Looking Under the Hood of Competency Based Education 11 7 16 Webinar

afternoon everyone my name is Wendy thermos senior researcher at American institutes for research and we are so pleased to have for today’s webinar looking under the hood of competency-based education this is a nice chance for all of us to take an hour away from the election madness and and talk about a topic that I know is of interest to a great many of you here today I am so fortunate to be joined today by several members of our research team from our study Jill Walton who was the principal investigator for the study Catherine bitter who was the project director for phase one of the study Christina’s i sir our lead methodologist Lauren climber our research associate and we have some other a ir staff members who are helping to organize today’s event Deirdre Tomlinson who is our tech guru and corals in our communication specialist i also want to acknowledge the Nellie Mae education foundation who funded this study and I know that Goldberg will be joining us today she’s the director of research we have other staff members from Nellie May who are also be joining us this study was conducted in three different states and we are so fortunate today to have two of our state partners Paul leather Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Education in New Hampshire apologize and say a quick hello hello everyone and ryan prone director for the investigators learning for everybody right welcome Ryan and tall and just a reminder to all presenters make sure both your computer and your phones are muted when you’re not presenting that will be helpful to everyone for audio so just a quick overview of today’s our will be spending about a half an hour talking briefly about competency-based education and highlighting some of the findings and also our process are for conducting our study and then we are going to be hearing from Paul leather and Ryan prone to share some reflections on the study what words of surprises are confirmations or what are the implications for the findings from this study for the work that they’re engaged in in their various states will have a short time and this is only an hour but we will have a short time at the end for folks either pose questions or to write in questions in the chat box so a few little housekeeping is today’s webinar will be 60 minutes will be ending at three o’clock eastern time and it is being recorded we will be posting a copy of this recording on the deeper learning website and we’ll also be sending out to anyone who’s registered for today’s event for golden will be putting the website link in the chat box so that you can all access that I imagine that the recording will be up within a day or two we also have provided for you a copy of today’s powerpoint and a copy of the study of competency-based education looking under the hood of competency-based education over to the right under the downloadable files it’s a pod over to the right of your slides then we have about 60 members or participants who are here to join us today so you can chat with one another through the group chat or if you’d like to pose a question to one of our presenters or guest speakers please use the Q&A function up at the top right of your screen if you’re experiencing any tech issues please also note those in the Q&A section and the drawer Cora will assist to and resolving any of your texts tech issues so we’re going to start with a pole and I’m hoping dinner you can just bring the pulse we can find out who’s here today everyone can take a moment and indicate what kind of role you play in the field and then just how much experience you already have about contact with competency-based education how much you already know I can see we have our research heavy audience here today that’s fantastic and also a lot of folks with a great deal of expertise i would just take a few more minutes for everyone to respond to the to poll questions great all right get her lips and the pole it looks like a many of our Christmas here today come from the research world and have either some knowledge are quite a bit of knowledge about competency-based dead so we can move quickly through our first few slides so it seems that everyone here is pretty familiar with the term competency-based dead which is founded on a pretty simple idea that children and user are it’s better for us to measure their learning through their demonstrated competency than just simply through a time-based system where credit is awarded based on how long a student has been participating in a classroom or completing assignments now I’m a call-in CCSSO have done a recent scan and it 42 states across the u.s. are in some days of either planning piloting are implementing CBE this is a very rapidly growing trend but despite its popularity and it’s a growing interest in this area there’s actually a relatively little rigorous research that looked at the effects of CP on students and there’s also not a lot of consensus in terms of what we mean by the term CBE so one of the first questions that there are research team tried to address was what do we mean by CB what does it look like in the classroom we started out approaching this question by looking at the kinds of definitions that many of the folks on the call have been involved in developing we have partners at CCSSO and I make all who have developed definitions of what they mean by CBE many of the states around the country that have been engaged in CB work have opposed their own definitions we also went out and spoke to school leaders from schools that identified as CB schools to find out what were the key features they associated with a CBE approach now number-one recognition of learning of what I just mentioned sort of one of the more common features of TBE that students are received credit based on their demonstrated learning rather than their seat time and often folks associate CB with having flexible pacing but we also uncovered as part of our search on the done exploring the meaning of CBE with several other features and we came up with these six features that you can see on your screen here so one of the key areas was learning targets that they’re clear and explicit to students that students really understand what’s expected of them many of the folks that we spoke to and that we saw in our scan of definitions of CD talked about how to be is associated with a personalized learning approach for each student is given personalized support to be able to support that learning assessment and I know Paul has a lot to say on this topic and one of the key things we discovered in about TBE was more flexibility and choice about when and how they show learning and I know Paul has a lot to say about what what kind of learning tasks and demonstrations of learning are associated with a CD approach and then lastly other many folks in the CB world who believe that if it’s about learning that it shouldn’t matter where and when that learning takes place so expanded opportunities for students to learn outside of this of the school schedule and school building and opportunity to earn credit for those kinds of experiences a second key question our research team had to tackle before we could get and with our study was to think about what’s the theory how is it that we think that see me benefit students and i’m assuming that most of us on the call today would argue that CD is something positive it’s a way that students can gain greater academic competency but we needed to sort of uncover the black box of what we mean by CB and how we believe it contribute to Student Success so as you can see on the screen our theory was that when a school embraces the TV label that the teachers and classrooms will be changing their practices will be setting more clear and higher expectations for students combined with flexibility and the opportunity for students to take more responsibility and ownership over their learning those experiences the change experiences for students with their eyes and this is based on some reviews of the research would lead to increased or enhance learning capacities on the part of students changes in their mindsets and dispositions changes in their self-regulated learning skills and changes in their academic behavior and again through our research scan we are we hypothesized that it was it was the mechanism of those improved learning capacities that would help students to gain a greater progress with their academics I’m going to turn this over to Catherine better for a moment to tell you a little bit about the design of the study catherine was the founding project director for the study so Katherine go ahead and advance to the next slide and share with us some features of the design of our study UND and the goal of our competency-based education study which is funded by denying the Education Foundation and took over took place over two years january2014 to December 2015 with twofold first its to describe the types of instructional practices and policies using schools that are implementing te and how they compare to those used in more traditional environment and then secondly to examine the relationships between students he experiences and interested in their learning capacities in the areas of academic mindsets self-regulate self-regulated learning and academic behaviour is contrasted goals we do not understand that would allow us to collect data on practices and policies from administrators teachers and students both in school considered implementer the CDE and matched comparison schools and would also allow us to look at changing student self-reported learning capacities over the course of one school year specifically we collected data from ten public high schools identified a CD implementers by state education administrators and local administrators the schools are located across three states participating and g-csf those Innovation Lab network in New Hampshire with constant and Kentucky and then we also collected data from eight comparison high schools that were generally similar demographically and located in similar regions to the cpe school in the study we collected data at two time points in the 2014-15 school year first in order to measure cheese and student learning capacities overtime women and we administer the students surveyed nice graders in a subset of for CTE and for comparison schools in fall and spring of the 2014-15 school year this survey address learning to cavities that we believe most aligned with the goals of CDE including as we said academic mindsets and dispositions regulated learning skills and academic behaviour and in a minute Lauren climber will be providing some more details about the development of this thursday then to gather information on students experiences related to TBE we supplemented the spring student survey with questions related to their CD experiences in school and in addition to collect information on teachers instructional practices and CBE related structures within schools and classrooms with develop surveys for core content teachers and administrators between administered in the full sample of 18 schools and spring 2015 so in total and we collected data from approximately 250 teachers and 30 school administrators across the 18 school and a little over 1,000 students completed both the tempo student surveys response rates are generally in the seventy to eighty percent range and then to complete the analysis we also collected student demographic and achieving background data from district and state systems which we’ll talk about when we get into the analysis and so for now I’m going to hand it over to Lauren climber he’s gonna talk a bit about the survey development practice thanks Catherine I’m so the student teacher and administrator raise our key part of our study so I’d like to share just a little bit about how we develop these instruments i’m going to start with the student survey and you’ll see a sample on your screen now there are two main parts of the ginger bay develop develop the first part of the Student Survey which asks students about their learning capacities we first reviewed relevant literature and resources of TV practices to identify the expected outcomes associated with TV practices we then conducted a search to locate existing survey instruments designed to measure the outcome areas of interest we modify the existing instruments to create a series of scale to measure students academic mindsets and dispositions self-regulated learning skills which would be some good strategy to have used to engage and incomplete lancaster and their academic behavior such as preparation engagement and effort in their coursework for example under the domain of academic mindsets and dispositions students responded to questions regarding their sense of belonging academic self-efficacy intrinsic motivation and locus of control to develop the second part of the survey which a student to describe their experiences in their classes we first significant an extensive review of the winter church you identify the six CD features that when he mentioned earlier we then obtained input and reviews from our great state partners and other key stakeholders to finalize our TBE measurement area we then developed original search student survey questions in each of these six areas a critical part of our development include cognitive interviews at CB schools and eat one state and each of the deep and 19 TV school locally overall we conducted 16 student cognitive interviews in interviews we asked some specific questions such as when you hear the term learning gold what does that mean to you or can you tell me about the learning goals you had in mind when you answer these questions and we also have some general questions such as where there any questions and affection that you thought were computing or that you have to read more than one to understand their paper revise and refine double-time following each round of cognitive interviews we also developed survey for both teachers and administrators based on 6 area the TV i just discussed and on your screen you’ll see a sample survey teacher survey question for teachers the surveys ask them to respond to questions across the six CD features areas at multiple levels including school-wide policies and practices policies and practices across the course of that they teach and policies and practices for one specific course for administrators the survey includes questions related to school I practices and policies on similar to the student surveys conducted cognitive interviews with both teachers and administrators and the three seats and these included some questions such as where there any questions in the sections that did not make sense in the context of your classroom or school again we’re even revisited and revived the teacher and administrator survey several times in response to the feedback and now I’m going to turn it over to proceed either who’s going to tell you a little bit about the approach we used to examine the survey responses thanks Lauren Christy you all right yeah like 40 so first the first step to analyzing the video with great your triangle and i just made a reservation at the epic ah yeah and have a question for you the and could you check i’ll give you a reservation just one ok could you check to see if there is an earlier y8 on my return on the seven yeah could you please meet your phone if you they everybody else yeah ya did this new one because yeah Rachel can you leave me your phone okay whew ok and ok I think we’re going to continue talking about the analytic approach for the teacher three so the first that that we followed with to confirm that extensive survey items that we intended to use as survey scales could in fact be grouped together to measure the CD features that were discussed earlier and we did this by using exploratory factor analysis as well as calculating the cronbach’s alpha can make sure that the survey items together as we have intended we then use t-test to examine whether there were differences between the teacher 30 responses of the teachers in the TBE schools and teachers in the comparison schools to determine if the differences were statistically significant and finally we looked at the distribution of the responses from teachers both between schools and within cool to look at the amount of variation and teacher responses overall many of the findings of our study followed what we would expect where teachers in TBE settings were more likely to report a specific CD features and he didn’t comparison school such as meeting with students one-on-one to the stuff learning targets wanted to discuss student progress toward meeting the goal i’m also the teacher can CBE school or more likely to report that students are required to demonstrate proficiency in order to earn court credit at the resort flexibility and retaking assessment and or being able to demonstrate confident of company in alternative ways the teachers and ed schools had greater use of technology and we’re more likely to use personalized learning plans for all students and also they reported a greater amount of flexibility in the pacing for student number some key areas however where we expected to differences between teachers and TBE schools in comparison school but we actually didn’t find a significant difference some of these include using traditional measures when assigning final grade a traditional measures such as final exam and of course unit exam of the use of formative and interim assessment of the expectation that students would be responsible for tracking their own learning and progress having opportunities for students to conduct independent studies are making presentations appears and also the use of other non-traditional summative assessments such as paper presentations or portfolios and so again these were differences that are we expected to see perhaps the use of more non-traditional summative assessments among teachers in de school but in fact we didn’t find a difference between schools labeled as CBE and schools that were comparable schools overall we believe that we were not able to find significant differences between teachers and TV and comparison settings for some of these features because there was a substantial amount of variation within the schools within our sample so for example there in a school there might be more flexible pacing among students in math courses but not so much in the science courses or there might be different types of assessments in a science course but in a sport they were more likely to use the more traditional measures and overall we found that rather than implementing the fully that all of the CBE features within the CBE schools we found that a lot of the CD you were still participating in many of the traditional ways of measuring student performance but also adding on some of the CBE features and so one reason that some of our signing for unexpected and we we did not serve the difference because the large amount of variation within school and the fact that not only were many of the traditional practices being used in CTE schools but many of the teachers and the comparison tools were off Oh implementing some features that we traditionally think of SCE now i’m going to go ahead and turn the presentation back to Wendy who will discuss other student survey analyses thanks Chrissie so very interestingly as crazy just described yes we found a number of areas where teachers were reporting that their practices were different from traditional settings but also a lot of areas where there really wasn’t a lot of difference and as you recall from Catherine’s portion and from lawrence presentation one of our questions of course with how our students experiencing CD in the classroom so you know that was obviously we were kind of holding our breath to find out what what was what kinds of differences will be fine and in fact there were a couple of areas where students who attended schools that are labeled as CB did report differences these two key areas were having a personal learning plan and this is for all students not just students who maybe are struggling academically and having regular opportunities to meet with an adult just to talk about their learning so that you know was an indication that yes maybe some changes were being experienced by students however all of the other areas that we tried to capture within our surveys that looked at the nature of students experience in the classroom showed little to no difference between students and CB and comparison schools now we attribute that is Christy was talking about to the the wide variation that we were finding and teacher practices within schools and this was particularly the case in schools that were identifying as CBE so the research team decided to pose a different question as you recall from lawrence portion of the presentation another part of our student surveys was looking at students learning capacity their mindsets and dispositions their self-regulated learning skills and their academic behaviour and Catherine explained we then looked at repost changes in those learning capacities so we asked questions in the fall and then we ask them again in the spring and determine how much change your positive shifted we see in some of these learning capacity so the research team given that we weren’t really seeing differences and students experiences depending on the school they attended decide ask a different question and that question was how are students learning capacities influence when they report experiencing features that we normally associate with CB regardless of the school that they attack and haha so better news here we did find some really great associations now there’s an arrow at the bottom and many researchers on the call so i hope you associate this is but a bi directional arrow is indicating that we used a correlational approach to look at associations between students reports of experiencing specific features associated with CB so in this case students who talked about having clear learning targets really understanding what was expected of them showed positive changes in their intrinsic motivation and self-management for example students who reported that they believed they were clear expectations that they had to demonstrate their learning in order to earn credit for a course also show positive changes in their self-efficacy their cognitive control in their intrinsic motivation students who reported that they had were given more flexibility around pacing so for instance if I need more time I can take more time were more likely to show positive changes in their self-efficacy and their intrinsic motivation these are just a few of the examples of the many associations that we found and i encourage you as i mentioned earlier there’s a copy of our final report on the screen so anyone who’s interested in seeing the many ways in which students reports of experiencing specific CD features were associated with positive changes in their learning capacities can take a look at that report so what was our takeaway is as researchers clearly there’s some promising evidence that when students report experiencing specific features that we associate with CBE we were seeing evidence that perhaps there are positive changes in their learning capacities and we know from the research review that we conducted as part of the initial part of the study that those kinds of learning capacities are linked to long term academic gains for students we also found that clearly embracing a CB label is just not enough that there’s no guarantee of the school calls himself CBE that their classroom experience is going to be any different than the classroom experiences of students in traditional schools so that led us to conclude that one of the most important takeaway from the study for us is that schools that are interested in embracing a CD approach need to be much more careful and gauge and monitor how those practices are making their way to the classroom and whether or not students are really experiencing differences or changes in the nature of those classroom experiences now as fascinating as our takeaways researchers are we are actually much more interested in hearing directly from our partners and those in the field who are doing the CD work every day so i would like to invite up all leather who is the Deputy Commissioner for the New Hampshire Department of Education to share a few reflections and a little introduction to their work and New Hampshire so Paul I’d like to hand it over to you thank you and I really appreciate having the opportunity to speak to this report which is entirely consistent with our own findings we’ve been working at competency education for several decades here and a new hampshire and what we have found is very consistent with what you have found in this study which is that district school and classroom practice can vary dramatically and most particularly at the school and classroom level and that it’s not enough to just say that were all implementing competency education and to have a definition that everyone is apparently ascribed to it’s more important to really look at and to see what’s going on between students and adults in terms of teaching and learning and so what we have found is that if there is a students have a choice voice and an agency really a greater ownership of their learning and of the competencies that they are expected to demonstrate as well as a clear and rigorous expectations for all students and supports for all students and we’re not just academic content but also those skills and dispositions that are necessary for success are assessed through complex performance through authentic task that we have seen quality of both the delivery and the learning in competency education improve this is why we’ve implemented really a kind of a different system we moved from 2005 where we essentially mandated competency education for all New Hampshire schools to implementing a system called New Hampshire pace or performance the Senate Education which is the a system where there is an expectation of rich performance tasks being delivered where those tasks are calibrated in terms of what proficiency means across schools and across educators and across students and where there are common tasks that are developed by educators for calibration purposes and where there is substantial professional development development provided and practiced even before folks join the overall process and where there are supportive networks across six districts and across schools and particularly within schools around professional learning communities where educators and students look at student work which is through that process moves to a much more rich and deep kind of student work which is tied to a student expectation and and that’s crucial to the to the improvement process of Education we really have ascribed to the instructional core model that dick Elmore’s talked about for a number of years where change must be directly connected to student learning and educator capacity and so that we have essential elements like partnerships between the state and the local level and I think when we hear from Ryan will hear more about regional partnerships between schools and educators but we in New Hampshire small state we are creating networks of schools districts and educators that are in partnership and really there’s a sense of ownership at the local low level this year we’re focusing more on a greater emphasis around both project-based learning and the development of developmental skills and dispositions and we also are focusing more on individual student pacing really a personalized model which has not been a major feature in most New Hampshire schools up until this time and so we have actually turned our sites to what’s going on in Wisconsin and have learned a lot from the work that Ryan and others have have been doing in the season one project in in wisconsin i’m going to stop there and we can talk about questions relatives and hampshire a little later but I’m going to turn it over to Ryan now we’re good afternoon everybody my name’s Ryan krone i’m the director of the Institute for personalized learning arabic with arguably everybody hear that i hope again i’m ryan from the director of the Institute for personalized learning and prior to come into this role over the last couple of months I was a district administrator district principal looking in our region to putting some of the work of cops the basic education forward without the but i consider myself a big client of the Institute so just a frame for you as an audience with the institute is the institute was developed here in Wisconsin on the part of a regional call by our superintendents for need a paradigm shift for education and it’s one of the main elements that that paradigm shift was up was really a shift in Wisconsin to move to more of a learner-centered Clarence standard system or cops be based on education has been a part of that our students demonstrated proficiency is moving that so there was a regional call for this type of war and since that time in 2010 a number of the the way we’ve designed our our program the number of schools and school districts and teachers have taken some of the core ideas around here and sort of develop their own iteration or their own design cycle to go about doing this in their schools and classrooms we’ve been pretty fortunate in this area as many states are to have a lot of teachers on principles and practitioners RC value in this work and because of that we have some unique models that are three four five six and seven years old that we’re seeing different storylines evolved so I was really fascinated with the research that’s been coming here as we started some of the findings because i have a local interpretation local stories and it’s great to see how the workers come around but just to frame something quick for audiences as to what we’re seeing for the most part if we began with looking at comedy based education taking off in our classrooms one of the things that we asked our teams to do with to think intentionally about the teaching and learning practices that would most likely drive that forward whether that was around certain type of assessment practices or feedback practices whether it’s about personal learning goals or other pieces like that and we asked them to take not only those practices but to be really really clear on the intent of those practices as to what were they trying to develop in terms of those of our personal success skills or learner independent skills or 21st century skills whatever we would call them to be very helpful about that was one of the goals behind this work so again to start with that looking at Wisconsin look at this is up and the chain strategy of if we’re going to be looking at bringing company based education forward what practices will be b and point in our classrooms across our schools and more importantly what was the intent of deployment practices we’ve really pushed on you know I 10,000 foot view that if those practices were designed to nurture powerful learners or those practices were there to build the capacity and those learners to learn or even lastly if those practices were position students as a co-designer of their learning where they have shared accountability for success that we thought that those two pieces were candid hands together in terms of on in terms of the teaching practices that we were intentionally bring forward but really the intent that we wanted that the student would take on these new roles and responsibilities of further work so we thought some of the findings about students having for example you know learning plans or medium or figuring with an adult as when he talked about just a little bit of go about how clear learning targets showed some connections with intrinsic motivation or how we had soon felt like they had a greater self exterior intrinsic motivation that was kind of our our goal in doing this work that we would have that being intent up is as much as the content or the competency was there we wanted to make sure that the intent there of developing you know nurturing learners and building their capacity to learn was part of our outcomes there’s the schools here that i will our reference here a little bit because they’re pretty unique ones called the flight academy and the flight a candidate means therefore facilitated learning through independent guidance high expectations and technology is a school was started by two educators is now 25 educators working in the school of the team and it’s the school within a school so you get a chance to really do some comparison of students that are in a competency-based education world versus maybe those that are in a more traditional setting but we found in that school what’s interesting is that school is designed around three questions they have students what are you going to learn that’s going to how are you going to learn it and they asked and finally how are you going to show it so the a hundred percent of their lifestyle in this school is designed around really need to understand on the competencies that they are the proficiencies that they’re going to need to be able to demonstrate they even have control of how they’re going to learn that material and how they would not show their evidence and that takes place as well as one of the major findings of not only having plans to do that work but even more importantly that they regularly meet with teachers and confirming or 1i one model as a part of the environment versus maybe a traditional meetings I bring that example up because it’s an example it really flipped on the role of the learner and there all of the educator upside down which was really the only way to sort of find success in this environment to truly have a learner’s take on the role of being a co-designer or seeing themselves as it really haven’t shared commitment to their own success in that school and as the educators have continued to involve in there they have followed the only way that it really is possible for them to be providing or I wanted our website providing instruction but really that’s the limit it’s a it’s a different toner setting up the learning environment on really the only way they’ve been able to do that to truly think of those practices that do engage learners on with a different role so again back to the Institute when we started in 2010 it was teachers like this that we’re seeing the value of competency-based education and seen that that was the main currency on or out product of their work and that they would try to design systems around this since then I mentioned flight as being one but there is on we work with about 70 local districts here in Wisconsin or in our neighboring states that are doing this work and for the most part most of the projects that are going here are shifted on T individual teachers teacher teams or schools that have decided to take this on one of the big pieces that we’ve seen in addition to some of the teaching-learning process that we’ve seen is that the last layer structures and policies that are changing here that are really getting out of the way of a traditional system to really allow students to move forward so for the most part of Wisconsin our model similar model are we have an equation that these are is usually wrong which is one teacher with 28 kids for 52 minutes six no six classes a day five days a week a hundred schoolers partner in 80 days in the school year but for the most part flight and the other stem academy and a number of other schools that are here they changed all of those variables in a way that really allows them to understand the role of the teacher role the learner but where you see minutes changing out and time is no longer a constant but time is a variable we’re learning it is designed to be the constant you also see it spots where students are not progressing in a in a course in traditional five days a week hundred schools you see them it’s more based on on mastery and you’re seeing more and more evidence of that in structures and policies not work students are no longer being awarded credit for seat time but for mastery or more courses are even bigger being designed around the flexible nature of learning whether that’s just flexing the time or flexing on the duration of the course on last but not least we just I heard the term a couple of times earlier on a wide variation which I thought was a really interesting piece as the initial study look at this wide variation and it’s something that we’re seeing here throughout our state or the district were working with position is this wide variation in terms of the practices the quality of the practices the implementation level of the practice you have some people just starting this work for a couple of you know weeks in versus others that have been doing this for 45 years what we have tried to Center on that variation was a deep understanding of oh why they’re doing the practices in the port first place and how many pieces of exposure to students need to have until they really start to develop these skills we’ve worked a little bit with UW Madison’s research team on this over the last couple years but we’ve been studying is that variation in the and the quality indicators that can go with these practices but even more importantly is the type of exposure that students need until they truly take on some of these roles that sort of off you know the learner independence roles and the co.design role that really then start to work with the educator in fueling a cycle of learning that we depend on students having those skilled as we designed learning environment versus that’s worth developing them and there’s a real difference in those two that we’re seeing as school that are just starting this on don’t read a lot of the benefits until those practices are really apart an instrumental part of the experience but when they do become instrumental part what we’re seeing informally here at your own Wisconsin is that that really does change the nature of learning experience and hence really pushes forward that the power of the copper based education of students take on greater control so i will maybe wrap up my piece as well as looking through a number of things out there but can turn it back over to the facilitation team or any questions thank you so much ryan right I’m just curious it sounds like there are a lot of confirmations in the study findings any surprises or implications for the work that you’re doing in Wisconsin related to these study finding I do think it directly aligned with how of this what you would share in the beginning here which is there is a wide variation in terms of what people are defining a competency-based education or even in particular what some of their goals are we have worked for school that we’re focused on competency-based education but they really hadn’t paid much attention to the role that the shift enroll that’s required for educator for a learner and not put those places they were if you focus more on reaching proficiency or other places we have seen that there was they were really focused on a roll of the learner as as as the centerpiece of this work and seeing that has been a eventual driver of them continuing to learn to meet the proficiencies at the same time again the quality piece of our next iteration around is really going to be looking at helping to define some rubrics and quality indicators for particular practices as well as trying to link some of those practices in terms of quality or quantity of exposure opportunities for students to really kind of coincide with the development of some of these these skills or attributes that you know whether its intrinsic motivation or self-efficacy for example how how often is to have to be exposed to goal-setting to become to benefit from the work the individual ownership of that goal in terms of their learning thanks Ryan I know you’ve had a number of participants post questions directly to you and I’m wondering maybe you can take a moment and share first of all were there any surprises in our study findings and then if you could address a couple of the participants questions verbally that would be great yes I didn’t think actually that there were too many surprises I i do think that you know your core findings that that they were very different expectations across schools and and very different kinds of implementation going on across schools that we found that as well and we we believe that’s an artifact of the whole problem of of coming out of no child left behind where every school and district was expected to do exactly the same thing and after a while people started to ignore that and started to ignore state level expectations in a sense and what about what they’re doing and also recognize that accountability and assessment and all of that was really way too far from the classroom which was your third finding and so we needed to create a system that was much closer to to teaching and learning in terms of the specific questions I think Mandy asked questions about specific professional development and resources for competency education what I didn’t mention earlier is that we’ve developed kind of a tiered system of supports for our districts the first year is for those who are really just starting to implement competency education so we provide technical assistance and a number of supports on our new hampshire network and I can provide some of that information to to the the conveners of this webinar so that that can be sent out as part of that we even have online courses for for folks today on both leadership around competency education and and change processes as well as just implementing competency education as well and we’ve also focused a great deal on implementing project-based learning implementing a team teaching implementing multi-class room arrangements implementing personalized learning planning and implementing methods that will enhance student agency choices voice in the process so you know there are obviously many factors that need to take place to really change the student environment to to being more student-centered and so we really focus on that in in that first year and the second here were particularly focused on professional development around complex performance tasks and providing instruction two teams of educators around constructing performance tasks scoring performance task calibration of performance tasks since the system is is actually an assessment and accountability system i’m interested in the finding that in the study that talks about choice and voice in assessment and we are looking at approaching that but we haven’t quite yet figured out how to build that and hold ourselves accountable to its so I’m interested in knowing more about where folks might be with that we had a second question around thoughts about funding for personalized pace in terms of overall student funding i would just say that what we’re attempting to implement our cost neutral methods of personalization and again as I mentioned drawing from some of the learnings that our compatriots in Wisconsin have accomplished where they are doing this in public schools with public school staff but but really reorganizing how teaching and learning is going on and putting more expectations and in hands of of students in a classroom or learning environment where there are many more opportunities for for learning better are paced by students and really evaluated by students along the way so we we are trying to stay away from kind of costing out how how this might be a more expensive approach and really trying to find ways to scale personalization within our current cost thank you so much Paul I believe we have someone from our participant list that would like to pose a question directly Kim’s you want to unmute yourself and try posting your question and please introduce yourself all right well maybe that didn’t work while we’re waiting for kim to a new Ryan you want to talk a little bit about the professional learning opportunities that you’ve developed in wisconsin at the Institute yeah it really at the heart of our work has been designing professional development support for educators and when we first started everything that we did was labeled getting started this is about looking at our current design and finding the entry point in your practice that would have been a little bit more student center or focused on learning and trying to find some kind of a path from your current practice and practices that started to overlap with really positioning students in a position to learn since that time those practices continue involved to evolve from students who were hurt staff and teachers who are getting started to where they’re doing a little bit more iteration and redesign of their work and even possibly here across the region with some schools and districts that are looking at bringing this full scale and really looking at systemic change but for the most part our model imagine a a a two-tiered model the first part really being around leadership and designing on strategic framework for positioning on this ship this is a complete shift in our system as we’re all aware I’m just called everybody has background with the work of conservation education but it is a system or a school or a teacher is making a transformational shift from maybe their current instructional league dominated classroom on 21 that based off of students demonstrating evidence of learning wewe really work hard with the school leadership team and the district and the school teachers of understanding the strategic nature of that shift but then the fun begins in beginning to well do design professional development around those practices so we have we do have a strategic framework em and on our website i don’t show it here is we have a honeycomb change strategy element model which really again the design is a sort of a design thinking framework that we’re going to begin educators at the center but why it is that they’re beginning this work we look at the teaching and learning practices that are big and to start to position students in greater control of the experience and even more importantly and understanding that learning their debt their demonstration of their learning is the currency to what we’re about this interchange how those practices evolve and eventually what structures and policies might be changing their classroom design a few different tool kids we call them toolkits but they’re basically activities that were teachers redesign a particular practice or enhanced particular practice to have greater and greater control for student learning and it can be as simple as providing more learner voice and choice in there and I an upcoming unit of study or lessen your teachers there may be providing multiple methods for learning it too is this complexes where whole teachers and systems are redesigning for example hole courses around recognizing anywhere anytime learnings club learning that taking place outside of the classroom outside of an instructor and even outside of the school where students are coming in demonstrating proficiencies and teachers our partner them to sort of the guide and a facilitator of their experiences outside so we have array of symbols offerings that really are intended at all of them are getting at the intent of what is the working here helping to make that transformational shift and working alongside educators as they’re shifting practices one of the time on sort of me to meet the needs of really the requirements of a competency-based education system is designed this where all students are demonstrating understanding vs jonh experience in just an instructional design thanks Ryan I think we’re going to try again to see if we can get a question posed directly from our audience Kim’s you want to give that a try i know you had a question for one of our guest speakers yeah can you hear me now and fails thanksgiving excellent Kim Carter here in New Hampshire and i work with QED Foundation which is a non-profit supporting this work and providing technical assistance and run a couple of small schools that are committed to have been committed to this kind of works and last 15 years I’m Ryan I’m particularly intrigued by what you’re talking about with the investigating the iterations are actually difficult pieces of exposure that students need to have to begin to develop these skills and take on the role of designer it could you say more about that is any of that research available publicly thanks hello Kim thanks for the question and great questions so that those are the next questions that were posing based off of our initial research we did some research with carbon with uw-madison Avice of pips tell you which is practices and personalized learning and there are initial study was just to start to find and study we studied twelve schools were some of this work was happening for personal learning are cops the basic education at that part of it and in particular looked at the role where students were in that’s where they were have these and we clearly saw that these these schools are these practices had a nice correlation with some co development skills and why we couldn’t prove them at first but they were definitely there is themes there there was definitely a difference in the role that the learner had because of some of these practices and so we saw that as a side finger our initial study our next time around we really want to study the amount of exposure that students are getting environments to some of these practices and how that might relate to the development of some of these practices so i mentioned before so that’s an example of that is if it lets say a teacher is providing students with multiple instructional methods and motives are really giving students the opportunity to select how they’re going to learn something frequently hoping that students are able to self-assess their own learning style advocate for their own needs and learning and kind of take on that role of the cold desire of their learning experience one of our questions is how how much from are we watching students really develop the identity of a co-designer or these co-development skills and is there a connection between the frequency or exposure that they’re getting so that we’re not we’re hoping to do is be able to have a deeper richer story around how many times students need to be in the position in this role which we think is this case it needs to be they can either be consistently in this role but we want to see how often so that his teachers are doing goal setting on practicing their classroom or providing students choice how frequently do we want that to happen and what is the quality of practice around that so we don’t have any research on yet because that’s the next version of our research but we do have a number of stories around here of watching is again as that webinar said earlier the the of the very the levels of variation we want to see we can sort of bring some clarity to that variation and you may be clear with students need to be able to select how they learn that every time is it half the time is that every class and we just want to get some greater story around that that helps with your question yeah I think you’re going to some really important pieces on that are going to have layers to them because i think i love what you just said is going to be critical and I i I’ve certainly found that to be true than my last like 20 years doing it and I find their differences across different populations students too so it’s almost like we need a learning progression for the role of co-designer so thanks thanks ryan look forward to hearing more about your work totally agree that that learning progression exactly i think we’re hoping to bring some eyes too so thank you so this is wendy and it looks like we’re just about out of time I want to take a moment to thank so many people who helped make today’s webinar possible first to our guest speakers Paul letter from the department of education New Hampshire Ryan crone from the Institute of personalized learning our research team we have Jill Walston we have captured better Chrissy’s i sir Lauren climber and to our funder we have Eve Goldberg director of research from Nellie Mae Education Foundation who’s online adrianna Martinez whose from CCSSO and thanks to Nellie Mae very soon the surveys that we developed for this study will be publicly available and Lauren climber i will be organising the dissemination of these surveys she has put her email in the general chat box if you have any interest in being part of piloting or using these surveys please be in touch with Lauren and I want to thank everyone so much for taking an hour away from the election to join us today and we will be in touch we’ll be sending out a link with some additional materials that paul i will be providing a link to our recording and we want to thank everyone so much for joining us today thank you

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *