log inhelp

 | 

  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Dokkio Sidebar applies AI to make browsing the web faster and more productive. Whenever you open Sidebar, you'll get an AI summary of the web page and can ask any question you like about the content of the page! Try Dokkio Sidebar for free.

View
 

Unit Three (TBT Workshop) Activities

Page history last edited by Aimee Howley 10 years, 2 months ago

Unit Three Discussion:

 

The discussion prompts below are designed to structure either face-to-face or on-line discussion among workshop participants.

 

  • Many steps go into creating an effective TBT. Based on the readings in this unit and your own experiences, what are those steps? Of those steps, which are the most important?
  •  Why is it important to embed accountability structures into TBT work and into the implementation of the instructional practices that a TBT decide will be most effective?

 

Activity: Making the Shift from Autonomy to Accountability

 

This activity offers your team (either your actual TBT or a team composed of workshop participants) the opportunity to construct and use a process for selecting instructional strategies that are likely to be effective--especially with students who are encountering learning difficulties.

 

  • To get started, discuss one instructional strategy that has been thinking about adopting (or that several team members believe might be a promising practice for working with struggling students), and evaluate the evidence supporting that strategy. For accomplishing this work, we suggest that the team subdivide into two smaller groups to accomplish two critical tasks.

 

    • Subgroup One would identify, collect, and present the school or district performance data that supports the claim that a new instructional strategy would be useful for a given grade level and/or subject.
    •  Subgroup Two would contrast the research evidence supporting the promising practice with two other practices. For example, if the team is considering "ability grouping" as a strategy, Subgroup Two should compare the research evidence supporting this practice with the evidence supporting other practices for struggling students such as cooperative learning or universal design for learning.

 

  •  Once the subgroups have completed their work, the team should reconvene to share the subgroup findings. In this discussion the team as a whole should decide whether or not for each strategy meets criteria for being sufficient and persuasive. The checklist below can be used to guide the discussion, or the team can develop its own checklist or rubric.
  •  Finally, as a team, create a document that outlines the need (and the performance data evidence supporting the claim for need), the goal, the strategy to be used (and the evidence that supports the use of the preferred strategy). 

 

 

Criteria Target Strategy  Alternative #1  Alternative #2
One or more meta-analysis studies support the  use of this strategy. Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
One or more experimental studies support the use of this strategy. Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
One or more studies with sample sizes larger than 100 support the use of this strategy. Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
Studies show the applicability of this strategy across different demographic groups (e.g., groups differentiated by locale, gender, income, race, ethnicity, and so on). Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
Five or more replication studies support the use of this strategy. Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
The articles describing evidence for the use of this strategy were mostly published in peer-reviewed journals. Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
The strategy is feasible in the school where it will be applied. Yes/No   Yes/No  Yes/No 
The strategy fits with the instructional philosophy of teachers in the team that plans to implement it. Yes/No  Yes/No  Yes/No 
TOTAL OF YES VOTES      

 

 

Scoring Rubric

Performance

Criteria for Target Performance

(Score = 3)

Criteria for Target Performance

(Score = 2) 

Criteria for Target Performance

(Score = 1) 

Gathering data

 

 Subgroups gather data that is relevant, current, and addresses the school or district's needs. Subgroups gather enough data to support claims with almost no ambiguity.  Subgroups gather data that addresses the school or district's needs. Subgroups gather enough data to support claims.  Subgroups gather data that attempts to address the school or district's needs, but the data may relate only tangentially to these needs. Data are limited and cannot adequately support cliams. 
Making judgments about evidence Teams compare and contrast a variety of instructional strategies and the evidence to support them, and choose a strategy that is both appropriate to the school or district and has clear evidence of effectiveness in similar circumstances to those that the school or district is encountering. Teams compare and contrast at least three instructional strategies and the evidence to support them, and choose a strategy that is appropriate to the school or district and has some evidence of effectiveness in similar circumstances to those that the school or district is encountering.

Team chooses one instructional strategy to focus on, and gathers some evidence to support a claim for its effectiveness within a given school or district.
Developing a report The report presents organized and extensive information, research, and data about the school or district need to be addressed, and the various strategies studied. The report discusses which strategy was chosen and why--including evidence to support the claim for potential effectiveness-- and clearly shows how the chosen strategy will be implemented and how implementation will address the school or district need. The report presents clear, organized information, research, and data about the school or district need, and the various strategies studied. The report discusses which strategy was chosen and why (including discussion of research on its effectiveness), and clearly shows how the chosen strategy will be implemented and how implementation will address the school or district need.  The report attempts to identify and organize information, research, and data about one school/district need or achievement gap, though this need may be chosen to suit the purpose of finding an "easy" strategy to implement. The report discusses which strategy was chosen and how that strategy will address the need identified. However, the report may fail to provide sufficient evidence to support to the group's claim that such a strategy is likely to succeed even with faithful implementation. 
Participating in the work of the team  All team members faithfully take on both the individual and the collaborative portions of work, and strive to provide insight, clarity, and organization to the process of planning and creating the report and outline for strategy implementation. Time is made for consensus building, in the process, so that all members are in agreement about the chosen strategy.
  All team members faithfully take on both the individual and the collaborative portions of work, and share work equitably in planning and creating the report and outline for strategy implementation. The team makes some time for consensus building, even if the team does not end up reaching agreement. Some team members take on the majority of the legwork (gathering and reading research or organizing the report), while others play a more passive role or fail to complete their tasks. The team finds it difficult to share openly with one another or build consensus in choosing one strategy to implement. 

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.

Printable version