1 © 2014 Education Elements
District Digital Content Review Lexington School District One
Education Elements November 10, 2014
Objectives
The purpose of this presentation is to start the discussion around what digital content Lexington School District One will offer its blended learning schools. The document contains our first pass at potential recommendations for ELA and Math providers so your team can begin the process of identifying content providers you would like to invite to a content fair on Dec 12 for a more in-depth understanding of the program.
© 2014 Education Elements 2
Project Roadmap
Plan & Alignment Design Professional Learning
Final Model Design Design
Project Defini4on Document & Work Plan Pre-‐Launch PLA -‐ Leaders I
On-‐going PL + Support District & School Readiness Assessment Assess
Ini4al Site Visit PLA – Leaders II Digital Content Selec4on
Digital Content
Planning & Kickoff
Measuring Success
Plan
Needs Defini4on, Goals, Key Success Measures, and District Expecta4ons
Monitor
School Success Metrics
Highlight Implementa;on
Highlight Support
SIS Setup Plan Setup
Go-‐Live Prep Go-‐Live!
Highlight PD Highlight Training
Configura4on Document Mapping Confirma4on
Content Procurement
Data Agreement
EE Deliverable
Phase
District Deliverable
AcAvity
Founda4ons Event
© 2014 Education Elements 3
Key Digital Content Dates
© 2014 Education Elements 4
Activity Team Date Due
Review Short-List of Digital Content Providers EE Nov 17
Schedule Content Providers for Content Fair Lex-1 Dec 5
Conduct Design Workshop & Content Fair EE Dec 12
Review Content Provider Feedback from Schools
EE & Lex-1 Dec 15
Select Content Providers Lex-1 Dec 17
Content Procurement Complete Lex-1 Jan 2
Questions for Implementation Team:
Who will decide who should come to the content fair? Who will extend the invitations to content providers?
In addition to the content fair, would you like to select a small group
of teachers and students to test drive some of the options in the weeks leading up to the fair?
Content Strategy Variables At-a-Glance
© 2014 Education Elements 5
Current Curriculum
& Instruction
Instructional model: • Gradual release of responsibility • Some workshop and project-based learning in math ELA Curriculum: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Collections Math Curriculum: Carnegie Math Series: Courses 1-3 and Pearson Algebra 1- Common Core Edition • Other Resources: Minds on Mathematics and Mathia
• 1:1 iPads • Middle Schools with at least 90 computers for lab
• TBD
Current Hardware
Financial Plan
Question for Implementation Team:
What is the approximate per-student budget for
digital content?
Understanding Schools’ Needs
© 2014 Education Elements 6
Carolina Springs
Gilbert Pelion White Knoll
PASS ELA Exemplary & Met 73% 75% 62% 74%
PASS Math Exemplary & Met 71% 71% 60% 73%
The data below reflects the SC PASS Schools Performance Report Cards for each school from the 2012-2013 academic school year:
Question for Implementation Team:
How would you articulate the specific academic needs for the four middle schools?
Blended Learning Design
Design Workshop: What is a design strategy?
© 2014 Education Elements 7
School Vision, Goals, and
Blended Learning Priorities
Design Strategy
Instructional Delivery Strategy
Digital Content Strategy
Design Workshop (Dec 12)
Design Strategy
A “design strategy,” is a clear plan that iden4fies the role and purpose of digital content, while simultaneously asking key ques4ons aligned to the space and 4me needed to build Blended
Classrooms that fit the goals and needs of your school.
A Framework for Thinking about Digital Content
© 2014 Education Elements 8
Primarily Instruction
Primarily Practice
Significantly Below Grade
Level
Above Grade Level
Low Teacher Input/Low
Control
High Teacher Input/High
Control
Instructional Use: How do you want to use your digital content?
Student Support: Which students do you want to focus on supporting with digital content?
Teacher Input: How much input and control over digital content do you want teachers to have?
Instructional Use: How do you want to use your digital content?
© 2014 Education Elements 9
Primarily Instruction
Primarily Practice
Typical Characteristics • Higher cost • Longer sessions • More coverage of
standards • Core content
Typical Characteristics • Lower cost • Shorter sessions • Less coverage of
standards • Supplemental content
These programs can introduce or re-teach
material to students and provide opportunities to
practice and demonstrate mastery.
These programs offer students opportunities
to practice and demonstrate mastery,
but offer little to no instruction.
Question for Implementation Team:
Where would you land on
this spectrum?
Student Support: Which students do you want to focus on supporting with digital content?
© 2014 Education Elements 10
Significantly Below Grade
Level
Above Grade Level
These programs contain material for students who
are one or more years below grade level. Or, they are designed exclusively
for students in need of intervention, and scaffold
down several grade levels.
These programs contain material appropriate for
students who are performing one or more years above
grade level.
Typical Characteristics • Practice and/or instruction • Content is not necessarily
more rigorous; simply presents material at the next grade/subject level
Typical Characteristics • Practice and/or
instruction • Additional scaffolding • Often require daily use
Question for Implementation Team:
Where would you land on
this spectrum?
Teacher Input: How much input and control over digital content do you
want teachers to have?
© 2014 Education Elements 11
Low Teacher Input/Low
Control
High Teacher Input/High
Control
Typical Characteristics • Loose alignment to offline
instruction • Require little input from the
teacher (less time consuming to manage)
• Adaptable
These programs generally adapt to students’ needs
by providing targeted instruction and/or practice with virtually no input from
the teacher.
These programs enable teachers to assign lessons
and/or practice opportunities to students.
Typical Characteristics • Potential to have tight
alignment to offline instruction
• Require regular input from the teacher
(more time consuming) • Assignable
Question for Implementation Team:
Where would you land on
this spectrum?
ELA Content Recommendations (1st DRAFT)
© 2014 Education Elements 13
• For English language learners or struggling readers
• Students develop phonics, phonemic awareness, comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency skills
• Students prescribed an adaptive learning path based on initial diagnostic
• Online fiction and nonfiction texts
• Teachers can annotate and add questions/quizzes
• High input from teachers necessary
• Nonfiction texts
• Short articles with writing response component
• Adapts to student’s Lexile level
• Can be used in ELA, Sci, and SS classes
• Digital reading environment with leveled full texts
• Students take placement exam and interest inventory
• Adapts to student’s Lexile level
• Approx 70% fiction, 30% nonfiction
Math Content Recommendations (1st DRAFT)
© 2014 Education Elements 14
• Students solve visual math puzzles and viewing short, animated tutorials
• Secondary intervention program for 6-8 includes on grade-level and intervention
• Diagnostic tool personalizes the learning path for students
• Practice-based program
• Teachers assign playlists; high input from teachers necessary
• Adaptive diagnostic test identifies areas of need and creates individualized “pie,” or learning pathway
• Students can dictate how and when to work though their pie or teachers can decide
• Students have a personalized learning path which adjusts through ongoing assessment
• Each lesson focuses on a single mathematical concept
• Students manipulate virtual interactives, solve mathematical expressions and complete game-like exercises
• No teacher input
Next Steps
© 2014 Education Elements 15
EE compiles second draft of content provider recommendations based on district conversation and school visits. EE shares draft with Lex-1 team on Nov 17 project call. Lex-1 team selects short list of content providers to invite to Dec. 12 content fair. EE provides content provider information to Lex-1 team and begins to extend invitations.
Lexington One Mission & Vision
© 2014 Education Elements 17
Summary of Mission & Vision The mission of Lexington County School District One — where caring people, academics, the arts and athletics connect — is to prepare 21st century graduates while serving as the center for community learning. The graduates of Lexington County School District One are a new generation of leaders and global citizens who are self-directed, creative, collaborative, caring and multilingual and who flourish in a global, competitive 21st century. Our graduates are confident in academics, sophisticated in learning, accomplished in 21st century skills, global in orientation and prepared as leaders and citizens of our democracy.
Mission & Vision
Academic Goals
Blended Learning Priori;es
Lexington One Academic Goals
© 2014 Education Elements 18
Summary of Academic Goals
Mission & Vision
Academic Goals
Blended Learning Priori;es
Question for Implementation Team:
How would you articulate
the academic goals or academic needs for the
four middle schools?
Lexington One Blended Learning Priorities (DRAFT)
© 2014 Education Elements 19
Blended Learning Priorities Mission & Vision
District-‐Wide Academic Goals
Blended Learning Priori;es
1. Shift teacher role into one of facilitator of active student learning, as measured by lesson plan review, digital content review, and classroom observations.
2. Increased student ownership of the learning process, as measured by student climate survey and classroom observations.
3. Increase student achievement, as measured by more proficiency on DEPLP, increased MAP scores, and increased growth on PASS.
4. Increase student engagement and teacher satisfaction, as measured by school climate surveys and decreased behavior referrals.
Question for Implementation Team:
Do you agree with these
draft priorities?