the following evidence/artifacts: 1. A completed Inquiry Cycle Snapshot - Data Driver Worksheet, that summarizes an inquiry cycle, including the gains in student learning related to the team’s goal. 2. Common Assessment used by the team for the purpose of assessing student progress at the end of the inquiry cycle (Question #5 in the Inquiry Cycle Snapshot). 3. A table or graph that shows aggregated data from two assessments (pre and post implementation). Data shows that on average across the grade, students were assessed and made progress in targeted skills or standards. See sample data tables and graphs.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
2
As evidenced by the artifacts submitted: “Yes”
“Almost”
“Not Yet”
The team engaged in a coherent inquiry cycle.
The team went through the phases of a cycle of inquiry, including analysis of data, goal setting, implementation of instructional strategies, and evaluation of progress at the end of the cycle.
The team went through the phases of an inquiry cycle, however the cycle is not coherent, or further clarity is needed to describe one or more of the phases of the cycle.
One or more of the phases of the inquiry cycle was not completed. For example, the team did not set a goal, or the team set a goal but did not implement instructional strategies in line with that goal.
The learning team leader provides a critical analysis of student progress that reflects a strong understanding of what learning and instructional gaps remain.
As evidenced in writing, it is evident that the learning team leader thinks critically about the extent of student progress, and demonstrates a strong understanding of what learning and instructional gaps remain, based on the cycle data analyzed.
The learning team leader is only partially able to articulate the extent of student progress during this cycle. The learning and instructional gaps that remain are unclear or unrelated.
The learning team leader is not able to articulate the extent of student progress during this cycle. She is unable to speak deeply to the learning and instructional gaps that remain, providing superficial information that is not tightly tied to the cycle data.
The learning team leader articulates clear and appropriate next steps to advance student learning.
The learning team leader is able to identify clear next steps for the team that are instructionally sound and follow logically from the analysis of inquiry cycle data.
The learning team leader identifies next steps for the team that are either unclear, not instructionally sound, or do not follow logically from the analysis of inquiry cycle data.
The learning team leader does not articulate next steps for the team.
The data display (chart or graph) shows data from an assessment pre-implementation, and another assessment postimplementation.
Data has been analyzed from an assessment preimplementation, as compared to another assessment postimplementation. The post-implementation common assessment is aligned to the student learning goal. Data can be analyzed in aggregate and shows data from all team members / across multiple classrooms.
The data from the inquiry cycle demonstrates that students (on average across the grade) made progress on targeted skills or standards.
When looking at the aggregate progress of the team across the grade, it is evident that students made progress on targeted skills or standards.
Data is collected pre and post-implementation, but the process for determining progress is unclear. Alignment between the post-implementation data point and the student learning goal is unclear.
Data is either not collected in reference to the cycle, or collected on a single assessment at the end of the cycle, with no mechanism for determining progress made over time. The post-implementation data point does not align to the student learning goal.
Data is not aggregated, or does not yet show data from all team members / across multiple classrooms.
Data is accessible for one or a few team members, but not from all team members.
When looking at the aggregate progress of the team across the grade, there is an attempt to assess students postimplementation, but it is
When looking at the aggregate progress of the team across the grade, there is no evidence of student progress on targeted skills or standards.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
3
unclear whether students made progress on targeted skills or standards.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
4
Key Method Learning team leader synthesizes team’s key learnings and next steps from engaging in a collaborative inquiry cycle, and documents progress made in student learning.
Method Components Identify progress in student learning • Teams engaging in collaborative inquiry cycles use data and research to inform instruction, resulting in improvements in student learning. For this milestone, you will summarize an inquiry cycle, including the gains in student learning related to your team’s goal. You will make an explicit connection between the team’s use of data and research, resulting team actions, and student progress. • Review the artifacts you submitted for the micro-credentials that you have already earned in this strand (Assessor, Data Analyst, Goal Setter, Researcher), and the “next steps” that the team committed to as a result of the work towards each of these micro-credentials. Follow the thread of your team’s work (what happened when you implemented “next steps”?) and identify how it has resulted in gains in student learning (based on gains in grade-level average performance data).
Supporting Research §
“What Research Says about Collaborative Inquiry.” Educational Leadership 66.4 (2008): 87-88. Web. http://bit.ly/1U8HTnP
§
“Building Capacity to Transform Literacy Learning.” Literacy in Learning Exchange. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Mar. 2016. http://www.literacyinlearningexchange.org/sites/default/files/ncleshortlitreview.pdf
§
Venables, Daniel. “Introduction: Why Is (Working with) Data so Hard?” ASCD, n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. http://bit.ly/1pL4eMC
§
DuFour, Richard, and Robert J. Marzano. Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree, 2012. Print. http://amzn.to/1U0hUA6
§
Bambrick-Santoyo, Paul. Driven by Data: A Practical Guide to Improve Instruction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010. Print. http://amzn.to/24MSXvY
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
1
Resources §
Learning Team Leader Guide: How to Lead for Impact: A guide to support learning team leaders in facilitating effective professional learning communities. http://bit.ly/1Tnkxfw
§
PLC Coaching Plan (Sample): Possible coaching plan for PLC work during a unit or module of instruction. http://bit.ly/1SUFvmD
§
End of Unit / Cycle Assessment: A short survey for teams to assess their progress at the end of a unit or cycle http://bit.ly/1VXCySB
§
PLC Implementation Plan: A tool for planning the implementation of team goals. http://bit.ly/1rlpSZ8
§
PLC Ongoing Action Plan: A tool to record meeting agendas, notes, and team goals in order to support the process of continuous improvement. http://bit.ly/1puCTib
Submission Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria To earn this micro-credential, you must earn all of the following micro-credentials: Data Analyst, Assessor, Goal Setter, and Researcher. You must also receive a passing evaluation for Parts 1 and 3, and a “yes” for each of the criteria assessed in Part 2 below. Part 1. Overview questions (300-word limit for this section) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
What subject area(s) did your team focus on this cycle? What grade level(s)? What was your team’s student learning goal for this cycle? What standard does the goal address? To what extent did your team make progress related to the student learning goal? a. A great deal of progress was made and we met our goal! b. Good progress was made, but we did not quite meet our goal. c. Some progress was made d. Little or no progress was made
-
Passing: The response to overview questions clearly and thoroughly describes the team and the focus of the inquiry cycle.
Part 2. Evidence/artifacts Please submit the following evidence/artifacts: 1. A completed Inquiry Cycle Snapshot - Data Driver Worksheet, that summarizes an inquiry cycle, including the gains in student learning related to the team’s goal. 2. Common Assessment used by the team for the purpose of assessing student progress at the end of the inquiry cycle (Question #5 in the Inquiry Cycle Snapshot). 3. A table or graph that shows aggregated data from two assessments (pre and post implementation). Data shows that on average across the grade, students were assessed and made progress in targeted skills or standards. See sample data tables and graphs.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
2
As evidenced by the artifacts submitted: “Yes”
“Almost”
“Not Yet”
The team engaged in a coherent inquiry cycle.
The team went through the phases of a cycle of inquiry, including analysis of data, goal setting, implementation of instructional strategies, and evaluation of progress at the end of the cycle.
The team went through the phases of an inquiry cycle, however the cycle is not coherent, or further clarity is needed to describe one or more of the phases of the cycle.
One or more of the phases of the inquiry cycle was not completed. For example, the team did not set a goal, or the team set a goal but did not implement instructional strategies in line with that goal.
The learning team leader provides a critical analysis of student progress that reflects a strong understanding of what learning and instructional gaps remain.
As evidenced in writing, it is evident that the learning team leader thinks critically about the extent of student progress, and demonstrates a strong understanding of what learning and instructional gaps remain, based on the cycle data analyzed.
The learning team leader is only partially able to articulate the extent of student progress during this cycle. The learning and instructional gaps that remain are unclear or unrelated.
The learning team leader is not able to articulate the extent of student progress during this cycle. She is unable to speak deeply to the learning and instructional gaps that remain, providing superficial information that is not tightly tied to the cycle data.
The learning team leader articulates clear and appropriate next steps to advance student learning.
The learning team leader is able to identify clear next steps for the team that are instructionally sound and follow logically from the analysis of inquiry cycle data.
The learning team leader identifies next steps for the team that are either unclear, not instructionally sound, or do not follow logically from the analysis of inquiry cycle data.
The learning team leader does not articulate next steps for the team.
The data display (chart or graph) shows data from an assessment pre-implementation, and another assessment postimplementation.
Data has been analyzed from an assessment preimplementation, as compared to another assessment postimplementation. The post-implementation common assessment is aligned to the student learning goal. Data can be analyzed in aggregate and shows data from all team members / across multiple classrooms.
The data from the inquiry cycle demonstrates that students (on average across the grade) made progress on targeted skills or standards.
When looking at the aggregate progress of the team across the grade, it is evident that students made progress on targeted skills or standards.
Data is collected pre and post-implementation, but the process for determining progress is unclear. Alignment between the post-implementation data point and the student learning goal is unclear.
Data is either not collected in reference to the cycle, or collected on a single assessment at the end of the cycle, with no mechanism for determining progress made over time. The post-implementation data point does not align to the student learning goal.
Data is not aggregated, or does not yet show data from all team members / across multiple classrooms.
Data is accessible for one or a few team members, but not from all team members.
When looking at the aggregate progress of the team across the grade, there is an attempt to assess students postimplementation, but it is
When looking at the aggregate progress of the team across the grade, there is no evidence of student progress on targeted skills or standards.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
3
unclear whether students made progress on targeted skills or standards.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
4
