Redistricting vs. Realignment Reflection and Response Start with - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

redistricting vs realignment
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Redistricting vs. Realignment Reflection and Response Start with - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Redistricting vs. Realignment Reflection and Response Start with WHY? Every member of the school community should have an equal opportunity to learn and grow, and all should have the same opportunities to meet with success. Begin with


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Redistricting vs. Realignment

Reflection and Response

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Start with “WHY?”

Every member of the school community should have an equal opportunity to learn and grow, and all should have the same opportunities to meet with success.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Begin with the End in Mind!

Equitable and balanced classrooms across the district’s schools ensuring students and teachers learn and grow to improve our district as a whole.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Visible Learning There are thousands of studies promulgating claims that this method works or that innovation

  • works. We have a rich educational research

base, but rarely is it used by teachers, and rarely does it lead to policy changes that affect the nature of teaching (Hattie, 2009)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Significance vs. Effect Size

Significance is the risk associated with not being 100% confident that what you observe in an experiment is due to the treatment or what was being tested. Effect Size is a measure of how different two groups are from one another

  • - it’s the measure of

the magnitude of the treatment… Kind of like how big is big.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Trust but Verify It’s better to have data about a program’s effects presented as an effect size, which helps us decide whether the program’s effect is potentially large enough to be worth pursuing in terms of time, money, and personnel costs (Berliner & Glass, 2015).

slide-7
SLIDE 7

School Size

d = 0.43 medium effect

Small around d = 0.2 Medium around d = 0.4 Large around d = 0.6

  • Stekelenburg (1991)
  • Ready, Lee, & Welner

(2004) and Lee & Smith (1997)

  • Howley & Bickel (1999)

and Lee & Smith (1997)

  • Newman et al. (2006)
  • Byrk, Easton, Kerbow,

Rollow, & Sebring (1993)

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Class Size

d = 0.21 small effect

Small around d = 0.2 Medium around d = 0.4 Large around d = 0.6

  • Hattie (2009)
  • Finn (2002)
  • Hattie (2009)
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Socioeconomic Status

d = 0.57 large effect

Small around d = 0.2 Medium around d = 0.4 Large around d = 0.6

  • Sirin (2005)
  • Hart & Risley (1995)
  • Clinton, Hattie, & Dixon

(2007)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Parent Involvement

d = 0.51 medium/large effect

Small around d = 0.2 Medium around d = 0.4 Large around d = 0.6

  • Hattie (2009)
  • Hung & Ho (2005)
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Multi-grade/multi-age

Two sides of a coin! d = 0.04 small/almost no effect d = 0.53 medium/large effect

  • Hattie (2009)
  • Trussell-Cullen (1994)
  • Wilkinson & Fung

(2002)

  • Berndt (2004)
slide-12
SLIDE 12

School Leaders (2 types)

Instructional leadership refers to those leaders who have their major focus on creating a learning climate free of disruption, a system

  • f clear teaching objectives,

and high expectations for teachers and students. Transformational leadership refers to those leaders who engage with their teaching staff in ways that inspire them to new levels of energy, commitment, and moral purpose such that they work collaboratively to overcome challenges and reach goals.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

School Leaders

d = 0.36 medium effect

Small around d = 0.2 Medium around d = 0.4 Large around d = 0.6

According to Brown (2001) Transformational, d = 0.36 Instructional, d = 0.66 at elementary, d = 0.76 greatest effect, d = 0.91

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Conclusion

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Philosophical Approach

Pragmatic Approach - Do what works Existential Approach - Do whatever you want Utilitarian Approach - Do the greatest good What is the greatest good for the greatest number of people?