EVIDENCE: ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS & MATH PERFORMANCE

CONTINUED SUPPORT FOR ACADEMIC GROWTH

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

During the 2018-2019 school year, we identified key ideas and details as our area of greatest concern (in reading) across all grade levels. Literacy and humanities teachers spent time focusing on these skills and on creating specific and time-bound documents such as course syllabi, curriculum maps, SASMs, master rubrics, and academic intensive plans that were aligned with our standards-based gradebook. These documents have been collected for all Harborside classes in order to form the first official version of the "Harborside Curriculum". As a result, based on our Spring ACT Aspire Interim data, students in both 9th and 10th grade made gains in the area of "Key Ideas and Details" during the 2018-2019 school year. This work connects with Core Practices 1 and 2. 

​

Using these course maps, we then did an ELA curriculum audit in which our goal was to analyze the overall coverage of standards. The results and feedback given to us can be seen here: Literacy Analysis Overview document. 

In addition to this, the Literacy Team spent time facilitating professional development focused on improving the quality and depth of questions (DOK) that our students were being exposed to on a regular basis. This included creating a DOK Harborside Resource Book for all staff to reference when designing assessments and learning targets. All Winter and Spring Intensive options also incorporated writing skill learning targets focused on writing conventions. Writing skills were and continue to be assessed throughout the school year in all humanities and ELA classes. This work connects with Core Practices 1, 28, and 29.

​

LITERACY INTERVENTION CLASS

All literacy intervention classes have been structured to include the following:

​

• Identification of students who are most in need (as evidenced by their Winter MAP and ACT Aspire assessments).

• Instruction focused on Making Thinking Visible skills for reading, including predicting, determining importance, making connections, summarizing, inferring, synthesizing, and critiquing.

• Students were divided into 2-3 groups within each intervention classroom. Groups were created based on students' common instructional needs. Groups were fluid/flexible. (Students remained in each group as long as it took them to master a skill or learning target (at least on 3 (proficient) on the student data tracker.

• Time was structured in the following way:

  • Warm up (20 minutes, including the teaching of specific reading skills).

  • For the remainder of the period, time was divided so that 1-2 mini-lessons could be taught.

  • While one small group received instruction focused on particular reading skill, the other group spent time on Edgenuity. Then, the groups flip-flopped.

• Here is a link to a Literacy Course Map.

• To ensure that Edgenuity was used to reinforce skills taught in mini-lessons, teachers created ILPs (individual learning paths) for students that were skill-based and appropriately leveled.

• Classroom norms were created. Headphone use was an expectation while students were on Edgenuity.

• Headphones and other electronic devices were numbered, assigned, and coordinated for student use.

• Edgenuity learning logs were used to monitor student progress, motivation, and foster ownership of LP goals.

• Students who were in Reading intervention classes (grades 6-10) were explicitly taught MTV reading strategies (summarizing, connecting, inferring, determining importance, synthesizing, visualizing, critiquing, analyzing, etc.) in order to meet instructional needs and improve deficit areas.

• Teachers noticed improved comprehension of text and vocabulary over the course of nine weeks.

MATH

Over the past three years, we have experienced some of the same growing pains in math as we have in reading, as we made the change to standards-based grading. We believe that bundling standards into 6-8 categories per class has created a general focus on power standards vs. a specific focus on supporting standards. During the 2018-2019 school year, the Harborside staff spent a lot of time regaining the kind of clarity that we felt we needed to address these specific learning gaps. The Math team also did a curriculum audit, comparing our curriculum maps/pacing guides with the most essential standards identified by KUSD. This led to the creation of common math assessments for grades 6-10. This work aligns with Core Practice 30.

In an effort to address the discrepancies in our data and skill gaps in student learning, we also spent the last two school years providing on-going professional development focused on the importance of improving the quality and depth of questions that our students are being exposed on a regular basis. We have integrated stressed the importance of using varied DOK questions within classroom assessments (formative and summative) and have given staff time to analyze and revise assessments accordingly. This work aligns with Core Practices 29 & 30.

​

MATH INTERVENTION CLASS

All Math intervention classes have been structured to include the following:

• Identification of students who are most in need (as evidenced by their Winter MAP and ACT Aspire assessments).

• Instruction focused on the following skills:

  • Grade 9/10: Rational Numbers (Chapter 2), Functions, and Statistics.

  • Grade 7/8: Rational Numbers, Functions, and Statistics.

  • Grade 6: Numbers and Quantity.

• Students were divided into 2-3 groups within each intervention classroom. Groups were based on students' common instructional needs and were fluid/flexible. Students would remain in each group as long as it takes them to master a skill/learning target (at least on 3 (proficient) on the student data tracker).

• Time was structured in the following way:

  • Warm-up (20 minutes, including Math Talks and the teaching of the CUBES strategy for solving word).

  • For the remainder of the period, time was divided so that 1-2 mini-lessons could be taught.

  • While one small group was receiving instruction focused on a particular math skill, the other group spent time on Edgenuity. Then groups would flip-flop.

• Math Intervention Course Maps were created for teachers, including links to the following:

  • Pre-assessment of target skills

  • Target assessments for each skill

  • Student data trackers for each skill

  • Post-assessments for each Unit

  • District Performance Tasks

• Students monitored their own progress by completing Data Trackers for each unit/skill. Students will need to achieve a level 3 (proficiency score) in each target skill in order to advance to the next skill. Redo assessments were attached to course maps for this purpose.

• To ensure that Edgenuity was being used to reinforce skills taught in mini-lessons, teachers created ILPs (individual learning paths) for students that are skill-based and at their appropriate level.

• Classroom norms were created and headphone usage was an expectation while students were on Edgenuity.

• Headphones and other electronic devices were numbered, assigned, and coordinated for student use.

• Edgenuity learning logs were used to monitor student progress, motivation, and foster ownership of LP goals. 

​Students who were in Math Intervention created data binders in order to compile notes, keep track of targets learned, and take ownership of their learning. Students were explicitly told what they were supposed to know and be able to do at the end of each unit, lesson, day, etc. There was a balance of knowledge, skills, and reasoning embedded into each lesson, and student learning was regularly assessed (for prerequisite skills and summatively). The implications of this were evident in that students were able to use what they had learned in new and different contexts. They were able to articulate how each strategy helped them move closer to their targets, self-assess, and track and record their progress.​​

GROWTH MINDSET

Since we also felt it was essential for our students to understand the importance of testing, we spent some time over the past two school years working to improve the testing mindset in our building. We wanted students to be engaged in understanding and performing well on annual and interim standardized assessments, so we took some time to examine the process of standardized testing, including tracking and understanding their work patterns, analyzing personal data on interim assessments, and exposing them to practice tests. We then used this information to set individual and class goals on standardized tests. In addition, teachers collected and analyzed whole class data as a way to track progress towards learning targets and set instructional goals. They praised effort, perseverance, and the use of strategies during testing. They incorporated growth mindset lessons into Crew time each week, and incentives were provided for students who put forth their best effort and/or met their personal growth goals. This work aligns with Core Practices 20 & 34.