9. Instructional Management
a. Demonstrate an understanding of research of learning and instructional strategies
b. Describe and apply research and best practice in integrating curriculum and resources to all learners c. Demonstrate the ability to utilize data for instructional decision-making d. Demonstrate the ability to design appropriate assessment strategies for measuring learner outcomes e. Demonstrate the ability to implement alternative instructional designs, curriculum, behavior management and assessment accommodations and modifications f. Demonstrate the ability to appropriately use technology to support instruction |
Instructional management is a cornerstone of principal leadership. Through my experiences in instructional management, I now believe that any vision for continuous improvement in the area of instruction needs to initially be based on data and root cause analysis leading to the development of action steps for change.
Assessments help drive our instruction. This year, the other reading specialist in our district and myself have pushed for change in the area of reading assessments at our elementary school. First, we had major concerns related to the consistency of our reading benchmark assessment. After presenting evidence supporting our position, we researched alternatives and lead the literacy team to decide to transition to the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System. This summer, we determined how the assessment will be rolled out and where, when, and how teachers will be trained (Artifact 1). We also spearheaded the decision for our school to transition from the NWEA MAPS & AIMSWeb assessments to FAST next year. The FAST assessment has shorter duration normed, growth assessments (to replace NWEA) and a progress monitoring component (to replace AIMSWeb). A key characteristic is the expanded early literacy assessments that can be used by both intervention and classroom teachers. Consistency is key to being able to compare data. This change will allow us to make better instructional decisions for our students and be aligned in our assessment conversations.
I have also been able to work with data and instructional programming for our English Language Learners. This spring, I was able to work with our new EL teacher in studying EL procedures and student data. First, too many EL students are still receiving services into middle and high school, having been in programming from early elementary school. This tells us that our program needs to be more strategic in its interventions, targeting the issues that students are having with shorter, more precise intervention activities. We also have a higher than average number of EL students who have been identified as needing special education services. Based on the data, plans were made for clustering and instructional services for next year (Artifact 2). This lead to my work with the student placement committee, the group that determines placement procedures that teachers follow to form class groups for the following year. Results from this meeting lead to the EL teacher and I meeting with each grade level and sharing the new rationale, grouping suggestions, and instructional focus for specific EL students for 2015-2016. To follow up these changes, we also plan to offer some specific professional development related to this topic early next year.
I have also had experience in strengthening teachers’ instructional strategies throughout our district. In my role as Q Comp coordinator, I am tasked with facilitating our plan requirement that states that teachers must implement new instructional strategies every year. This year, we focused on learning targets and student engagement. Learning targets are now the norm in every classroom in the district. Teachers state the learning target of the lesson and have become much more purposeful about student involved formative assessments related to their learning targets. In many classrooms the pairing of learning target and exit slip has had favorable learning results. In the area of student engagement, I compiled three newsletters (Artifact 3) with information and ideas for teachers to choose from for our Q Comp requirement. Some of these options included the technology components of using Plickers for student voting and Socrative for older kids, turning their phones into clickers. I trained our observers in what to look for in observing for engagement, and our PLC leaders in how to help teachers pair the right engagement strategy with the needs of the students in their content area and grade level.
Instructional leadership impacts student success. In the best scenario, it grows teachers’ competencies, aids in the evolution of best practices, and creates a vision by creating process, order, and consistency where they are lacking. Ultimately, it supports all learners, meeting them where they are and taking them as far as they can achieve. Instructional leadership must be done well in order to give our students the education that they deserve.
Assessments help drive our instruction. This year, the other reading specialist in our district and myself have pushed for change in the area of reading assessments at our elementary school. First, we had major concerns related to the consistency of our reading benchmark assessment. After presenting evidence supporting our position, we researched alternatives and lead the literacy team to decide to transition to the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System. This summer, we determined how the assessment will be rolled out and where, when, and how teachers will be trained (Artifact 1). We also spearheaded the decision for our school to transition from the NWEA MAPS & AIMSWeb assessments to FAST next year. The FAST assessment has shorter duration normed, growth assessments (to replace NWEA) and a progress monitoring component (to replace AIMSWeb). A key characteristic is the expanded early literacy assessments that can be used by both intervention and classroom teachers. Consistency is key to being able to compare data. This change will allow us to make better instructional decisions for our students and be aligned in our assessment conversations.
I have also been able to work with data and instructional programming for our English Language Learners. This spring, I was able to work with our new EL teacher in studying EL procedures and student data. First, too many EL students are still receiving services into middle and high school, having been in programming from early elementary school. This tells us that our program needs to be more strategic in its interventions, targeting the issues that students are having with shorter, more precise intervention activities. We also have a higher than average number of EL students who have been identified as needing special education services. Based on the data, plans were made for clustering and instructional services for next year (Artifact 2). This lead to my work with the student placement committee, the group that determines placement procedures that teachers follow to form class groups for the following year. Results from this meeting lead to the EL teacher and I meeting with each grade level and sharing the new rationale, grouping suggestions, and instructional focus for specific EL students for 2015-2016. To follow up these changes, we also plan to offer some specific professional development related to this topic early next year.
I have also had experience in strengthening teachers’ instructional strategies throughout our district. In my role as Q Comp coordinator, I am tasked with facilitating our plan requirement that states that teachers must implement new instructional strategies every year. This year, we focused on learning targets and student engagement. Learning targets are now the norm in every classroom in the district. Teachers state the learning target of the lesson and have become much more purposeful about student involved formative assessments related to their learning targets. In many classrooms the pairing of learning target and exit slip has had favorable learning results. In the area of student engagement, I compiled three newsletters (Artifact 3) with information and ideas for teachers to choose from for our Q Comp requirement. Some of these options included the technology components of using Plickers for student voting and Socrative for older kids, turning their phones into clickers. I trained our observers in what to look for in observing for engagement, and our PLC leaders in how to help teachers pair the right engagement strategy with the needs of the students in their content area and grade level.
Instructional leadership impacts student success. In the best scenario, it grows teachers’ competencies, aids in the evolution of best practices, and creates a vision by creating process, order, and consistency where they are lacking. Ultimately, it supports all learners, meeting them where they are and taking them as far as they can achieve. Instructional leadership must be done well in order to give our students the education that they deserve.