Inclusion in the Age of Accountability: IEP to AYP

1
Inclusion in the Age of Accountability IEP to
AYP!

• Ervin Knezek
• ervin.knezek_at_esc13.txed.net

2

• The Rule of the Game
• New Assessments
• Instructional Issues
• Staff Issues
• Resources

3
The Forces of Transition
Federal
State
Local
Leadership
Data/Information/Updates
Refocus, Renew, Retool
Abandon
Transition
Adopt
4
The Context

• Two systems
• State (AEIS, State Compensatory, PBM)
• Federal (AYP/AMAOs/Technology)
• Assessments
• TAKS
• SDAA
• On enrolled grade level
• Off enrolled grade level
• Baseline (last year)
• LDAA (Locally Determined Alternate Assessment)
• RPTE
• TELPAS (RPTE TOP)

Achievement level (I, II, III)
5
Make a List

• At your table what are your burning
  accountability questions?

6
Texas Accountability Systemfor 2004 and
BeyondCommissioner of EducationFinal
DecisionsThe Texas System
7
Overall Design

• The overall design of the state accountability
  system is an improvement model
• Campuses and districts must meet either an
  absolute standard or an improvement standard for
  each accountability measure at the Academically
  Acceptable level

8
Rating Labels

• Campuses and districts are assigned the same
  rating labels
• Exemplary
• Recognized
• Academically Acceptable
• Academically Unacceptable

9
State Accountability Indicators

• Performance
• TAKS
• SDAA
• Completion Rate (grades 9-12)
• Annual Dropout Rate (grades 7-8)

10
Student Performance IndicatorsTexas Assessment
of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)State Developed
Alternative Assessment (SDAA)
11
Accountability Subsets

• District mobility District ratings are based on
  test results for students enrolled in the
  district on the PEIMS fall as of date
• Campus mobility Campus ratings are based on
  test results for students enrolled on the campus
  on the PEIMS fall as of date

12
Student Groups

• TAKS performance is evaluated for All Students
  and for the following student groups meeting
  minimum size requirements
• African American
• Hispanic
• White
• Economically Disadvantaged
• SDAA performance is evaluated for All Students
  only

13
Minimum Size forStudent Groups

• TAKS (Reading/ELA, Writing, Math, Science, Social
  Studies)
• 30/10/50
• Student groups are evaluated if the campus or
  district has test results for at least 30
  students in the group (summed across grades) for
  the subject and that represents at least 10 of
  all tests takers in that subject, or test results
  for at least 50 students in the group
• SDAA (Reading, Writing, Math)
• 30 tests
• Tests may represent as few as 10 students

14
Performance Standards

• Exemplary 90
• Recognized
• 70 in 2004 through 2006
• 75 in 2007
• 80 in 2008 (where it is expected to remain)
• Acceptable 2004 through 2006
• In 2007, the standards will begin to increase
  incrementally until they reach 70
• Reading/ELA, Writing, Social Studies, SDAA 50
• Mathematics 35
• Science 25
• Academically Unacceptable
• Below Acceptable Levels

15
NCES Dropout Definition
16
Adopting theNCES Dropout Definition

• State statute requires Texas to adopt the NCES
  dropout definition for 2005-06 leavers
• Students leaving school to enter an alternative
  program to work toward a HS diploma or GED
  certificate are dropouts under the NCES definition

17
Completion Rate(Grades 9-12)
18
Annual Dropout Rate(Grades 7-8)
19
NCLBThe Federal Accountability System
20
Objectives

• Provide an overview of the federal accountability
  system AKA AYP
• Examine special issues associated with assessment
  of students with disabilities

21
NCLB The Big Picture

• Ratified by congress in December 2001 and signed
  by President Bush on January 8, 2002
• Four key elements
• Stronger accountability for results
• Expanded flexibility and local control
• Expanded options for parents
• Emphasis on research-based methods

22
NCLB Accountability Provisions

• Stronger academic standards
• Tests aligned with rigorous state standards
• Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
• Results reported according to student groups
• Access to Highly Qualified teachers

23
What is AYP?

• Under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), public
  school districts, campuses, and the state are
  evaluated annually for Adequate Yearly Progress
  (AYP).

24
What Does AYP Measure?

• Performance of students in Reading/Language Arts
  and Mathematics
• Participation of students in the assessment
  system
• One additional measure
• Attendance (elementary/middle school)
• Graduation Rate (high school)

25
How Does AYP Compare to the State Accountability
System?

• Includes LEP and Special Education student groups
• Different performance standards
• Fewer subject areas evaluated
• Sanctions for Title I campuses
• Limitation on of scores reported as
  proficient when assessed against alternate
  standards

26
What Tests are Included?

• TAKS
• Reading Proficiency Test in English (RPTE)
• State Developed Alternative Assessment (SDAA)
• Locally Determined Alternative Assessment (LDAA)

27
Texas AYP Targets Reading/English Language Arts
and Mathematics
Grades 3-8 and 10 summed across grade levels by
subject for reading/language arts and mathematics
28
Texas AYP Targets Reading/English Language Arts
and Mathematics
29
What Student Groups are Assessed for AYP?

• All students
• White
• Hispanic
• African-American
• Economically Disadvantaged
• Limited English Proficient (LEP)
• Special Education

30
How Do Campuses and Districts Meet AYP?

• Did all student groups meet the performance
  standard for Reading and Mathematics?
• Did at least 95 of the students enrolled on test
  date participate in testing?
• Did the campus meet the Attendance or Graduation
  standard?

31
Is There A Performance Improvement Option?

• Used when did not meet absolute performance
  standard
• Did the campus or district
• Reduce prior year failure by 10?
• See an improvement of at least 0.1 on Attendance
  or Graduation Rate?

32
What is the 2004 AYP Schedule?

• November 15, 2004 Information released to
  school districts
• December 17, 2004 End of appeals process
• February 23, 2005 Final ratings released to
  school districts
• February 24, 2005 Final ratings released to the
  public

33
What Are Some of the Issues Related to the
Assessment of Students with Disabilities?

• A unique accountability group
• Performance on all assessments rather than the
  results of SDAA as an accountability indicator
• Limitation on scores counted as proficient
  against alternate (off grade level) standards at
  the district level

34
Accountability Indicator
35
Results Evaluated
36
Determination forMet Standard
37
Cap on Results Which May Be Scored Proficient
38
SDAA One Grade Level Below and Correct
SDAA Two Grade Levels Below and Correct
And So On for SDAA
LDAA TEKS-Based Test
LDAA Functional Test
39
Student Groups
40
Minimum Group Size
41
Tests Evaluated
42
Participation
43
Performance Standards
44
Baseline Administrations(2004)
45
Redistribution of Scores That Exceed 1 Limitation

• Scores above the 1 limitation will be
  reclassified as not proficient and will be
  redistributed to the campus
• Impacts all student groups represented by the
  score

46
What are the Sanctions for Campuses Not Meeting
AYP?

• Campus requirements by year
• School Choice
• Supplemental Education Services
• Corrective Action
• Restructuring
• Alternative Governance

47
Title I Districts Not Meeting AYP

• Stage 1 Revise District Improvement
  Plan
• Stage 2 Implement revised District
  Improvement Plan
• Stage 3 Improvement Requirements
• Defer programmatic funds or reduce administrative
  funds
• Implement significant curricular and professional
  development activities
• Replace the district personnel relevant to the
  district not meeting AYP

48
Stage 3 Continued

• Stage 3 Improvement Requirements
• Remove particular schools from the jurisdiction
  of the district and establish alternative
  arrangements for public governance
• Appoint a receiver or trustee to administer the
  affairs of the district place of the
  superintendent and school board
• Abolish or restructure the school district
• Authorize student transfers from a school
  operated by the school district to a higher
  performing public school operated by another
  school district and provide transportation, and
  implement at least one additional corrective
  action

49
AYP Planning for 2005

• 1 cap
• SDAA II
• ARD Decision making
• Fifth Year Students
• Medical Emergencies- documentation
• Continuing students
• Targeted assistance
• Score code accuracy
• LDAA

50
An AYP Process (Bentley, Pflugerville ISD)

• Use PEIMS data to generate a list of who is
  served in special education and what their
  enrolled grade level is
• Practice test high target students tested low
  last year
• Rerun numbers for AYP based on inclusion of these
  students

51
An AYP Process (Bentley, Pflugerville ISD)

• Use on level released TAKS to baseline for SDAA
  II
• Work with staff to project what is possible in
  terms of assessment
• Plan for tutorials, other intervention
• Reset ARD expectations
• Remember your own expectations

52
Thinking through your data
53
Purpose Bernhardt

• Understand current and future needs of the
  school, students, parents, teachers and the
  community.
• Determine how well current processes meet needs.
• Identify ways in which the school and community
  are changing.
• Identify the root causes of problems.
• Determine types of programs and expertise which
  will be required in the future.

54
Purpose Bernhardt

• Make sure students dont fall through the
  cracks.
• Meet federal and state requirements.
• Provide students with feedback on their
  performance.
• Measure program success and effectiveness.
• Determine teachers, parents, students,
  graduates and administrators perceptions of the
  learning environment.

55
(No Transcript)
56
29
57
(No Transcript)
58
(No Transcript)
59
(No Transcript)
60
(No Transcript)
61
Kinds of Data (Bernhardt)

• Student Learning
• Demographic
• School Processes
• Perception
• Work in your table group, what are data sources
  for each?

62
Break
63
Assessment of Students with Disabilities TAKS to
SDAA II (and LDAA)
64
Objectives

• Discuss changes in assessment of students with
  disabilities
• Determine appropriate use of accommodations and
  modifications
• Discuss using the ARD process to increase the
  level of rigor

65
How did we get here?
66

• Instructional decisions should always inform and
  guide assessment decisions.

67
Differences Between SDAA II and TAKS

• Larger font size
• More white space
• Slightly shorter reading and writing passages
• More illustrations accompanying passages and test
  items
• Slightly fewer items on some tests

• SDAA II assesses ALMOST all the same TEKS as TAKS
  (see SDAA II/TAKS/TEKS Correlation Guide)
• Differences between TAKS and SDAA II do not
  affect level of TEKS curriculum assessed

68
Blueprints
69
Blueprints
70
A Tool
Sorting Cards!
TAKS
SDAA II
71
To get materials, PowerPoints, etc.

• www.esc13.net/cc/inclusion.html

72
Develop a Common Vocabulary!

• Accommodation
• a change in teaching or learning strategies based
  on the specific needs of a student with a
  disability (e.g., oral testing, highlighted
  textbooks, short answer tests)
• Does NOT change the content of instruction.
• Modification
• a change in the curriculum of a course (e.g.,
  eliminating one or more of the TEKS or changing
  the grade level of certain TEKS)
• Changes the content of instruction

73
Accommodation

• Which ones are frequently used?
• Are they allowable of state assessments?
• How can they be scaffolded?

74
How do we accommodate?

• Presentation Accommodations
• Response Accommodations
• Timing/Scheduling Accommodations
• Setting Accommodations

75
A Tool
Frequently Accommodating
76
Accommodation Analysis or Paralysis?

• Generate a list of the accommodations most
  frequently used at your school?
• Use the guide to allowable and non allowable
  assessments to determine if those accommodations
  are non-allowable?
• If they are non-allowable, how could you scaffold
  them?

77
(No Transcript)
78
Getting on the Same Page with the TEKS

• Key vocabulary
• Language of instruction
• Level of rigor

79
What Are the Priority Standards?

• EEssential Most Critical 50 of Objectives
• IImportant Next 30
• Important now but master later
• CCondensed Last 20
• Scaffolded objectives
• Less instructional time required

• Plan for the essential first, never compromise on
  time with essentials
• The more students are at risk, the more time
  allocated to essentials
• Focus on essentials for remediation and
  acceleration

80
Criteria and Considerations

• Essential
• 50 of content
• 60-70 of instructional time
• High number of items on state assessment
• Prerequisite for learning at the next grade level
• Taught to mastery that current year
• Enduring, life skills, across disciplines
• Important
• 30 of content
• 20-30 of instructional time
• Fewer number of items on assessment
• Tested at a later grade level
• Essential in upcoming grade
• May have been essential in a previous grade
• Condensed
• 20 of content
• 10-20 of instructional time
• Probably not tested at that grade level
• Reinforcement

81
Look at your curriculum materials

• Identify three objectives from each category
• Essential
• Important
• Condensed

Faculty Meeting? Team Meeting? Pace slowly
82
Lesson from your colleagues

• Prioritization is about time/weight
• All the TEKS have to be taught the question is,
  Where should we spend the bulk of our time?
• Some TEKS lend themselves to being
  condensed/combined

83
SDAA II TAKS RPTE Correlation Guide

• Which Student Expectations (SEs)are assessed on
  each test?
• Which SEs are assessed on both TAKS and SDAA?
• What is the content?
• What is the context?
• What is the cognitive level?

84
Organization of SDAA II

• Instructional Levels
• Objectives (Umbrella Statements)
• Presented across grade levels
• Information Booklets
• Information that clarifies how to read the TEKS
• An overview of the subject within the context of
  SDAA II
• A blueprint of the testthe number of items under
  each objective and the number of items on the
  test as a whole
• The reasons each objective and its TEKS student
  expectations are critical to student learning and
  success
• Additional information about each objective that
  will help educators understand how it might be
  assessed on SDAA II
• Sample items that show some of the ways
  objectives might be assessed
• FOR YOUR INFORMATION

85
Where do we start?

• The Student
• The TEKS
• The IEP

86
Who are the students?

• Demographic data
• Disability category
• What instructional arrangements

87
When in ARDWhich test? Which level?
88
A Tool
Instruction Assessment?
89
Lunch
90
Thinking about instruction

• There is not a separate pedagogy for struggling
  learners (Stoffer, 2005)
• Staff expectations and beliefs influences student
  outcomes
• Achievement gains are more consistent when
  instruction is
• structured, explicit, and teacher directed for
  new learning (Darling-Hammond, 1992)
• at the appropriate level of challenge (Vygotsky)
• at the appropriate level of challenge (Vygotsky)
• scaffolded (Chang, 2002)
• mastered before moving on (Ellis, 1997)
• repeated
• presented in discreet steps
• monitored

91
Access to the TEKS

• Role of collaborating teachers
• Who owns the curriculum?
• Will students have access?

92
Reading
93
SDAA II - Reading

• Instructional Levels
• K
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• Passage lengths somewhat shorter
• IL K-1 objectives represent learning to read
  tasks
• IL 2-8 objectives represent a direct correlation
  with TAKS on content, context, cognitive level

94
SDAA II Reading

• Reading Selections
• Narrative
• Expository
• Mixed (starting at IL 2)
• Paired (starting at IL 4)
• Triplets (Starting at IL 9)

95
Expository Text (Quinn)

• Science
• Social Studies
• Mathematics

8
96
SDAA II Reading IL K
97
SDAA II Reading IL 1
98
SDAA II Reading IL 2
TAKS!
99
SDAA II IL 3 -8

• Beginning at Instructional Level 3, paragraphs
  are numbered
• When appropriate, each selection is preceded by a
  title.
• At Instructional Levels 6, 7, and 8, narratives
  are formatted so that students have the option of
  taking notes.

100
SDAA II
TAKS
101
SDAA II
TAKS
102
SDAA II IL 9

• Triplet of three published pieces
• Narrative
• Expository
• Viewing and Representing
• Multiple Choice
• Open ended items
• Dictionary

103
SDAA II IL 9
104
Scaffold

• Instructional
• Teacher does, student watches
• Teacher does, student helps
• Student does, teacher helps
• Study Guides
• Advance Organizers
• Graphic organizers
• Tiered Activities

105
A Tool
Think about how to get the right answer. Think
about how to get the wrong answer!
Thinking Thing
106
A ResourceSpecial Connectionshttp//www.specialc
onnections.ku.edu/
107
Reading Overview

• Longer passages at all grades
• More expository text
• Paired selections except at grade three
• Narrative, expository, mixed passages
• Areas to look for
• True summary
• Context
• Dictionary usage
• Fact and Opinion
• Conclude!
• Graphic organizers
• Viewing and Representing

108
Reading TAAS and SDAA v. TAKS and SDAA II
Instructional Strategies to Reconsider

• Short passages
• Over reliance on key words
• Single passage selections
• Any materials with TAAS summarization, fact and
  opinion, context clues
• Single meaning vocabulary lessons

109
Supporting Students with Disabilities for
Success on SDAA II or TAKS Reading

• Connected text
• VOCABULARY!
• Scaffolded materials
• Cognitive walkthrough
• Talkbacks
• Construct of text
• Paragraph stop points

110
Writing and ELA (IL 10)
111
Writing

• Instructional Levels
• K/1
• 2
• 3/4
• 5
• 6/7
• 8/9

112
SDAA II Writing IL K/1
113
SDAA II Writing IL 2
114
SDAA II IL 2 Writing Rubric

• Focus and Coherence
• Organization
• Development
• of Ideas
• Convention

115
(No Transcript)
116
SDAA II Writing IL 3/4 through 8/9
117
SDAA II Writing Rubric

• Focus and Coherence
• Organization
• Development
• of Ideas
• Voice
• Conventions

118
SDAA II Revising and Editing
119
SDAA II ELA IL 10

• Triplet
• Narrative
• Expository
• Viewing and Representing
• Writing prompt
• Student must be on level oin both reading and
  writing

120
Writing TAAS and SDAA v. TAKS and SDAA II
Instructional Strategies to Reconsider

• Formula approaches
• Over reliance on key words
• Any TAAS practice materials

121
Supporting Students with Disabilities for
Success on SDAA II or TAKS Writing

• Multiple journal writing opportunities
• Connections with reading passages
• Multiple story telling opportunities
• Peer review
• Emphasis on voice
• Structuring revising and editing based on high
  success opportunities

122
A Tool

• The student sample

123
Mathematics
124
SDAA II Mathematics

• Instructional Levels
• K
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• Increased rigor
• Very few differences from TAKS

Not tested at IL K or 1
125
SDAA II Mathematics

• Some items may include application context and
  extraneous information.
• Each item will extend across the page rather than
  appear in a multicolumn format.
• Most items will be in a multiple-choice format
  with four answer choices.
• There may be a limited number of open-ended
  griddable items.
• Mathematics charts

126
IL 3
IL 5
127
A Tool
Charting Progress!
128
IL 8
IL 7
129
SDAA II Mathematics IL 9/10
130
(No Transcript)
131
(No Transcript)
132
Mathematics

• More complex problems
• Symbolic ALGEBRA!
• Applied measurement
• Logical reasoning
• Mathematical communication
• Graphing calculators
• Use the charts

133
Math TAAS and SDAA v. TAKS and SDAA II
Instructional Strategies to Reconsider

• 1 or 2 step problem solving
• Single process/algorithm problem solving
• Over reliance on key words

134
Supporting Students with Disabilities for
Success on SDAA II or TAKS Math
8

• Structure of math text
• Viewing and representing
• TEKS vocabulary particularly object naming/math
  vocabulary confusion
• Deconstruction of passage
• Number
• Process
• Using released tests
• Paired talk throughs
• Deconstructing distractors

135
Tools and Resources

• http//www.esc13store.net/
• TAKS Side by Sides
• Griddies
• Charts
• Assessment of Students with Disabilities Toolkit
  for Leaders
• TAKS off level
• Smart Teaching Tools
• http//www.dcschools.com/TAKS/default.asp
• Special Connections
• http//www.specialconnections.ku.edu/

136
ARD Committee Decision-Making Process
137

• Instructional decisions should always inform and
  guide assessment decisions.

138
(No Transcript)
139
Putting the Assessment Decisions in Context

• Components of Effective ARD Committee Decision
  Making
• Required ARDC Members
• Eligibility
• Educational Needs
• Educational Program/Placement
• Statewide/Districtwide Assessment

140
Required ARDC Members

• Parent(s)
• At least one general education teacher of the
  student (if the student is, or may be,
  participating in the general education
  environment)
• At least one special education teacher/service
  provider of the student
• A representative of the district who
• Is qualified to provide or supervise the
  provision of specially designed instruction
• Is knowledgeable about the general curriculum
• Is knowledgeable about the availability of
  resources in the district, AND
• Has the administrative authority to commit the
  resources of the district
• An individual who can interpret the instructional
  implications of evaluation data
• Other individuals with knowledge or special
  expertise regarding the student (e.g.,
  AI/VI/CATE/LPAC representative)
• The student, if appropriate

141
Questions for Discussion
Required ARDC Members

• How will the required members of the ARDC impact
  the decision-making process for state assessment?
• What processes need to be in place at your campus
  so all members come to the ARDC meeting prepared?
• Who should sit as the district representative at
  your ARDC meetings?

142
Eligibility

• At each meeting, the ARDC must consider whether
  the student is, or continues to be, eligible to
  receive special education services.
• Eligibility involves
• Is there a disability?
• Is there a need for special education services
  (and possibly related services) as a result of
  the disability?

143
Questions for Discussion
Eligibility

• How does the students disability impact the
  decision making about instruction?
• How does the students disability impact the
  decision making about assessment?

144
Present Levels of Educational Performance
Educational Needs

• TEKS level
• Performance in current curriculum/IEP
• Services necessary to continue to progress
  in/access TEKS
• Benchmark data
• Curriculum based measures
• Response to instructional intervention
• Language acquisition (LEP)

145
Educational Needs
Performance on Statewide and Districtwide
Assessments

• Confidential Student Report
• Benchmark data
• Grades
• Which assessment did the student take last year?
  Performance level?
• Did the assessment level last year match the
  curriculum stated in the IEP?
• How far off enrolled grade level was the
  curriculum for the IEP set?

146
Questions for Discussion
Educational Needs

• How does information about current educational
  performance impact decisions regarding current
  year instruction?
• What processes are in place to ensure that the
  instructional levels are based on educational
  need?

147
Educational Program and Placement

• Each year, the ARDC must determine the
  educational program for the student for the
  upcoming year
• This involves decision-making relating to
• Curriculum
• TEKS
• Individualized goals and objectives
• Accommodations
• Specially designed instructional services
  (special education services)

148
Educational Program and Placement

• Data Sources that are used in determining
  appropriate instruction/curriculum
• FIE
• Classroom performance
• Curriculum based measures
• Performance on past statewide assessments (by
  objective)
• Performance on district benchmarks

149
Questions for Discussion
Educational Program and Placement

• What is the current program?
• To what extent is the student accessing the
  general curriculum/TEKS?
• What kinds of accommodations have been used that
  have realized the greatest success?
• Are we accommodating or modifying?
• Which TEKS will form the basis for this years
  goals and objectives?

150
Questions for Discussion
Educational Program and Placement

• On your campus, do most IEPS developed on your
  campus
• Accommodate instruction?
• Modify content of instruction? To what extent?
• How will this inform placement decisions later
  on?
• What is the relationship between your placement
  decisions and the goals and objectives?
• What is the relationship between your placement
  decisions and assessment?

151
Educational Program and Placement

• Instructional decisions should always inform and
  guide assessment decisions.

152
Statewide and Districtwide Assessment

• Students with disabilities who are receiving
  special education services are included in
  statewide AND districtwide assessments
• A student with a disabilitys IEP must include
• A statement of any individual accommodations that
  are needed in order for the student to
  participate in statewide or districtwide
  assessments of student achievement
• 2. IF the ARDC determines that a student is not
  going to participate in a statewide or
  districtwide assessment, the IEP must specify
• Why the assessment is inappropriate, and
• How the student will be assessed

153
Statewide and Districtwide Assessment

• Statewide Assessments
• TAKS
• TAKS/Spanish TAKS (without accommodations)
• TAKS/Spanish TAKS (with accommodations)
• SDAA II
• SDAA II (without accommodations)
• SDAA II (with accommodations)
• LDAA
• LDAA TEKS-based
• LDAA Functional
• RPTE
• Texas Observation Protocols (TOP)
• Early Reading Assessment (TPRI/Tejas Lee)

154
Statewide and Districtwide Assessment

• District Assessments
• TO BE DETERMINED BY DISTRICT
• Other norm/criterion referenced assessments
• District developed/administered assessments
• Process followed by ARDC will be similar to
  process followed for statewide assessments

155
What decisions?
Statewide and Districtwide Assessment

• Which assessment?
• Which version?
• Which level?
• Instructional
• Achievement
• What accommodations?

156
A Tool
157
Statewide and Districtwide Assessment

• Instructional decisions should always inform and
  guide assessment decisions.

158
Statewide and Districtwide Assessment
Determining which State Assessment to
Administer
159
(No Transcript)
160
Monitoring the Inclusive Classroom

• Five types of co-teaching (Friend, Reising, and
  Cook, 1993)
• Lead and Support
• Station Teaching
• Parallel Teaching
• Alternative Teaching
• Team Teaching

Who needs to know the curriculum content?
161
Professional Development

• Planning
• TEKS
• Assessment
• Evaluation

162
Planning Time

• A focus on the curriculum
• Assigned tasks demonstrating that teachers are
  sharing materials and resources
• Common assessments being developed
• Discussion of student work around a priority
  objective

163
Making use of Teacher Leader TeamsWho is on your
staff?
164
Assumptions About Change

• People have to see a need to change
• People need a path to follow (need to be able to
  see what needs to be different)
• People need support during the change process
• People need time to implement change
• Change is difficult to implement
• People learn from hearing from others who
  struggle with the same issues

165

• Contact Information
• ervin.knezek_at_esc13.txed.net