PUT TITLE HERE Leading Student Achievement Mary Jean Gallagher Assistant Deputy Minister Student...

PUT TITLE HERELeading Student Achievement

Mary Jean Gallagher

Assistant Deputy Minister Student Achievement Division

Chief Student Achievement Officer of Ontario

Ministry of Education

Reach Every StudentMinistry of Education – Goals

• High levels of student achievement

• Reduced gaps in student achievement

• Increased public confidence in education

Reach Every Student – Four Pillars of Student Achievement/Student

Success

• Literacy• Numeracy• Program Pathways and Supports• Community, Culture and Caring – Character Education,

Parent Engagement, Student Voice, etc.

Student Achievement

• The work that we do…

• Together!

Primary (Grade 3) Junior (Grade 6)

◊ Girls ▲ All Students ■ Boys x ESL/ELL Students ж Special Needs Students

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Perc

ent o

f stu

dent

s at

Lev

els

3&4

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Per

cent

of s

tude

nts

at L

evel

s 3&

4

Reading

Primary (Grade 3) Junior (Grade 6)

◊ Girls ▲ All Students ■ Boys x ESL/ELL Students ж Special Needs Students

Writing

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Perc

ent o

f stu

dent

s at

Lev

els

3&4

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 3 - 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Per

cent

of s

tude

nts

at L

evel

s 3&

4

Mathematics

5 8 5 7

6 4 6 66 8 6 9 6 8

5 9 5 8

6 5 6 66 8 6 9 6 9

5 85 5

6 36 6

6 9 6 8 6 7

2 52 7

3 22 9

3 13 5 3 5

3 9 4 0

5 0 5 1 5 35 6

5 8

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

2 0 0 1 / 0 2 2 0 0 2 / 0 3 2 0 0 3 / 0 4 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 7 - 0 8

Y e a r

Perc

ent a

t Lev

els 3&

4

A l l s t u d e n t s G i r l s B o y s S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n E S L / E L L S t u d e n t s

54 53

5760 61

5961

55 55

60 6062

6062

52 5256

60 59 5860

1618

20 21 21 2123

35 35

4144

46 47

51

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/2007 2007-08

Year

Perc

ent a

t Lev

els

3&4

All students Girls Boys Special Education ESL/ELL Students

Primary (Grade 3) Junior (Grade 6)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-Feb 02-Mar 03-Apr 04-May 05-Jun 06-Jul 07-Aug

Reading Writing Math

Year-over-Year EQAO Test ResultsFrench Language Boards

Closing Gaps: Reducing the Number of Underperforming Elementary Schools

6%5%5%

7%

19%

14%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Schools with less than 34% of students achieving levels 3 and 4 in Grade 3 Reading

22

11

16

17

14

19

13

5

7

10

5

11

0

5

10

15

20

25

Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing Grade 3Mathematics

Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing Grade 6Mathematics

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Stu

de

nts

at

Le

ve

l 1

an

d b

elo

w

2002-03 2007-08

Raising the Bar: English Language StudentsReduction in Percentage of Students Achieving at the

Lowest Level in EQAO Assessments

20

11

14

11

10 1010

4

8

4

3

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing Grade 3 Mathematics Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing Grade 6 Mathematics

2002-03 2007-08

Raising the Bar: French Language StudentsReduction in Percentage of Students Achieving at the

Lowest Level in EQAO Assessments

Getting to 75 – Almost there!EQAO Assessment Results - 2008

Reading Writing Mathematics

Proportion of students  Level 3 or

higher

Difference between Level

3 and 2.7 to 2.9

Level 3 or higher

Difference between

Level 3 and 2.7 to 2.9

Level 3 or higher

Difference between

Level 3 and 2.7 to 2.9

English language Boards Grade 3 61% 12% 66% 20% 68% 14%

Grade 6 66% 13% 67% 18% 61% 14%

French-language Boards Grade 3 60% 16% 74% 14% 62% 17%

Grade 6 75% 13% 80% 11% 78% 12%

Getting to 75 - Almost there!Breakdown of Students Within Level 2

Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing Grade 3 Math

% of Level 2 Students Achieving Scores from 2.7 to < 3

46%

69%

56%

Getting to 75 - Almost there!Breakdown of Students Within Level 2

Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing Grade 6 Math

% of Level 2 Students Achieving Scores from 2.7 to < 3

54% 64

%

48%

Moving Student Achievement from 2.7 to 3

What is different about student achievement now?

• The number of students scoring below level 2 has reduced significantly. Of those in level 2, the number that are scoring just below level 3 (at or above 2.7, below 3) is large. This provides a significant opportunity to raise levels of student achievement and to further motivate the system to do so.

• These students perform well on less demanding reading comprehension tasks such as, “Understanding explicitly stated information in a reading selection”, or “conventions of language”.

Common Themes in Effective Schools

• Organizational Culture

• Focus

• Leadership

• Assessment and Use of Data

• Links Beyond the School

Lessons Learned

Ministry of Education – SupportsLeadership Development• For Teacher Leaders• For SEF & SS Leaders• For Principals• For Senior Administration• For PAL

Developing Expertise • in Gathering, Analyzing and Interpreting Data – Misa

Leaders

Resources K – 12

• Monographs, Newsletters• DVDs, Webcasts• Differentiated Instruction Kits• ELL Guides• Guides to Effective Instruction for literacy and

math

Ministry of Education - Supports

Engagement

• Student

• Parent

Ministry of Education - Supports

Ministry of Education - Supports

School Effectiveness Framework – Student Success Action Planning Framework

• Setting Goals Collectively• Promoting Professional Learning Communities• Distributive Leadership• Accountability for Results

Going Forward – Continuity, Ingenuity, Synergy

• Collaboration and continuity in our approach to K-12 student achievement and capacity building

• Increasing partnerships to leverage improvement among neighbouring boards and schools

• More support for boards with low performance across elementary and secondary schools

• More supports for low performing and static schools • More classroom-based instructional and assessment

supports through coaching in differentiated instruction, teaching learning critical pathways

Leadership Activities in LNS• Capacity-building series – webcasts and monographs

- Each webcast has a leadership component that addresses the work of supervisory officers, principals and/or teacher leaders

• Leading Student Achievement project (LSA)- LSA involves networks of learning to support the instructional leadership role of

the principal• Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP)

- OFIP is a whole-school approach to school improvement that focuses on distributed leadership• Leader-to-Leader

- A commitment by Premier McGuinty to personally engage a small number of elementary principals in discussions about successful practices as well as the challenges that schools face when trying to improve student achievement

• School Effectiveness Framework (SEF)- The SEF provides province-wide criteria for effective instruction and outlines what leaders

need to do to support instruction and pedagogy

“I slept and dreamed that life was happiness.

I awoke and saw that life was service.

I served and found that in service, happiness is found.”

Tagore