Raising the Barand Closing the Gap:
Whatever It Takesin Elementary Schools
Rebecca DuFour
In-Depth Seminar
Raising the Bar and Closing the Gap:
Whatever It Takes in Elementary Schools
Becky DuFour
For access to these schools and districts and additional international models of the PLC at Work process, go to:
www.AllThingsPLC.info “Evidence of Effectiveness.”
Features 38 schools in nine different districts.
What is it we expect them to learn?
How will we know when they have learned it?
How will we respond when they don’t learn?
How will we respond when they already know it?
Critical Corollary Questions: If We Believe All Kids Can Learn
Step One of the PLC Process: Learn Together!
A cardinal rule: Professional learning communities always attempt to answer critical questions by first building shared knowledge—engaging in collective inquiry—learning together.
If people make decisions based on the collective study of the same pool of information, they increase the likelihood they will arrive at the same conclusion.
Raising the Bar and Closing the Gap:
Whatever It Takes in Elementary Schools
Becky DuFour
For access to these schools and districts and additional international models of the PLC at Work process, go to:
www.AllThingsPLC.info “Evidence of Effectiveness.”
Features 38 schools in nine different districts.
What is it we expect them to learn?
How will we know when they have learned it?
How will we respond when they don’t learn?
How will we respond when they already know it?
Critical Corollary Questions: If We Believe All Kids Can Learn
Step One of the PLC Process: Learn Together!
A cardinal rule: Professional learning communities always attempt to answer critical questions by first building shared knowledge—engaging in collective inquiry—learning together.
If people make decisions based on the collective study of the same pool of information, they increase the likelihood they will arrive at the same conclusion.
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 1
Why Should We Implement Systematic Interventions?
Characteristics of high-performing schools include setting high expectations for all students, using assessment data to support student success, and employing systems for identifying intervention (Ragland, Clubine, Constable, & Smith, 2002).
“Reforms must move the system toward early identification and swift intervention, using scientifically based instruction and teaching methods” (President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education, 2002, p. 8).
“A criterion for schools that have made great strides in achievement and equity is immediate and decisive intervention. . . . Successful schools do not give a second thought to providing preventive assistance for students in need” (Reeves, 2006, p. 87).
“The most significant factor in providing appropriate interventions for students was the development of layers of support. Systems of support specifically addressed the needs of students who were ‘stretching’ to take more rigorous coursework” (Dolejs, 2006, p. 3).
“High-performing schools and school systems set high expectations for what each and every child should achieve, and then monitor performance against the expectations, intervening whenever they are not met. . . . The very best systems intervene at the level of the individual student, developing processes and structures within schools that are able to identify whenever a student is starting to fall behind, and then intervening to improve that child’s performance” (Barber & Mourshed, 2007, p. 34).
In order to raise student achievement, schools must use diagnostic assessments to measure students’ knowledge and skills at the beginning of each curriculum unit, on-the-spot assessments to check for understanding during instruction, and end-of-unit assessments and interim assessments to see how well students learned. “All of these enable teachers to make mid-course corrections and to get students into intervention earlier” (Odden & Archibald, 2009, p. 23).
In higher performing school systems, “teachers identify struggling students as early as possible, and direct them towards a variety of proven intervention strategies, developed at both the school and district level, that assist all students in mastering grade-level academic objectives” (National Center for Educational Achievement, 2009, p. 34).
“One of the most productive ways for districts to facilitate continual improvement is to develop teachers’ capacity to use formative assessments of student progress aligned with district expectations for student learning, and to use formative data in devising and implementing interventions during the school year” (Louis et al., 2010, p. 214).
“If a school can make both teaching and time variables . . . and target them to meet each student’s individual learning and developmental needs, the school is more likely to achieve high levels of learning for every student” (Mattos & Buffum, 2015, p. 2).
Learning by Doing © 2006, 2010, 2016 Solution Tree Press • SolutionTree.comVisit go.SolutionTree.com/PLCbooks to download this free reproducible.
REPRODUCIBLE
2
The Questions Facing Each Team1. How will we provide additional support for
2. How will we enrich and extend the learning
3. Who is available to assist our team in responding to our students?
Classroom Teachers, Resource Specialists, and Other Supports Work Together to:
supplementinstruction.
Teacher 1
Teacher 2
Teacher 3
Teacher 4
Tutor 1 Tutor 2Special
Ed. Staff
Resource Specialist
Resource Specialist
Sp
ec
ial
Ed
uc
ati
on
Re
ferr
al
Ve
ry I
nte
ns
ive
Su
pp
ort
(I
nd
ivid
ua
lize
d S
ch
ed
ule
)
Stu
de
nts
re
ce
ive
in
div
idu
aliz
ed
, in
ten
siv
e
inte
rve
ntio
ns t
ha
t ta
rge
t th
e s
tud
en
ts’ skill
de
ficits
for
the
re
me
dia
tio
n o
f e
xis
tin
g p
rob
lem
s a
nd
th
e
pre
ve
ntio
n o
f m
ore
se
ve
re p
rob
lem
s.
Inte
rve
nti
on
& E
nri
ch
me
nt
for
All
In
Tie
r 2
, stu
de
nts
no
t m
akin
g a
de
qu
ate
pro
gre
ss in
th
e c
ore
cu
rric
ulu
m a
re p
rovid
ed
with
in
cre
asin
gly
in
ten
siv
e in
str
uctio
n m
atc
he
d t
o t
he
ir n
ee
ds o
n t
he
ba
sis
of
leve
ls o
f
pe
rfo
rma
nce
an
d r
ate
s o
f p
rog
ress.
Da
ily
Ne
w D
ire
ct
Ins
tru
cti
on
fo
r A
LL
Stu
de
nts
All
stu
de
nts
in
Tie
r 1
re
ce
ive
hig
h-q
ua
lity,
scie
ntifica
lly b
ase
d in
str
uctio
n,
diffe
ren
tia
ted
to
me
et
the
ir n
ee
ds,
an
d a
re
scre
en
ed
on
a p
eri
od
ic b
asis
to
id
en
tify
str
ug
glin
g le
arn
ers
wh
o n
eed
ad
ditio
na
l su
pp
ort
.
Tie
r II
I
Tie
r II
Tie
r I
A P
yra
mid
of
Inte
rve
ntio
ns
An
An
sw
er
to “
Re
sp
on
se
to
In
terv
en
tio
n”
(RtI
)
Ten RTI Mistakes 1. RTI becomes an appendage to traditional schooling practices rather than a
catalyst for the cultural changes effective intervention requires.
If teachers define their role as teaching rather than ensuring student learning, a system of intervention can provide yet another reason that classroom teachers avoid taking responsibility for student learning. In the wrong school culture, teachers can assume, “I taught it, they didn’t get it, so let the system of intervention deal with them.” If teachers continue to work in isolation—if what a student is taught, when content is taught, and how learning is assessed is left to the discretion of the individual classroom teacher—a system of intervention intended to promote a collective effort to raise student achievement will be ineffective.
If educators continue to view assessments merely as a tool for assigning grades rather than a process for addressing student needs and improving professional practice, intervention will have little impact on enhancing student learning. Effective intervention must be integrated within the context of a guaranteed curriculum, informative assessments, and a process of continuous improvement (IRA Commission on RTI, 2009). Simply put, to implement systematic interventions successfully, “a school must not only provide its staff with a new set of ‘tools’ to help students learn, but must also help educators develop a new way of thinking about their roles and responsibilities” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2011).
2. RTI is viewed as a checklist to complete or a program to be purchased to comply with regulations rather than an ongoing process to improve student learning.
If educators believe that RTI simply requires completing the steps on a checklist, purchasing new curriculum, or assigning students who struggle to a computer-based program of learning in order to meet the stipulations of new regulations, the schools will fail to develop effective systems of intervention. As the leading authors on RTI have concluded, “If there is one thing that traditional special education has taught us, it’s that staying compliant does not necessarily lead to improved student learning—in fact, the opposite is more often the case” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2010, p. 13).
3. RTI is reactive rather than proactive.
We have seen intervention plans that have no process for identifying and supporting students until they have failed a grading period. This “wait to fail” strategy offers the equivalent of an educational autopsy rather than the ongoing monitoring of student learning that RTI is intended to offer.
4. RTI does not provide additional time or differentiated support for learning.
Intervention plans that remove students from reading instruction to provide them with reading instruction may be offering students teaching in a different setting, but they are not offering additional time for learning. Plans that simply repeat the same instructional strategies that have already proven to be ineffective for particular students might provide those students with more time for learning, but “more of the same” is not effective intervention.
5. RTI invites students to access available interventions.
When educators claim that they have addressed the challenge of a systematic intervention by inviting students who need help to “stop in” before or after school for assistance if they are so inclined, they fail to grasp the meaning of either systematic or intervention.
6. RTI is based on seat time rather than proficiency.
When students are assigned to intervention for a designated length of time (for example, nine weeks or a semester) rather than until they demonstrate proficiency, the focus of intervention becomes ensuring students complete the allotted time rather than ensuring that they learn. Again, if educators concentrate on compliance rather than results, intervention will be ineffective.
7. RTI focuses on symptoms rather than causes.
When educators assign students to intervention because they are failing language arts, they are responding to a symptom; but, without greater clarity regarding what is causing the failure, they will be unable to intervene effectively. They are tantamount to a doctor prescribing a specific antidote based solely on the knowledge that a patient is experiencing chest pain. Chest pain can be caused by a myriad of factors—from heartburn to a heart attack. To treat the symptom effectively, more precise information is required. Effective intervention will be based on in-depth knowledge of the specific skill the student is lacking and the most effective strategies for helping the student acquire that skill.
8. RTI does not provide the channels of communication essential to effective intervention.
A collective and systematic approach to intervention requires effective communication between all those who contribute to the intervention process—classroom teachers, collaborative teams, special education teachers, instructional coaches, counselors, and school administrators. If key school personnel are unable to articulate the desired outcome for the student, the specific steps of the intervention plan, the responsibilities of all those who provide the intervention, how student
Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate.
Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate. 3
Ten RTI Mistakes 1. RTI becomes an appendage to traditional schooling practices rather than a
catalyst for the cultural changes effective intervention requires.
If teachers define their role as teaching rather than ensuring student learning, a system of intervention can provide yet another reason that classroom teachers avoid taking responsibility for student learning. In the wrong school culture, teachers can assume, “I taught it, they didn’t get it, so let the system of intervention deal with them.” If teachers continue to work in isolation—if what a student is taught, when content is taught, and how learning is assessed is left to the discretion of the individual classroom teacher—a system of intervention intended to promote a collective effort to raise student achievement will be ineffective.
If educators continue to view assessments merely as a tool for assigning grades rather than a process for addressing student needs and improving professional practice, intervention will have little impact on enhancing student learning. Effective intervention must be integrated within the context of a guaranteed curriculum, informative assessments, and a process of continuous improvement (IRA Commission on RTI, 2009). Simply put, to implement systematic interventions successfully, “a school must not only provide its staff with a new set of ‘tools’ to help students learn, but must also help educators develop a new way of thinking about their roles and responsibilities” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2011).
2. RTI is viewed as a checklist to complete or a program to be purchased to comply with regulations rather than an ongoing process to improve student learning.
If educators believe that RTI simply requires completing the steps on a checklist, purchasing new curriculum, or assigning students who struggle to a computer-based program of learning in order to meet the stipulations of new regulations, the schools will fail to develop effective systems of intervention. As the leading authors on RTI have concluded, “If there is one thing that traditional special education has taught us, it’s that staying compliant does not necessarily lead to improved student learning—in fact, the opposite is more often the case” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2010, p. 13).
3. RTI is reactive rather than proactive.
We have seen intervention plans that have no process for identifying and supporting students until they have failed a grading period. This “wait to fail” strategy offers the equivalent of an educational autopsy rather than the ongoing monitoring of student learning that RTI is intended to offer.
© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate.
4. RTI does not provide additional time or differentiated support for learning.
Intervention plans that remove students from reading instruction to provide them with reading instruction may be offering students teaching in a different setting, but they are not offering additional time for learning. Plans that simply repeat the same instructional strategies that have already proven to be ineffective for particular students might provide those students with more time for learning, but “more of the same” is not effective intervention.
5. RTI invites students to access available interventions.
When educators claim that they have addressed the challenge of a systematic intervention by inviting students who need help to “stop in” before or after school for assistance if they are so inclined, they fail to grasp the meaning of either systematic or intervention.
6. RTI is based on seat time rather than proficiency.
When students are assigned to intervention for a designated length of time (for example, nine weeks or a semester) rather than until they demonstrate proficiency, the focus of intervention becomes ensuring students complete the allotted time rather than ensuring that they learn. Again, if educators concentrate on compliance rather than results, intervention will be ineffective.
7. RTI focuses on symptoms rather than causes.
When educators assign students to intervention because they are failing language arts, they are responding to a symptom; but, without greater clarity regarding what is causing the failure, they will be unable to intervene effectively. They are tantamount to a doctor prescribing a specific antidote based solely on the knowledge that a patient is experiencing chest pain. Chest pain can be caused by a myriad of factors—from heartburn to a heart attack. To treat the symptom effectively, more precise information is required. Effective intervention will be based on in-depth knowledge of the specific skill the student is lacking and the most effective strategies for helping the student acquire that skill.
8. RTI does not provide the channels of communication essential to effective intervention.
A collective and systematic approach to intervention requires effective communication between all those who contribute to the intervention process—classroom teachers, collaborative teams, special education teachers, instructional coaches, counselors, and school administrators. If key school personnel are unable to articulate the desired outcome for the student, the specific steps of the intervention plan, the responsibilities of all those who provide the intervention, how student
progress will be monitored, and the standard the student must achieve to no longer require the service, the intervention process will be ineffective. The process must ensure that all of the respective parties are provided with ongoing information regarding the specific needs and progress of individual students.
9. RTI assigns the least-skilled adults to work with the students most in need of expert teaching.
In many schools, students who struggle are assigned to well-intentioned people who lack the pedagogical skill and content expertise to resolve the students’ learning difficulties. Too often intervention is provided by parent volunteers, paraprofessionals, teacher assistants, or special education teachers who may be trained in particular learning disabilities but lack an in-depth knowledge of the progression of skills a particular subject area requires. As Richard Allington, the former president of the International Reading Associate lamented, when schools assign people without expertise to the hardest kids to teach “you penalize children for the rest of their lives because of your decision,” yet routinely “no one gets worse or less instruction than the kids who need it most” (in Rebora, 2010).
10. RTI is viewed as a special education program.
The most common mistake educators are making regarding RTI is viewing it as an extension of special education. RTI was specifically intended to address general education by strengthening classroom instruction and providing systematic intervention for all students in order to limit the number of students assigned to special education to those with a handicapping condition.
When done well, special education programs serve a vital purpose in our schools. Special education not only gives access to public schooling to students who in the past were denied such access, but it also provides the additional time and focused support to help those students acquire essential knowledge and skills. In many schools, however, the only way any student could get access to additional help was to place them in special education. Students were assigned to special education programs not because of a handicapping condition but because they were experiencing difficulty. As a result, well-intentioned special education personnel often struggled to provide the effective services their programs were designed to provide (President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education, 2002).
If schools consider RTI a special education initiative to get more students into special education faster, it will do far more harm than good. It will merely reinforce rather than eliminate the artificial gap that often exists between general education and special education teachers. If general education teachers assume that students who experience difficulty have some neurological difficulty, and it falls to special education teachers to solve their problem, intervention will be ineffective.
Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate.
Extra Time and Support for Students in an Elementary School
Schedule grade-level teachers, resource specialists, and other supports to work together during I/E time.
Organize parent volunteers, business partners, senior citizens, and high school and college interns to serve as mentors and tutors along with the school-based team.
Redefine focus of student support team to plan additional interventions.
Save one student.
Develop buddy programs and peer tutoring.
Build and nurture strong parent partnerships.
Building Strong Partnerships: The National PTA
Conduct grade-level parent workshops.
Provide tools, tips, and materials for at-home practice during parent workshops and via frequent grade-level communication to parents.
Establish ongoing systems for two-way communication with each parent.
Send student work folders home—with teacher feedback—for parent review, comments, questions, and signature.
See Chapter 14 in Revisiting PLCs at Work for more information on parent partnerships in a PLC at Work.
To sustain the momentum, PLCs …
... celebrate small wins early and
often!
Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate.4
Ten RTI Mistakes 1. RTI becomes an appendage to traditional schooling practices rather than a
catalyst for the cultural changes effective intervention requires.
If teachers define their role as teaching rather than ensuring student learning, a system of intervention can provide yet another reason that classroom teachers avoid taking responsibility for student learning. In the wrong school culture, teachers can assume, “I taught it, they didn’t get it, so let the system of intervention deal with them.” If teachers continue to work in isolation—if what a student is taught, when content is taught, and how learning is assessed is left to the discretion of the individual classroom teacher—a system of intervention intended to promote a collective effort to raise student achievement will be ineffective.
If educators continue to view assessments merely as a tool for assigning grades rather than a process for addressing student needs and improving professional practice, intervention will have little impact on enhancing student learning. Effective intervention must be integrated within the context of a guaranteed curriculum, informative assessments, and a process of continuous improvement (IRA Commission on RTI, 2009). Simply put, to implement systematic interventions successfully, “a school must not only provide its staff with a new set of ‘tools’ to help students learn, but must also help educators develop a new way of thinking about their roles and responsibilities” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2011).
2. RTI is viewed as a checklist to complete or a program to be purchased to comply with regulations rather than an ongoing process to improve student learning.
If educators believe that RTI simply requires completing the steps on a checklist, purchasing new curriculum, or assigning students who struggle to a computer-based program of learning in order to meet the stipulations of new regulations, the schools will fail to develop effective systems of intervention. As the leading authors on RTI have concluded, “If there is one thing that traditional special education has taught us, it’s that staying compliant does not necessarily lead to improved student learning—in fact, the opposite is more often the case” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2010, p. 13).
3. RTI is reactive rather than proactive.
We have seen intervention plans that have no process for identifying and supporting students until they have failed a grading period. This “wait to fail” strategy offers the equivalent of an educational autopsy rather than the ongoing monitoring of student learning that RTI is intended to offer.
© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate.
4. RTI does not provide additional time or differentiated support for learning.
Intervention plans that remove students from reading instruction to provide them with reading instruction may be offering students teaching in a different setting, but they are not offering additional time for learning. Plans that simply repeat the same instructional strategies that have already proven to be ineffective for particular students might provide those students with more time for learning, but “more of the same” is not effective intervention.
5. RTI invites students to access available interventions.
When educators claim that they have addressed the challenge of a systematic intervention by inviting students who need help to “stop in” before or after school for assistance if they are so inclined, they fail to grasp the meaning of either systematic or intervention.
6. RTI is based on seat time rather than proficiency.
When students are assigned to intervention for a designated length of time (for example, nine weeks or a semester) rather than until they demonstrate proficiency, the focus of intervention becomes ensuring students complete the allotted time rather than ensuring that they learn. Again, if educators concentrate on compliance rather than results, intervention will be ineffective.
7. RTI focuses on symptoms rather than causes.
When educators assign students to intervention because they are failing language arts, they are responding to a symptom; but, without greater clarity regarding what is causing the failure, they will be unable to intervene effectively. They are tantamount to a doctor prescribing a specific antidote based solely on the knowledge that a patient is experiencing chest pain. Chest pain can be caused by a myriad of factors—from heartburn to a heart attack. To treat the symptom effectively, more precise information is required. Effective intervention will be based on in-depth knowledge of the specific skill the student is lacking and the most effective strategies for helping the student acquire that skill.
8. RTI does not provide the channels of communication essential to effective intervention.
A collective and systematic approach to intervention requires effective communication between all those who contribute to the intervention process—classroom teachers, collaborative teams, special education teachers, instructional coaches, counselors, and school administrators. If key school personnel are unable to articulate the desired outcome for the student, the specific steps of the intervention plan, the responsibilities of all those who provide the intervention, how student
Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate.
progress will be monitored, and the standard the student must achieve to no longer require the service, the intervention process will be ineffective. The process must ensure that all of the respective parties are provided with ongoing information regarding the specific needs and progress of individual students.
9. RTI assigns the least-skilled adults to work with the students most in need of expert teaching.
In many schools, students who struggle are assigned to well-intentioned people who lack the pedagogical skill and content expertise to resolve the students’ learning difficulties. Too often intervention is provided by parent volunteers, paraprofessionals, teacher assistants, or special education teachers who may be trained in particular learning disabilities but lack an in-depth knowledge of the progression of skills a particular subject area requires. As Richard Allington, the former president of the International Reading Associate lamented, when schools assign people without expertise to the hardest kids to teach “you penalize children for the rest of their lives because of your decision,” yet routinely “no one gets worse or less instruction than the kids who need it most” (in Rebora, 2010).
10. RTI is viewed as a special education program.
The most common mistake educators are making regarding RTI is viewing it as an extension of special education. RTI was specifically intended to address general education by strengthening classroom instruction and providing systematic intervention for all students in order to limit the number of students assigned to special education to those with a handicapping condition.
When done well, special education programs serve a vital purpose in our schools. Special education not only gives access to public schooling to students who in the past were denied such access, but it also provides the additional time and focused support to help those students acquire essential knowledge and skills. In many schools, however, the only way any student could get access to additional help was to place them in special education. Students were assigned to special education programs not because of a handicapping condition but because they were experiencing difficulty. As a result, well-intentioned special education personnel often struggled to provide the effective services their programs were designed to provide (President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education, 2002).
If schools consider RTI a special education initiative to get more students into special education faster, it will do far more harm than good. It will merely reinforce rather than eliminate the artificial gap that often exists between general education and special education teachers. If general education teachers assume that students who experience difficulty have some neurological difficulty, and it falls to special education teachers to solve their problem, intervention will be ineffective.
Extra Time and Support for Students in an Elementary School
Schedule grade-level teachers, resource specialists, and other supports to work together during I/E time.
Organize parent volunteers, business partners, senior citizens, and high school and college interns to serve as mentors and tutors along with the school-based team.
Redefine focus of student support team to plan additional interventions.
Save one student.
Develop buddy programs and peer tutoring.
Build and nurture strong parent partnerships.
Building Strong Partnerships: The National PTA
Conduct grade-level parent workshops.
Provide tools, tips, and materials for at-home practice during parent workshops and via frequent grade-level communication to parents.
Establish ongoing systems for two-way communication with each parent.
Send student work folders home—with teacher feedback—for parent review, comments, questions, and signature.
See Chapter 14 in Revisiting PLCs at Work for more information on parent partnerships in a PLC at Work.
To sustain the momentum, PLCs …
... celebrate small wins early and
often!
Leaders of Learning: How District, School, and Classroom Leaders Improve Student Achievement© Solution Tree Press 2011. Do not duplicate. 5
Rethinking Our Assumptions
The assumption, beliefs, expectations, and habits that constitute the culture for most schools go largely unexamined. We act in accordance with our understanding of traditional practice and conventional wisdom.
If culture reflects “the way we do things around here,” we face the challenge of making conscious that which typically is unconscious.
Necessary Cultural ShiftsIn traditional schools, each teacher in isolation:
Decides what to teach and when to teach it
Administers infrequent summative assessments
Focuses on inputs of teaching
Practices the “if only” model of improvement—looking out the window
Determines what to do when students don’t learn
In professional learning communities, teams of teachers:
Build shared knowledge about essential learning and pacing.
Administer frequent common formative assessments.
Focus on results—evidence of learning.
Practice the “what if” model of improvement—looking in the mirror.
Create systematic responses that ensure learning support for every student.
A Syllogism of What Should Be Rhetorical Questions
Do we believe it is the purpose of our school to ensure all students learn at high levels?
Do we acknowledge that students learn at different rates and with different levels of support?
Have we created a schedule that guarantees students will receive additional opportunities for learning through extra time and support, in a systematic way, regardless of who the teacher might be?
How can our school better allocate existing resources:
time, people, materials, money
to provide additional support for ALL students to learn at higher levels than ever before?
Changing the Way We Do Things Around Here
Rethinking Our Assumptions
The assumption, beliefs, expectations, and habits that constitute the culture for most schools go largely unexamined. We act in accordance with our understanding of traditional practice and conventional wisdom.
If culture reflects “the way we do things around here,” we face the challenge of making conscious that which typically is unconscious.
Necessary Cultural ShiftsIn traditional schools, each teacher in isolation:
Decides what to teach and when to teach it
Administers infrequent summative assessments
Focuses on inputs of teaching
Practices the “if only” model of improvement—looking out the window
Determines what to do when students don’t learn
In professional learning communities, teams of teachers:
Build shared knowledge about essential learning and pacing.
Administer frequent common formative assessments.
Focus on results—evidence of learning.
Practice the “what if” model of improvement—looking in the mirror.
Create systematic responses that ensure learning support for every student.
A Syllogism of What Should Be Rhetorical Questions
Do we believe it is the purpose of our school to ensure all students learn at high levels?
Do we acknowledge that students learn at different rates and with different levels of support?
Have we created a schedule that guarantees students will receive additional opportunities for learning through extra time and support, in a systematic way, regardless of who the teacher might be?
How can our school better allocate existing resources:
time, people, materials, money
to provide additional support for ALL students to learn at higher levels than ever before?
Changing the Way We Do Things Around Here
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate.6
Alig
n Sc
hool
Str
uctu
re t
o Su
ppor
t
Our
Cul
ture
: Lea
rnin
g fo
r A
ll
Des
igna
te b
lock
s of
tim
e to
del
iver
firs
t be
st in
stru
ctio
n ea
ch d
ay.
Des
igna
te a
blo
ck o
f col
labo
rativ
e ti
me
each
wee
k fo
r te
ams
to:
Cla
rify
ess
entia
l kno
wle
dge,
ski
lls, a
nd d
ispo
sitio
ns.
Dev
elop
com
mon
pac
ing
guid
es o
r cu
rric
ulum
map
s.
Cre
ate
com
mon
form
ativ
e an
d su
mm
ativ
e as
sess
men
ts.
Esta
blis
h a
com
mon
sta
ndar
d of
pro
ficie
ncy.
Use
com
mon
ass
essm
ent r
esul
ts to
iden
tify
stud
ents
who
nee
d ad
ditio
nal
time
and
supp
ort a
nd to
info
rm a
nd im
prov
e te
ache
r pr
actic
e.
Des
igna
te a
dai
ly b
lock
of t
ime
for
inte
rven
tion
and
ext
ensi
on d
urin
g th
e in
stru
ctio
nal d
ay t
hat
does
not
rem
ove
stud
ents
from
new
dir
ect
inst
ruct
ion.
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker. © Solution Tree 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 7
R e s p o n d i n g w h e n s t u d e n t s d o n ’ t l e a r n
kindergarten grade 1 grade 2 grade 3 grade 4 grade 5
Science8:50–9:35
(45 minutes)
Social Studies/Language Arts
8:50–9:40(50 minutes)
Small Group Instruction for I/E
and Guided Reading8:50–9:40
(50 minutes)
Specials8:50–9:35
Music, Art, PE, Library, Technology
(45 minutes)
Science8:50–9:35
(45 minutes)
Math8:50–10:30
(100 minutes)Language Arts/Social Studies
9:40–10:40(60 minutes)
Language Arts9:40–11:00
(80 minutes)
Language Arts8:50–10:05
(75 minutes)
Math9:40–11:10
(90 minutes)
Specials9:40–10:25
Music, Art, PE, Library, Technology
(45 minutes)Social Studies/Language Arts
10:05–10:50(45 minutes)
Small Group Instruction for I/E
and Guided Reading9:45–10:45
(60 minutes)
Social Studies/Language Arts
10:25–11:15(50 minutes)
Language Arts10:40–12:10
(90 minutes)
Specials10:30–11:15
Music, Art, PE, Library, Technology
(45 minutes)
Science10:50–11:35
(45 minutes)Lunch/Recess11:05–11:55
(50 minutes)
Small Group Instruction for I/E
and Guided Reading10:50–11:50
(60 minutes)
Social Studies/Language Arts
11:10–12:00(50 minutes)
Lunch/Recess11:15–12:05
(50 minutes)Lunch/Recess
11:25–12:15(50 minutes)Lunch/Recess
11:35–12:25(50 minutes)
Math12:00–1:20
(80 minutes)
Lunch/Recess12:00–12:50(50 minutes)
Language Arts12:05–1:30
(85 minutes)Lunch/Recess
12:10–1:10(60 minutes)
Science12:15–1:00
(45 minutes)Specials12:35–1:20
Music, Art, PE, Library, Technology
(45 minutes)
I/E12:40–1:25
(45 minutes)
Language Arts12:50–2:15
(85 minutes) Social Studies/Language Arts
1:00–1:50(50 minutes)Math
1:15–2:15(60 minutes)
Specials1:25–2:10
Music, Art, PE, Library, Writing
(45 minutes) Math1:25–3:00
(95 minutes)
I/E1:30–2:15
(45 minutes)
Math1:30–3:00
(90 minutes)
Language Arts1:50–3:00
(70 minutes)
Specials2:15–3:00
Music, Art, PE, Library, Technology
(45 minutes)
Science2:15–3:00
(45 minutes)
Science2:15–3:00
(45 minutes)
I/E2:20–3:00
(40 minutes)
Students Depart3:05–3:15
Students Depart3:05–3:15
Students Depart3:05–3:15
Students Depart3:05–3:15
Students Depart3:05–3:15
Students Depart3:05–3:15
Figure 7.1: Sample master instructional schedule for grades K–5.
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker. © Solution Tree 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate.8
Inte
rven
tion
Tea
m D
aily
Sch
edul
e !
!!
!!
!
8:15!–
!8:45
!Pla
nning
!Pla
nning
!Pla
nning
!Pla
nning
!Pla
nning
!
8:50!–
!9:40
!Second
!Grade!
Second
!Grade!
Second
!Grade!
Second
!Grade!
Second
!Grade!
9:45!–
!10:45
!Fir
st!Grade!
First!Grade!
First!Grade!
First!Grade!
First!Grade!
10:50
!–!11:50
!Kind
ergarte
n!Kind
ergarte
n!Kind
ergarte
n!Kind
ergarte
n!Kind
ergarte
n!
11:50
!–!12:35
!Lunch/Pla
nning
!Lunch/Pla
nning
!Lunch/Pla
nning
!Lunch/Pla
nning
!Lunch/Pla
nning
!
12:40
!–!1:2
5!Fourth!Gr
ade!
Fourth!Gr
ade!
Fourth!Gr
ade!
Fourth!Gr
ade!
Fourth!Gr
ade!
1:30!–
!2:15
!Th
ird!Gr
ade!
Third
!Grade!
Third
!Grade!
Third
!Grade!
Third
!Grade!
2:20!–
!3:00
!Fif
th!Gr
ade!
Fifth!Gr
ade!
Fifth!Gr
ade!
Fifth!Gr
ade!
Fifth!Gr
ade!
3:05!–
!3:15
!!Stu
dent!Dism
issal!
Student!Dism
issal!
Student!Dism
issal!
Student!Dism
issal!
Student!Dism
issal!
!!
!!
!!
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker. © Solution Tree 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 9
K1s
t2n
d3r
d4t
h5t
h
7:55
Rece
ss 9
:40
– 9:
55
Rece
ss 1
0:00
– 1
0:15
Rece
ss 1
0:00
– 1
0:15
Rece
ss 1
0:00
– 1
0:15
Rece
ss 1
0:15
– 1
0:30
Rece
ss 1
0:15
– 1
0:30
Rece
ss w
/1st
11:
20 –
11:
40Re
cess
w/1
st 1
1:20
– 1
1:40
Rece
ss 1
2:10
– 1
2:25
Rece
ss 1
2:10
– 1
2:25
Rece
ss 1
2:40
– 1
2:55
Rece
ss 1
2:40
– 1
2:55
Dis
mis
sal 1
:15
12:3
0M
ath
12
:30
- 1:3
0M
ath
12
:30
- 1:3
01:
00
1:30
Wri
ting
/PBI
S/Li
brar
y
12
:45
- 1:1
0
Wri
ting
/PBI
S
1:
30 -
2:20
Wri
ting
/PBI
S
1:30
- 2:
202:
00
Linc
oln
Elem
enta
ry S
choo
lM
aste
r Sc
hedu
le 2
012-
13
Mig
hty
Ram
s A
nnou
ncem
ents
on
Blac
ktop
8:00
RtI
8:15
– 9
:00
ELA
8:
15 -
9:15
ELA
8:
15 -
9:15
8:30
9:00
ELA
9:00
- 10
:00
Mat
h
9:15
- 9:
40Rt
I 9:
15 -
10:0
0
PE/F
lex
Grou
ping
/Lib
rary
9:
15 -
10:0
0
Brea
kfas
t/A
tten
danc
e in
the
cla
ssro
om
ELA
8:
15 -
9:15
PE -
8:15
-9:0
0
Fl
ex/L
ibar
y - 8
:15-
9:15
Mat
h
8:15
- 9:
15
Wri
ting
/PBI
S
1:
40 -
2:25
PE/F
lex
Grou
ping
/Lib
rary
1:40
- 2:
25
10:3
0Rt
I
10:3
0 - 1
1:00
PE/F
lex
Grou
ping
/Lib
rary
10:1
5 - 1
1:00
11:0
0
11:3
0
Lunc
h
11
:00
– 11
:20
Lunc
h
11
:00
– 11
:20
PALS
11:4
0 - 1
2:15
PE
11:
45 -1
2:15
(Tue
s)
Wri
ting
/PBI
S
11:1
5-12
:15
Mat
h
11:1
5-12
:15
12:0
0
PE/F
lex
Grou
ping
/Lib
rary
11
:00
- 11:
45Rt
I
11:0
0 - 1
1:45
RtI
12:5
5 - 1
:40
Lang
uage
Dep
loym
ent
10
:15
- 11:
00La
ngua
ge D
eplo
ymen
t
10:1
5 - 1
1:00
Lunc
h
11
:45
– 12
:10
Lunc
h
11
:45
– 12
:10
Lang
uage
Dep
loym
ent
4t
h &
5th
Grad
e
10:3
0 - 1
1:15
Lang
uage
Dep
loym
ent
4t
h &
5th
Grad
e
10:3
0 - 1
1:15
10:0
0M
ath
9:
55 -
10:3
0
9:30
Lang
uage
Dep
loym
ent
12
:15-
12:4
5
Lang
uage
Dep
loym
ent
1:35
- 2:
20
Wri
ting
/PBI
S
12
:40
- 1:3
5
Mat
h
11:4
0 - 1
2:40
Lunc
h12
:15
– 12
:40
RtI
12:5
5 - 1
:40
Lunc
h12
:15
– 12
:40
ELA
9:
15 -
10:1
5EL
A
9:15
- 10
:15
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker. © Solution Tree 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate.10
Lincoln Elementary ‒ Sanger, CA ~ Home of the Mighty Rams ~
• We have district minimum days every other Wednesday. Our students are dismissed at 12:25. We hold a very brief staff meeting followed by at least two hours of collaborative time until 3:00.
• On non-minimum days, our students are dismissed at 2:25 and
teams meet until 4:00. The district contract states teachers will stay until 4:00 on the minimum days, but as a staff we voted to move the extra hour to the non-minimum days so we had longer to meet.
• Some grade level teams also meet while their students are in PE
classes, but others use that as their individual prep since it is contractually a prep time.
• During RtI blocks, our support team includes the grade-level
teachers, two intervention teachers, and the RSP teacher.
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 11
Provide Teams With Time to Collaborate (page 3 of 3)
• Shared classes: Teachers across two different grade levels or courses combine their students into one class for instruction. While one teacher or team instructs the students during that period or supervises buddy time—older students reading, writing, practicing math facts, and so on with their younger buddies—the other team engages in collaborative work. The teams alternate instructing and supervising and collaborating to provide equity in learning time for students and teams.
• Group activities, events, or testing: Teams of teachers coordinate activities that require supervision of students rather than instructional expertise (for example, videos, resource lessons, read-alouds, assemblies, whole-class testing). Administrators, instructional assistants, and other staff are assigned to instruct and supervise students while the teachers engage in team collaboration.
• Banking time: Over a designated period of days, instructional minutes are extended beyond the required school day. After banking the desired number of minutes on designated days, the instructional day ends early to allow for faculty collaboration and student enrichment. In a middle school, for example, the traditional instructional day ends at 3:00 p.m., students board buses at 3:20 p.m., and the teacher contractual day ends at 3:30 p.m. The faculty decides to extend the instructional day until 3:10 p.m. By teaching an extra ten minutes nine days in a row, they bank ninety minutes. On the tenth day, instruction stops at 1:30 p.m., and the entire faculty has collaborative team time for two hours. The students remain on campus and engage in clubs, enrichment activities, and assemblies that a variety of parent and community partners sponsor and the school’s nonteaching staff co-supervise.
• In-service and faculty meeting time: Schedule extended time for teams to work together on
staff development days and during faculty meeting time. Rather than requiring staff to attend a traditional whole-staff in-service session or sit in a faculty meeting while directives and calendar items are read to highly educated professionals, shift the focus and use of these days or meetings so members of teams have extended time to learn with and from each other.
Third
-Gra
de M
aste
r Sch
edul
e fo
r Ins
truct
ion
Mon
day
Tues
day
Wed
nesd
ayTh
ursd
ay
Frid
ay 8
:00–
8:15
Beg
inni
ng o
f tea
cher
wor
k da
y8:
15–8
:40
Stu
dent
arr
ival
(bre
akfa
st, m
orni
ng w
ork,
take
-in p
roce
dure
s)8:
40–8
:50
Tard
y be
ll, m
orni
ng a
nnou
ncem
ents
, and
sta
rt of
inst
ruct
iona
l day
8:50
–9:2
5
Bud
dy T
ime
9:25
–9:5
5C
olla
bora
tive
Team
Tim
e
9:55
–11:
45
Lan
guag
e A
rts–S
ocia
l Stu
dies
11:4
5–12
:15
Inte
rven
tion–
Enr
ichm
ent
12:2
0–1:
15
Lu
nch–
Rec
ess
1:15
–2:1
5
M
ath
2:15
–3:0
0
Sci
ence
3:00
–3:1
0
Afte
rnoo
n an
noun
cem
ents
and
stu
dent
dis
mis
sal
3:10
–3:3
0
Inst
ruct
iona
l sta
ff pl
anni
ng
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker • © Solution Tree 2015 • SolutionTree.comVisit AllThingsPLC.info/files/uploads/schedule_examples_elementary.pdf to download this page.
REPRODUCIBLE
12
COMMON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT 3.OA: OPERATIONS & ALGEBRAIC THINKING 3.OA4: Determine the unknown whole number in mult. & div. equations (Target 80/100)
STUDENT CLASS #1 CLASS #2 CLASS #3 CLASS #4
1 50 90 100 70
2 60 90 100 70
3 70 90 80 80
4 90 90 100 80
5 90 90 100 100
6 100 100 90 40
7 90 100 80 70
8 90 80 80 50
9 80 100 100 80
10 60 90 90 70
11 90 100 90 50
12 80 100 100 50
13 90 100 80 100
14 90 90 80 100
15 100 100 90 100
16 80 100 80 80
17 90 90 90 90
18 100 90 100 90
19 80 90 80 80
20 80 90 90 70
21 80 80 90 60
22 80 80 100 70
23 90 100 90 50
24 80 80 80 80
25 70 80 80 80
26 60 80 80
27 80 90 80
28 80 90
% Proficient
# Below Proficient
# At Proficient
# Above Proficient
Dat
a A
naly
sis P
roto
col
Te
am__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Te
ache
r___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
D
ate
____
____
____
____
_ Th
is an
alys
is is
base
d on
our
team
’s c
omm
on a
sses
smen
t of t
he fo
llow
ing
esse
ntia
l lea
rnin
gs.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
1.
Whi
ch o
f our
stud
ents
nee
d ad
ditio
nal t
ime
and
supp
ort t
o ac
hiev
e at
or
abov
e pr
ofic
ienc
y on
an
esse
ntia
l lea
rnin
g?
How
will
we
prov
ide
that
tim
e an
d su
ppor
t?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
2.
Wha
t is o
ur p
lan
to e
nric
h an
d ex
tend
the
lear
ning
for
stud
ents
who
are
hig
hly
prof
icie
nt?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
3.
Wha
t is a
n ar
ea w
here
my
stud
ents
stru
ggle
d? _
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Wha
t str
ateg
ies w
ere
used
by
team
mat
es w
hose
stud
ents
per
form
ed w
ell?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
4.
Wha
t is a
n ar
ea w
here
our
team
’s st
uden
ts st
rugg
led?
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
W
hat d
o w
e be
lieve
is th
e ca
use?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
Wha
t is o
ur p
lan
for
impr
ovin
g th
e re
sults
?___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
COMMON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT 3.OA: OPERATIONS & ALGEBRAIC THINKING 3.OA4: Determine the unknown whole number in mult. & div. equations (Target 80/100)
STUDENT CLASS #1 CLASS #2 CLASS #3 CLASS #4
1 50 90 100 70
2 60 90 100 70
3 70 90 80 80
4 90 90 100 80
5 90 90 100 100
6 100 100 90 40
7 90 100 80 70
8 90 80 80 50
9 80 100 100 80
10 60 90 90 70
11 90 100 90 50
12 80 100 100 50
13 90 100 80 100
14 90 90 80 100
15 100 100 90 100
16 80 100 80 80
17 90 90 90 90
18 100 90 100 90
19 80 90 80 80
20 80 90 90 70
21 80 80 90 60
22 80 80 100 70
23 90 100 90 50
24 80 80 80 80
25 70 80 80 80
26 60 80 80
27 80 90 80
28 80 90
% Proficient
# Below Proficient
# At Proficient
# Above Proficient
The Questions Facing Each Team
1. How will we provide additional support for
timely, directive, and systematic?
2. How will we enrich and extend the learning
ClassroomTeacher 1
ClassroomTeacher 2
ClassroomTeacher 3
ClassroomTeacher 4
Special Ed. Teacher
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker. © Solution Tree 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 13
COMMON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT 3.OA: OPERATIONS & ALGEBRAIC THINKING 3.OA4: Determine the unknown whole number in mult. & div. equations (Target 80/100)
STUDENT CLASS #1 CLASS #2 CLASS #3 CLASS #4
1 50 90 100 70
2 60 90 100 70
3 70 90 80 80
4 90 90 100 80
5 90 90 100 100
6 100 100 90 40
7 90 100 80 70
8 90 80 80 50
9 80 100 100 80
10 60 90 90 70
11 90 100 90 50
12 80 100 100 50
13 90 100 80 100
14 90 90 80 100
15 100 100 90 100
16 80 100 80 80
17 90 90 90 90
18 100 90 100 90
19 80 90 80 80
20 80 90 90 70
21 80 80 90 60
22 80 80 100 70
23 90 100 90 50
24 80 80 80 80
25 70 80 80 80
26 60 80 80
27 80 90 80
28 80 90
% Proficient
# Below Proficient
# At Proficient
# Above Proficient
Dat
a A
naly
sis P
roto
col
Te
am__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Te
ache
r___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
D
ate
____
____
____
____
_ Th
is an
alys
is is
base
d on
our
team
’s c
omm
on a
sses
smen
t of t
he fo
llow
ing
esse
ntia
l lea
rnin
gs.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
1.
Whi
ch o
f our
stud
ents
nee
d ad
ditio
nal t
ime
and
supp
ort t
o ac
hiev
e at
or
abov
e pr
ofic
ienc
y on
an
esse
ntia
l lea
rnin
g?
How
will
we
prov
ide
that
tim
e an
d su
ppor
t?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
2.
Wha
t is o
ur p
lan
to e
nric
h an
d ex
tend
the
lear
ning
for
stud
ents
who
are
hig
hly
prof
icie
nt?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
3.
Wha
t is a
n ar
ea w
here
my
stud
ents
stru
ggle
d? _
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Wha
t str
ateg
ies w
ere
used
by
team
mat
es w
hose
stud
ents
per
form
ed w
ell?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
4.
Wha
t is a
n ar
ea w
here
our
team
’s st
uden
ts st
rugg
led?
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
W
hat d
o w
e be
lieve
is th
e ca
use?
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
Wha
t is o
ur p
lan
for
impr
ovin
g th
e re
sults
?___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
COMMON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT 3.OA: OPERATIONS & ALGEBRAIC THINKING 3.OA4: Determine the unknown whole number in mult. & div. equations (Target 80/100)
STUDENT CLASS #1 CLASS #2 CLASS #3 CLASS #4
1 50 90 100 70
2 60 90 100 70
3 70 90 80 80
4 90 90 100 80
5 90 90 100 100
6 100 100 90 40
7 90 100 80 70
8 90 80 80 50
9 80 100 100 80
10 60 90 90 70
11 90 100 90 50
12 80 100 100 50
13 90 100 80 100
14 90 90 80 100
15 100 100 90 100
16 80 100 80 80
17 90 90 90 90
18 100 90 100 90
19 80 90 80 80
20 80 90 90 70
21 80 80 90 60
22 80 80 100 70
23 90 100 90 50
24 80 80 80 80
25 70 80 80 80
26 60 80 80
27 80 90 80
28 80 90
% Proficient
# Below Proficient
# At Proficient
# Above Proficient
The Questions Facing Each Team
1. How will we provide additional support for
timely, directive, and systematic?
2. How will we enrich and extend the learning
ClassroomTeacher 1
ClassroomTeacher 2
ClassroomTeacher 3
ClassroomTeacher 4
Special Ed. Teacher
DuFour, DuFour, Eaker. © Solution Tree 2018. SolutionTree.comReproducible.
REPRODUCIBLE
14
Cla
ssro
omTe
ache
r 1
Cla
ssro
omTe
ache
r 2
Cla
ssro
omTe
ache
r 3
Cla
ssro
omTe
ache
r 4
Spec
ial E
d.
Teac
her
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comReproducible.
REPRODUCIBLE
15
The Questions Facing Each Team
1. How will we provide additional support for students who experience initial difficulty in a way that is timely, directive, and systematic?
2. How will we extend and enrich learning for students who already know it?
3. Who is available to assist our team in responding to our students?
Extra Time and Support for Students in an Elementary School
Schedule grade-level teachers, resource specialists, and other supports to work together during I/E time.
Organize parent volunteers, business partners, senior citizens, and high school and college interns to serve as mentors and tutors along with the school-based team.
Redefine the focus of the student support team to plan additional interventions.
Save one student.
Develop buddy programs and peer tutoring.
Teacher 1
Teacher 2
Teacher 3
Teacher 4 Tutor 1 Tutor 2
Special Ed. Staff
Resource Specialist
Resource Specialist Important Cautions
Don’t fall in love with a tree—embrace the forest.
No system of intervention can compensate for weak and ineffective teaching.
At the same time a faculty is working to create extra time and support for student learning, it must also take steps to create the powerful collaborative teams and common formative assessments that contribute to adult learning.
The Questions Facing Each Team
1. How will we provide additional support for students who experience initial difficulty in a way that is timely, directive, and systematic?
2. How will we extend and enrich learning for students who already know it?
3. Who is available to assist our team in responding to our students?
Extra Time and Support for Students in an Elementary School
Schedule grade-level teachers, resource specialists, and other supports to work together during I/E time.
Organize parent volunteers, business partners, senior citizens, and high school and college interns to serve as mentors and tutors along with the school-based team.
Redefine the focus of the student support team to plan additional interventions.
Save one student.
Develop buddy programs and peer tutoring.
Teacher 1
Teacher 2
Teacher 3
Teacher 4 Tutor 1 Tutor 2
Special Ed. Staff
Resource Specialist
Resource Specialist Important Cautions
Don’t fall in love with a tree—embrace the forest.
No system of intervention can compensate for weak and ineffective teaching.
At the same time a faculty is working to create extra time and support for student learning, it must also take steps to create the powerful collaborative teams and common formative assessments that contribute to adult learning.
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate.16
Are our students assured extra time and support for learning?
Is our response timely? How quickly are we able to identify the kids who need extra time and support? Does our focus prompt intervention or enrichment rather than sluggish remediation?
Is our response directive rather than invitational? Are kids invited to put in extra time or does our system ensure they put in extra time?
Is our response systematic? Do kids receive this intervention or enrichment according to a schoolwide plan rather than at the discretion of individual teachers?
Assess Your School’s Response When Kids Don’t Learn or Already Know It
Conduct grade-level parent workshops.
Provide tools, tips, and materials for at-home practice during parent workshops and via frequent grade-level communication to parents.
Establish ongoing systems for two-way communication with each parent.
Send student work folders home—with teacher feedback—for parent review, comments, questions, and signature.
See Chapter 14 in Revisiting PLCs at Work for more information on parent partnerships in a PLC at Work.
Build and Nurture Strong Parent Partnerships
To sustain the momentum, PLCs …
... celebrate small wins early and
often!
What Are You Celebrating?
“Celebrations weave our hearts and souls into a shared destiny. People come together to celebrate beginnings and endings, triumphs, and tragedies.”
—Bolman & Deal, Leading With Soul: An Uncommon Journey of Spirit (1995)
Are our students assured extra time and support for learning?
Is our response timely? How quickly are we able to identify the kids who need extra time and support? Does our focus prompt intervention or enrichment rather than sluggish remediation?
Is our response directive rather than invitational? Are kids invited to put in extra time or does our system ensure they put in extra time?
Is our response systematic? Do kids receive this intervention or enrichment according to a schoolwide plan rather than at the discretion of individual teachers?
Assess Your School’s Response When Kids Don’t Learn or Already Know It
Conduct grade-level parent workshops.
Provide tools, tips, and materials for at-home practice during parent workshops and via frequent grade-level communication to parents.
Establish ongoing systems for two-way communication with each parent.
Send student work folders home—with teacher feedback—for parent review, comments, questions, and signature.
See Chapter 14 in Revisiting PLCs at Work for more information on parent partnerships in a PLC at Work.
Build and Nurture Strong Parent Partnerships
To sustain the momentum, PLCs …
... celebrate small wins early and
often!
What Are You Celebrating?
“Celebrations weave our hearts and souls into a shared destiny. People come together to celebrate beginnings and endings, triumphs, and tragedies.”
—Bolman & Deal, Leading With Soul: An Uncommon Journey of Spirit (1995)
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 17
Learning by Doing © 2006, 2010, 2016 Solution Tree Press • solution-tree.comVisit go.SolutionTree.com/PLCbooks to download this free reproducible.
Why Should Celebration Be a Part of Our Culture?
“In successful change efforts, empowered people create short-term wins—victories that nourish faith in the change effort, emotionally reward the hard workers, keep the critics at bay, and build momentum. Without sufficient wins that are visible, timely, unambiguous, and meaningful to others, change efforts inevitably run into serious problems” (Kotter & Cohen, 2002, p. 125).
“Milestones that are identified, achieved, and celebrated represent an essential condition for building a learning organization” (Thompson, 1995, p. 96).
“Remembering to recognize, reward, and celebrate accomplishments is a critical leadership skill. And it is probably the most underutilized motivational tool in organizations” (Kanter, 1999, p. 20).
“Win small. Win early. Win often” (Hamel, 2002, p. 202).
“The most effective change processes are incremental—they break down big problems into small, doable steps and get a person to say ‘yes’ numerous times, not just once. They plan for small wins that form the basis for a consistent pattern of winning that appeals to people’s desire to belong to a successful venture. A series of small wins provides a foundation of stable building blocks for change” (Kouzes & Posner, 1987, p. 210).
“Specific goals should be designed to allow teams to achieve small wins as they pursue their common purpose. Small wins are invaluable to building members’ commitment and overcoming the obstacles that get in the way of achieving a meaningful, long-term purpose” (Katzenbach & Smith, 1993, p. 54).
“When people see tangible results, however incremental at first, and see how the results flow from the overall concept, they will line up with enthusiasm. People want to be a part of a winning team. They want to contribute to producing visible, tangible results. . . . When they feel the magic of momentum, when they can begin to see tangible results—that’s when they get on board” (Collins, 2001, p. 178).
“Reward small improvements in behavior along the way. Don’t wait until people achieve phenomenal results” (Patterson et al., 2008, p. 205).
“Small successes stimulate individuals to make further commitments to change. Staffs need tangible results in order to continue the development of their commitment to the change program and small steps engender understanding as well” (Eastwood & Louis, 1992, p. 219).
“Visible measures of progress are critical for motivating and encouraging educators to persist in the challenging work of improvement. Even the most dedicated and optimistic among us will stop if there’s no sign that what we’re doing is making a difference, or might make a difference eventually” (Elmore & City, 2007).
“When you set small, visible goals, and people achieve them, they start to get it into their heads that they can succeed. They break the habit of losing and begin to get into the habit of winning” (Heath & Heath, 2010, p. 144).
One of the most important things leaders can do is to create the conditions that allow people to experience progress in their work and then recognize and celebrate their accomplishments, even small accomplishments (Amabile & Kramer, 2011).
Learning by Doing © 2006, 2010, 2016 Solution Tree Press • SolutionTree.comVisit go.SolutionTree.com/PLCbooks to download this free reproducible.
REPRODUCIBLE
18
Actively Promote a Climate of Achievement: Incentives and Celebrations
Recognize improvement and achievement in daily school announcements and within classrooms.
Create classroom, grade-level, and schoolwide celebrations linked to school and team goals. (Example: “Hand in Hand We All Learn” people chain to recognize books read.)
Celebrate using media: classroom, school, and district newsletters and broadcasts.
Provide public recognition at awards assemblies, PTO and PTA meetings, family nights, and school board meetings.
Share professional learning and achievements at team, vertical, faculty, and district-level meetings.
www.AllThingsPLC.info
Visit schools listed under
“Evidence of Effectiveness”
Apply to add YOUR school or district to the growing list of:
Inspirational Stories
Celebration Strategies
Evidence of Effectiveness
What Happens When Kids Don’t Learn?
“High expectations for success will be judged not only by the initial staff beliefs and behaviors, but also by the organization’s response when some students do not learn.”
—Lezotte, Effective Schools Correlates: The First and Second Generation (1991)
Thank You!
Becky DuFour
Actively Promote a Climate of Achievement: Incentives and Celebrations
Recognize improvement and achievement in daily school announcements and within classrooms.
Create classroom, grade-level, and schoolwide celebrations linked to school and team goals. (Example: “Hand in Hand We All Learn” people chain to recognize books read.)
Celebrate using media: classroom, school, and district newsletters and broadcasts.
Provide public recognition at awards assemblies, PTO and PTA meetings, family nights, and school board meetings.
Share professional learning and achievements at team, vertical, faculty, and district-level meetings.
www.AllThingsPLC.info
Visit schools listed under
“Evidence of Effectiveness”
Apply to add YOUR school or district to the growing list of:
Inspirational Stories
Celebration Strategies
Evidence of Effectiveness
What Happens When Kids Don’t Learn?
“High expectations for success will be judged not only by the initial staff beliefs and behaviors, but also by the organization’s response when some students do not learn.”
—Lezotte, Effective Schools Correlates: The First and Second Generation (1991)
Thank You!
Becky DuFour
© DuFour 2018. SolutionTree.comDo not duplicate. 19
The
Pro
fess
iona
l Lea
rnin
g C
om
mun
itie
s at
Wo
rk™
Co
ntin
uum
: P
rovi
din
g S
tud
ents
Wit
h Sy
stem
atic
Inte
rven
tio
ns a
nd E
xten
sio
ns
DIR
EC
TIO
NS
: Ind
ivid
ually
, sile
ntly
, and
ho
nest
ly a
sses
s th
e cu
rren
t re
alit
y o
f yo
ur s
cho
ol’s
imp
lem
enta
tio
n o
f ea
ch in
dic
ato
r lis
ted
in t
he le
ft
colu
mn
. Co
nsid
er w
hat
evid
ence
or
anec
do
tes
sup
po
rt y
our
ass
essm
ent.
Thi
s fo
rm m
ay a
lso
be
used
to
ass
ess
dis
tric
t o
r te
am im
ple
men
tati
on
.
We
ackn
ow
led
ge
that
th
e fu
nd
amen
tal p
urp
ose
of
ou
r sc
ho
ol i
s to
hel
p a
ll st
ud
ents
ach
ieve
hig
h le
vels
of
lear
nin
g, a
nd
th
eref
ore
, we
pro
vid
e st
ud
ents
w
ith
sys
tem
atic
inte
rven
tio
ns
wh
en t
hey
str
ug
gle
an
d e
xten
sio
ns
wh
en t
hey
are
pro
fici
ent.
Ind
icat
or
Pre
-Ini
tiat
ing
Init
iati
ngIm
ple
men
ting
Dev
elo
pin
gSu
stai
ning
We
pro
vid
e a
syst
em o
f in
terv
enti
on
s th
at
gu
aran
tees
ea
ch s
tud
ent
will
rec
eive
ad
dit
ion
al
tim
e an
d
sup
po
rt f
or
lear
nin
g if
h
e o
r sh
e ex
per
ien
ces
init
ial
dif
ficu
lty.
S
tud
ents
w
ho
are
p
rofi
cien
t h
ave
acce
ss t
o
enri
ched
an
d
exte
nd
ed
lear
nin
g
op
po
rtun
itie
s.
Wha
t ha
pp
ens
wh
en
a st
uden
t d
oes
no
t le
arn
will
dep
end
al
mo
st e
xclu
sive
ly
on
the
teac
her
to
w
hom
th
e st
uden
t is
ass
ign
ed. T
here
is
no
co
ord
inat
ed
scho
ol r
esp
ons
e to
stu
den
ts w
ho
exp
erie
nce
dif
ficu
lty.
S
om
e te
ache
rs a
llow
st
uden
ts t
o t
urn
in
late
wo
rk; s
om
e d
o
not.
So
me
teac
hers
al
low
stu
den
ts
to r
etak
e a
test
; so
me
do
no
t. T
he
tens
ion
that
occ
urs
at t
he c
onc
lusi
on
of
each
uni
t w
hen
som
e st
uden
ts a
re
pro
fici
ent
and
rea
dy
to m
ove
forw
ard
and
o
ther
s ar
e fa
iling
to
dem
ons
trat
e p
rofi
cien
cy is
left
to
eac
h te
ache
r to
re
solv
e.
Th
e sc
hoo
l has
at
tem
pte
d t
o es
tab
lish
spec
ific
po
licie
s an
d
pro
ced
ures
reg
ard
ing
ho
mew
ork
, gra
din
g,
par
ent
noti
fica
tio
n o
f st
uden
t p
rog
ress
, an
d r
efer
ral o
f st
u-
den
ts t
o c
hild
stu
dy
team
s to
ass
ess
thei
r el
igib
ility
fo
r sp
ecia
l ed
ucat
ion
serv
ices
. If
the
scho
ol p
rovi
des
an
y ad
dit
iona
l su
pp
ort
fo
r st
uden
ts,
it is
eit
her
a “p
ull-
out
” p
rog
ram
tha
t
rem
oves
stu
den
ts
fro
m n
ew d
irec
t in
stru
ctio
n o
r an
o
pti
ona
l aft
er-s
cho
ol
pro
gra
m. P
olic
ies
are
esta
blis
hed
fo
r id
en-
tify
ing
stu
den
ts w
ho
are
elig
ible
fo
r m
ore
ad
vanc
ed le
arni
ng.
Th
e sc
ho
ol h
as t
aken
st
eps
to p
rovi
de
stu
-d
ents
wit
h ad
dit
ion
al
tim
e an
d s
up
po
rt
wh
en t
hey
exp
erie
nce
d
iffi
cult
y. T
he
staf
f is
gra
pp
ling
wit
h st
ruct
ura
l iss
ues
su
ch
as h
ow
to
pro
vid
e ti
me
for
inte
rven
tio
n d
uri
ng
th
e sc
ho
ol d
ay
in w
ays
that
do
no
t re
mo
ve t
he
stu
den
t fr
om
new
dir
ect
in-
stru
ctio
n. T
he
sch
oo
l sc
hed
ule
is r
egar
ded
as
a m
ajo
r im
ped
i-m
ent
to in
terv
enti
on
and
en
rich
men
t, a
nd
st
aff
mem
ber
s ar
e u
nwill
ing
to
ch
ang
e it
. S
om
e ar
e co
nce
rned
th
at p
rovi
din
g s
tu-
den
ts w
ith
add
itio
nal
ti
me
and
su
pp
ort
is
no
t h
old
ing
th
em
resp
on
sib
le f
or
thei
r o
wn
lear
nin
g.
Th
e sc
ho
ol h
as
dev
elo
ped
a
sch
oo
lwid
e p
lan
to
pro
vid
e st
ud
ents
w
ho
exp
erie
nce
d
iffi
cult
y w
ith
add
itio
nal
tim
e an
d s
up
po
rt f
or
lear
nin
g in
a w
ay
that
is t
imel
y,
dir
ecti
ve, a
nd
sy
stem
atic
. It
has
m
ade
stru
ctu
ral
chan
ges
su
ch a
s m
od
ific
atio
ns
in t
he
dai
ly s
ched
ule
to
su
pp
ort
th
is s
yste
m
of
inte
rven
tio
ns.
S
taff
mem
ber
s h
ave
bee
n as
sig
ned
n
ew r
ole
s an
d
resp
on
sib
iliti
es
to a
ssis
t w
ith
the
inte
rven
tio
ns.
Th
e fa
cult
y is
loo
kin
g
for
way
s to
mak
e th
e sy
stem
of
inte
rven
tio
ns
mo
re
effe
ctiv
e.
Th
e sc
ho
ol h
as a
hig
hly
co
ord
inat
ed
syst
em o
f in
terv
enti
on
s an
d e
xten
sio
ns
in p
lace
. Th
e sy
stem
is v
ery
pro
acti
ve.
Co
ord
inat
ion
wit
h se
nd
er s
cho
ols
en
able
s th
e st
aff
to id
enti
fy s
tud
ents
w
ho
will
ben
efit
fro
m a
dd
itio
nal
tim
e an
d s
up
po
rt f
or
lear
nin
g e
ven
bef
ore
th
ey a
rriv
e at
th
e sc
ho
ol.
Th
e sy
stem
is
ver
y fl
uid
. Stu
den
ts m
ove
into
in
terv
enti
on
and
en
rich
men
t ea
sily
an
d
rem
ain
on
ly a
s lo
ng
as
they
ben
efit
fr
om
it. T
he
achi
evem
ent
of
each
st
ud
ent
is m
oni
tore
d o
n a
tim
ely
bas
is.
Stu
den
ts w
ho
exp
erie
nce
dif
ficu
lty
are
req
uire
d, r
ath
er t
han
invi
ted
, to
ut
ilize
th
e sy
stem
of
sup
po
rt. T
he
pla
n is
mul
tila
yere
d. I
f th
e cu
rren
t le
vel o
f ti
me
and
su
pp
ort
is n
ot
suff
icie
nt t
o
hel
p a
stu
den
t b
eco
me
pro
fici
ent,
he
or
she
is m
ove
d t
o t
he
nex
t le
vel a
nd
re
ceiv
es in
crea
sed
tim
e an
d s
up
po
rt.
All
stu
den
ts a
re g
uar
ante
ed a
cces
s to
th
is s
yste
m o
f in
terv
enti
on
s re
gar
dle
ss
of
the
teac
her
to
wh
om
th
ey a
re
assi
gn
ed. T
he
scho
ol r
esp
on
ds
to
stu
den
ts a
nd
vie
ws
tho
se w
ho
are
fa
ilin
g t
o le
arn
as “
un
der
sup
po
rted
” ra
ther
th
an “
at r
isk.
”
page
1 o
f 2
Learning by Doing © 2006, 2010, 2016 Solution Tree Press • SolutionTree.comVisit go.SolutionTree.com/PLCbooks to download this free reproducible.
REPRODUCIBLE
20
Whe
re D
o W
e G
o F
rom
Her
e? W
ork
shee
t P
rovi
din
g S
tud
ents
Wit
h Sy
stem
atic
Inte
rven
tio
ns a
nd E
xten
sio
ns
Ind
icat
or
of
a P
LC a
t W
ork
Wha
t st
eps
or
acti
viti
es m
ust
be
init
iate
d
to c
reat
e th
is
cond
itio
n in
yo
ur s
cho
ol?
Who
will
be
resp
ons
ible
fo
r in
itia
ting
o
r su
stai
ning
th
ese
step
s o
r ac
tivi
ties
?
Wha
t is
a
real
isti
c ti
mel
ine
for
each
ste
p
or
pha
se o
f th
e ac
tivi
ty?
Wha
t w
ill
you
use
to
asse
ss t
he
effe
ctiv
enes
s o
f yo
ur in
itia
tive
?
We
pro
vid
e a
syst
em o
f in
terv
enti
on
s th
at g
uar
ante
es e
ach
stu
den
t w
ill r
ecei
ve a
dd
itio
nal
tim
e an
d s
up
po
rt f
or
lear
nin
g
if h
e o
r sh
e ex
per
ien
ces
init
ial d
iffi
cult
y. S
tud
ents
wh
o a
re
pro
fici
ent
hav
e ac
cess
to
en
rich
ed a
nd
ext
end
ed le
arn
ing
o
pp
ort
un
itie
s.
page
2 o
f 2
Learning by Doing © 2006, 2010, 2016 Solution Tree Press • SolutionTree.comVisit go.SolutionTree.com/PLCbooks to download this free reproducible.
REPRODUCIBLE
21