Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Marzano’s Classroom Instruction That Works: A Formula for Effective Educator Evaluation -Foundation for Power Walk Through Facilitation




Marzano’s Classroom Instruction That Works:
A Formula for Effective Educator Evaluation -Foundation for Power Walk Through Facilitation

Patrick Crowthers
Fall 2012
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development
Dr. Jay Dugan
Rowan University
Educational Specialist Degree in School Psychology

The New Jersey Department of Education has determined Dr. Robert Marzano's Causal 

Teacher Evaluation Model to meet the requirements of a research-based teacher practice 

evaluation system and to be eligible for the state's $1.16 million teacher evaluation pilot grant. 

Learning Sciences International, partner of Dr. Marzano, is the model's  provider.  This model is 

slowly being integrated and developed into various school districts throughout the state. The 

Marzano Model has already been used as the evaluation criteria of administrators and teachers in 

other states like FLORIDA and DELAWARE for instance.  There are nine identified strategies 

that will help to accomplish student achievement and organization in the classroom  based on 

Marzano’s Model of Teacher Evaluation; therefore every teacher would find them helpful when 

planning lessons. The criteria that is observed in the evaluation includes: identifying similarities & 

differences, summarizing & note taking, reinforcing and providing recognition,  homework & 

practice, nonlinguistic representations, cooperative learning groups, creating objectives/goals & 

providing feedback, generating and testing hypothesis (Educational Guesses), and finally the use of 

cues, questions, and organizers to supplement and maximize the students’ learning experience.

The Purpose of the Marzano Model of Teacher Evaluation is intended to to help define best practices in 

instruction for educators and in order for students to become successful and achieve. Furthermore,

is meant to provide educational professions with empirically sound data of effective instructional 

practices in order to maximize student success and achievement in the classroom environment. 

Additionally, it was designed for student success and the teacher is seen as the active participant and 

 facilitator of the learning environment; leading to a student centered evaluation of the instructional 

environment on behalf of the evaluators.  The evaluation model was created so that educational 

administration and supervisors would be able to complete a series of observation & assessments

 during an educator’s instructional period to gain insight into the students’ learning as well as the

effectiveness of the teacher's instructional practices.  The planned and systematic walkthroughs with 

administration/evaluators doing observations is a means to having a productive and effective assessment 

of the teacher's professional duties, along with a conversation with the teacher about their educational 

instructional practices for student success on multiple occasions in order to provide sound instructional

practices and alleviate areas that are deficient.  Furthermore, the walkthroughs are intended to help 

administrators/evaluators as well as educators/evaluatees develop best practices for instruction in the 

following academic subjects in schools on behalf of the students. They include: Math, Science, 

Language Arts, Social Studies, World Languages,  & PE/Music/Art specials.  

   There are specific instructional issues related to conducting observations based on the Marzano Model 

of Teacher Evaluation for student achievement. They include: classroom environment strategies, 

primary instructional strategies, secondary instructional strategies, as well as connections and links to 

Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning.   Along those lines, educators are evaluated using the model based on 

their professional duties and instructional practices including. The following are list of criteria that 

the Marzano Model takes into consideration in its evaluation of teacher effectiveness. Specifically,

does the educator have evidence of the following during their assigned assessment and

observation that includes: effective and appropriate communication with other school staff, parents, and 

students.  The teachers also are evaluated on their ability to provide sound reinforcement for students 

while providing recognition and praise. Educators are also assessed to be competent in their efforts to 

be able to successfully incorporating cooperative learning and effective positive peer relations in their 

lessons with students.  Using Marzano’s Model allows evaluation of the educator’s ability to 

incorporate the following into their lessons as well as creating a learning environment to achieve 

student success. The criteria for achieving successful instructional practice on behalf of educators 

for students includes the following for classroom teachers: communicates specific learning 

objectives and goals that you want the student to work toward, be accurate when teaching content; but 

not inflexible or open to student ideas, be able to successfully connect to prior experience or access 

students’ prior knowledge; schema, and finally be able to appropriately encourage and engage students 

in creating in establishing and implementing their goals for both the classroom as well as throughout the 

entire school setting.  

When providing effect feedback and evaluations to students based on their performance, 

proponents of the Marzano Model suggest that teachers use the following approaches when working 

with students: provide students with specific and elaborate feedback that is constructive and intended to 

focus on what the student did well(praise) and their effort vs. what they did wrong; also teachers can 

provide a framework of how the student can move on from here by establishing positive and attainable 

goals. Second, when assessing students and their work or effort, provide consistent and timely 

feedback; waiting to long will not provide the same effective reinforcement. Next, give students rubrics 

along with the assignments in order for them to be able to do well and have a complete understanding 

of what it is they are supposed to do in order to achieve high marks;  this way students can monitor their 

own understanding of what is needed to be successful on a project.  Finally, always allow students to 

engage in and develop reflective and analytical practices in terms of feedback and evaluation. Teachers 

can facilitate this for students in the following means:  individual editing or using a peer/buddy.  

   The Marzano Model, in its quest to provide the highest level of quality educators to teach  

students, addresses the need for educators to be able to do the following: show students that the effort is 

just as important in problem solving or completing their academic work as is the outcome or answer; 

the idea that teachers need to praise the effort and not the final answer at times.  It also calls for 

educators to be able to encourage students to develop a love of learning and find out what their 

strengths and weaknesses may be in the classroom; along with the  idea of developing classroom 

conversations with students to set goals and objectives of how to succeed and achieve their goals. The

 evaluation model by Marzano also considers if teachers are actively taking every opportunity to 

engage students in positive interactions and experiences during instructional periods in the classroom 

environment. Indicators to look for based on this model of teacher evaluation by Marzano can include

the following:  educators taking every opportunity they can to teach the students the relationship 

between effort and achievement in order to be successful and how it effects their attitude toward 

education as mentioned above. Next, encouraging and supporting students with explicit guidance of 

how to meet their educational goals and how they can attain those goals in the classroom setting and in 

the school. Finally, educators need to allow for opportunities for students to track their effort and 

achievement once they set their educational goals ex. charting their progress so that students can easily 

refer to what they are working for and keep their focus.

Based on the Marzano Model of Effective Educator Evaluation there are specific 

indicators associated with recognition and praise of students that administrators and evaluators 

will look for to promote student achievement and success in the classroom on behalf of the 

teacher. They include: teachers be able to provide opportunities for each student to develop, 

implement, and work towards a set of mastery goals that could reflect academic, social, or 

emotional growth depending on the particular student and situation. Second, educators taking the time 

to develop, implement, and b recognize student successes when a student meets and or 

exceeds expectations, performances, and behaviors. Teachers are encouraged to develop a

system to track and monitor progress along with a means for students to self-monitor their own 

behavior by creating positive behavior supports that may connect to the entire school or other 

teachers systems. This can be accomplished by using concrete and specific means to 

track their behavior ex. behavior plan - group or individual along with tangible and appropriate

reward.  Furthermore, teachers can help students to engage in cooperative to enhance their learning by: 

provide small attentive groups that promote learning in a student centered environment. They can also 

use and have the students become familiar with the PIE Acronym in order to promote cooperative 

learning in student achievement in the classroom environment. This stands for -

ositive Interdependence

I ndividual Accountability

E qual roles/work load

Under the Marzano Model of Teacher Evaluation, evaluators/administrators look 

to see that teachers design and implement cooperative learning groups for student success should 

also include:  a variety of data and criteria to thoughtfully plan and group students in cooperative 

groups,  institute best practices that shows that students can learn best when they are working 

with mixed ability groups, and establish cooperative partnerships that include high achieving and low 

achieving students.  This also includes groups including general education students along with ESL and 

special education to be included in the group; Marzano’s Model of Teacher Evaluation cites that all 

students can maximize their learning experience in mixed ability grouping.  Finally, evaluators 

and administrators using Marzano’s Model, will look to see that teachers are frequently and 

appropriately using cooperative learning, peer work, and mixed ability groups throughout all 

academics in the classroom to make it a classroom wide event that takes place daily.

Benefits of the Marzano Evaluation Model of evaluation can include how it is used to identify the 

direct cause-and-effect relationship between teaching practices and student achievement.  It also

supports and guides teachers and leaders to make informed decisions to yield the greatest benefits 

for their students.  The research and data are empirically sound; based on 40 years of collected 

research and five years of real-classroom experimental/control studies.  Along those lines, 

it has been tested for inter-rater reliability and offers intensive training for accuracy and 

fairness.  Finally, the last benefit of the model is that it makes steady, measurable increases in 

student achievement an achievable goal. Concerns associated with the Marazano Model of 

Teacher Evaluation includes how it addresses and focuses on teacher behaviors, rather than descriptions 

of professional practice to be evaluated.  Furthermore, any system of evaluation, such as the 

Marzano Model of teacher evaluation that penalizes teachers for failing to use a specific strategy 

is troubled because research and studies have been done to establish links between elements of 

the Marzano Model (that is, ones effecting particular teaching practices) and student learning 

outcomes. With that being said, it is not true that the model itself has been proven to cause or effect

student learning in a positive or negative context.

References:

      • Haystead, M. W., & Marzano, R. J. (2010a) Final report: A second year evaluation study of Promethean ActivClassroom. Englewood, CO: Marzano Research Laboratory marzanoresearch.com.

      • Haystead, M. W., & Marzano, R. J. (2010b). Meta-analytic synthesis of studies conducted at Marzano Research Laboratory on instructional strategies. Englewood, CO: Marzano Research Laboratory (marzanoresearch.com). 
      • Marzano, R. J., Frontier, T., & Livingston, D. (2011). Effective supervision: Supporting the art and science of teaching. Alexandria VA: ASCD. 

PARCC Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers




Monica Moore-Cook
PARCC, Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, is a partnership of 23 states including the Virgin Islands, to work together to create a common set of assessments in English and Math. The PARCC K-12 assessment system will be aligned to the college- and career-ready, Common Core State Standards, and is being designed to challenge students, help identify when they are not meeting the standards, and provide targeted instruction, supports and interventions to help them succeed. The emphasis of this computer-based test will be on formative, or benchmark assessments to monitor students’ progress toward college/career readiness.  PARCC’s vision is to “build a pathway to college and career readiness for all students; create high-quality assessments that measure the full range of the Common  Core State Standards; support educators in the classroom, make better use of technology in assessments; and advance accountability at all levels.”
This initiative began with the launch and design phase in the 2010-2011 school.  Last school year, 2011-2012 began the development.  For the next two school years they will be conducting a pilot/field testing and related research and data collection.  Lastly, during the 2014-2015 school year the administration of the PARCC will be completely initiated.  The design of the assessment will consist of the following summative and non-summative assessments: diagnostic (early indicator of where the student is), mid-year (comprised of performance-based items and tasks), performance based assessment (administered near the end of the school year) and end of the year assessment (innovative, computer-based items).   
What does this assessment mean for students and educators?  Students who score proficient on the assessments will know they are on track for the next steps in their education. In high school, results will provide an early signal about whether students are ready for entry-level, non-remedial courses at higher education institutions in all 24 PARCC states.  Students who are identified as not being on track, or who do not meet the college readiness score, will receive targeted supports and interventions.  Higher education partners in PARCC have committed to help develop the high school assessments and set the college-ready cut score that will be used to place incoming freshman in credit-bearing college courses. 
Assessing students’ knowledge to use as a bases of  improving instruction so that students are ultimately ready for college and careers is a positive initiative.  Even still there are many negatives.  The following is a table of a few pros and cons. 
Pros
Cons

Technical Advantages: 
Educators, parents and students will be provided with data throughout the year to guide instruction, improve students learning and track progress through this computer-based test.
Reduce paperwork, shipping/receiving & storage

Technical Challenges:
Addressing the technology gaps for the implementation, administration and scoring of these next generation assessments.


Implementation Advantages:
This will be a common assessment across the US that will coincide with the common core standards. 
Promote rigor in all areas of Mathematics and English Language Arts/Literacy
Increase college and career readiness

Implementation Challenges:
Make sure districts are ready to transition to these new assessments by 2014-2015- budget
More Assessment = funding and time

Policy Advantages:
Help ensure the new common core standards reach every classroom through measures of growth

Policy Challenges:
States/Districts will need to review their policies and make adjustments.


Although there are some real concerns about this new assessment, this partnership of states has committed to working together to overcome the challenges. They have strategically planned a collaborative effort to develop a set of high-quality instructional tools to help the education community transition to the next generation assessment system as well as tools to support the new assessment system. 

EE4NJ

Evaluation reform is one of the many issues facing teachers today. In the state of New Jersey that reform comes in the form of Excellent Educators for New Jersey (EE4NJ). This is a comprehensive teacher and principal evaluation system reform that began with a pilot program in the 2011-2012 school year. The goal of this new program is to provide meaningful data based feedback to teachers and school leaders to help them in their on-going effort to in increase student achievement. Feedback from the districts involved in the pilot program are aiding in this endeavor. The change stems from legislation that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and his administration enacted to bring more accountability to teacher performance. Based on the information from the state Department of Education’s website, the priorities of the new evaluation system is to establish a “universal evaluation system that is based on common language and clear expectations, provide teachers with timely, actionable, and data-driven feedback that will support their growth”. The end game is to use these, as well as other, measures of performance data to eventually inform personnel decisions including tenure and compensation levels. Under the new evaluation system teachers’ areas in need of improvement will be determined on an individual basis, that information will in turn be used to guide individual professional development plans. The principal or supervisor will use the evaluation results in collaboration with the teacher to create this plan Some other requirements of the EE4NJ plan require that all districts form a district evaluation advisory committee, a school improvement panel, and adopt educator evaluation rubrics that include state-approved teacher and principal practice evaluation instruments (these must be research based and evidence supported). There is a list of approved evaluation instruments on the NJ Department of Education’s website. In an article written for NJ Spotlight John Mooney writes that state officials have received a range of reactions and mixed emotions from the educational community regarding the new process. “We’ve been talking about this for more than a year, but it's now becoming real to people,” said Debra Bradley, director of government relations for the principals group. Mooney also points out that “under new tenure reform legislation signed in August, a teacher’s tenure protections will hinge on how they fare in the evaluation” so despite the mixed feelings there is a commitment by the districts to be well prepared. New Jersey Education Association put out a news release where problems of the new program were discussed. Since the new system requires that up to 45 percent of a teacher’s evaluation be based on “measures of student achievement” improvements in being able to measure this area is critical. For standardized tests the state is currently piloting a growth model of student achievement, however there is no way to link a student to a particular teacher. Without being able to tie student achievement to a specific teacher, it will be difficult to include this as measure of teacher effectiveness. Another area of concern highlighted in this news release regards development of assessments for students in grades and subjects where standardized tests do not exist. The NJDOE reports that “teachers and administrators are not properly trained to design rigorous and high-quality assessments”. They plan to explore ways to support districts in the development of these assessments. Despite your stance on the issue the process is changing, and fast. The state is requiring full implementation for all districts beginning in the 2013-2014 school year (an extension was granted to ensure enough time is given to effectively implement new evaluation for teachers). There is much that needs to be done and very little time left before the process rolls out completely. The time has come for administrators and teachers across the state to get on board, or they’ll get left behind. For complete details and information regarding EE4NJ visit the website http://www.state.nj.us.

PARCC- The Good and The Bad



The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) is a 23-state consortium working together to develop next-generation K-12 assessments in English and Mathematics. The 23 member states of PARCC collectively educate about 25 million public K-12 students in the United States. This assessment is to align with the Common Core State Standards that are being adopted by the majority of states in the U.S. with the goal of building pathways to college and career readiness for all students. As with every change, especially in the education field, there are pros and cons. Below is an overview of the pros and cons of the recently formed PARCC.
Pros
o   Students will know if they are on track to graduate ready for college and careers
o   Includes items across different levels of cognitive functioning
o   Teachers will have regular results available to guide learning and instruction
o   Provides the opportunity for participating states to come together and collectively move the field forward and break new ground in assessment design
o   Parents will have clear and timely information about the progress of their children
o   Has the ability to assess and measure higher-order skills such as critical thinking, communications, and problem solving
o   It is a summative AND formative assessment
o   Can be used as online digital libraries for sharing of instructional resources, professional development modules, student support materials, identification of effective practices, etc.
o   States will be able to have valid results that are comparable across the member states consider that 44% of students change schools at least once between kindergarten and the end of third grade
o   The nation’s education will be based on college- and career-ready, internationally benchmarked Common Core State Standards
o   Better prepare students going to college in English and Math considering one-third of freshmen must take and pay for remedial courses in math and/or English at two- and four-year colleges before they can even begin their chosen course of study
o   Can highlight where gaps may exist and how they can be addressed well before students enter college or the workforce
Cons
o   Fear of educators “teaching to the test”
o   Emphasis on informative texts in the Language Arts section and not enough emphasis on creative writing and literature
o   Public perception of just another “standardized test”
o   Financing- The two coalitions designing the tests won grants from the federal government to pay for the beginning of the process, but this funding won’t cover ongoing expenses related to the tests, like paying people to score answer sheets and the cost of new computers and expanded bandwidth
o   Use of individual student growth in determinations of teacher and principal effectiveness
o   Difficulty in a standardized test to truly reveal students’ knowledge, skills, AND understanding
o   Although there are included tests items across different levels of cognitive functioning, there is no reference to the assessment of students receiving Special Education services
o   The more complex, non-multiple choice questions will likely require a trained evaluator to score them
o   Difficulty in representing the full range of knowledge, skills and understanding encompassed in test objectives
While this is not an exhaustive list of all the possible pros and cons of PARCC, it provides a clear view of both sides of the story. It is evident one of the dominating, positive features of PARCC is that it aims to encompass a unitary assessment for all member states in order to provide comparable results on student achievement and college and career readiness. With over 40 states adopting the Common Core State Standards, it is imperative that a unitary, research-based assessment paradigm is in place to evaluate these standards as related to students’ college and career readiness. However, there is always a debate over the effectiveness and credibility of a “standardized test” to truly measure all areas of students’ ability. Only time will tell if PARCC will be an adequate and appropriate measure of these abilities after its official, planned implementation in the 2014-2015 school year.

Resources and more information:

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Common Core Standards -Kacey Burke


Educational standards set goals for student learning within the classroom to ensure students attain the skills and knowledge in the classroom to be successful in life and in future educational endeavors. Educational standards indicate when students in the education system are to learn certain subject matter. These standards do not tell teachers how to teach but rather provide the proverbial scaffolding while the teachers design the lesson plans that complete the scheme and delivery of the information to the children in the class.
In the current climate, each state individually develops its own educational standards that are to be taught to students. This lack of uniformity across states means that, in one state, children might learn algebra in grade 8, but in another state, children might learn algebra in grade 7. The Common Core State Standards were developed by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to be implemented in the United States by all states to ensure that student learning is guided by the same standards. According to the NGA Center and CCSSO, the adoption of the Common Core Standards by the states also will safeguard America’s competitive edge by students’ ability to compete not only with their peers, but also with students from around the world. The Common Core Standards according to the CCSSO and NGA Center are clear and succinct, aligned with college and work expectations, pertinent in the global economy, and evidence-based,
When developing the Common Core Standards, the CCSSO and NGA Center consulted with parents, teachers, experts, and administrators. In addition, three groups were set up to keep the development process of the standards open. These groups included the standards development work group, which was the group responsible for writing the proposed common core standards; the feedback group, which provided research-based information as well as expert input on draft document;, and the validation committee, which consists of 12 governors and chiefs nominated by the states, which will review the Common Cores Standards to be sure that they meet the development criteria.
            Currently, Common Core Standards only exist for mathematics and English-language arts. According to the CCSSO and NGA Center, the reason is math and English-language arts are skills that other subjects build upon, and they are the subjects that are most repeatedly assessed for accountability purposes. The CCSSO and NGA Center are not currently looking to develop Common Core Standards for any other subjects and are instead focusing on getting the standards for math and English-language arts implemented in the states. At the present, 45 of the 50 states have formally adopted the Common Core Standards, as have three territories: the Virgin Islands, District of Columbia, and Northern Mariana Islands.
            Those against the implementation of the Common Core Standards see them as vague and broad. They do not like how there will be an increased value on test scores, or that there are no modifications for students with disabilities. They also complain about how students will be expected to learn at a quicker rate. Supporters of the Common Core Standards praise the consistence that they will bring to education across the country. They also commend how the standards will allow assessments to cover many skills and how they will be able to compare scores more accurately, as well as to better allow schools to monitor student’s progress from year to year. They also like how they will help prepare students for higher education and/or careers. 

Monday, November 5, 2012

School Choice and Vouchers


The school choice program allows students and parents to have the option for the student to attend a school outside of their district of residence. Parents now have the choice to send their child to a student outside of the area in which they live and pay their taxes. The program allows flexibility for families to best meet the needs of their children by sending them to another public school, private school, or a charter school.  This gives parents the opportunity to find a school and education program that best fits the educational needs of their child.    
In New Jersey, The Interdistrict Public School Choice Program Act of 2010 was passed by Governor Chris Christie.  There are 107 school districts in New Jersey approved as choice districts for the 2013-2014 school year.  District participation is optional and would be up to the school districts board of education to participate.  Each choice school has a set number of openings per grade level.  If more students are requesting admittance to the school then there are openings, students will be chosen by a lottery.  Any student in New Jersey may participate in the school choice program.  There is an application process for students choosing to participate in the school choice program.  Several steps have to be completed for a student to attend a choice school outside of their district.  More information can be obtained from www.state.nj.us/education/choice/.  The Interdistrict Public School Choice Program Act of 2010 can be viewed at www.state.nj.us/education/choice/law.htm
In the voucher system, the parents are given money from the government that would have gone to their home district school.  They are given a certificate which gets placed in an educational savings account for the student.  Parents have the option of using the funds towards the tuition and costs of attendance to a private school of choice.

Arguments in favor of school choice:
-Parents can decide which school best serves the needs of their child.  Parents have the option of sending their child to a school district that could accommodate their child’s needs better than their home district.  
-Children living in under advantaged/low income school districts have access to high-performing school districts.  Students from impoverished areas get the same education as middle class areas where the districts may have better educational offerings for students.
-Schools compete for students and must be more responsive to parents and students, leading schools to improve their curriculums and programs to increase student performance.  This creates competition amongst school districts, leading schools to produce the best outcomes for students.  

Arguments against school choice:
-Shifting of funds from one school to another does not address the problems of the poorly performing schools.  The education of the other students attending the home district are still effected by the problems of the poor performance of the home school district.  
-School vouchers take money from the public schools for students that choose to attend private schools.  Schools are already underfunded and will loose more funds when students go outside of their home district.  
-The voucher lottery is a terrible way to determine access to an education.  All students show receive the same level of education.
-According to the NEA, the National Education Association, a pure voucher system would only encourage economic, racial, ethnic and religious stratification in our society
There are valid arguments in favor of school choice and against school choice.  Both sides provide insight into the school choice program.  The student’s educational needs must be taken into consideration as the top priority and families need to make the best decision for their child’s needs.  Each child has an individual needs and circumstances.