The Madison Story

Vision into Reality – Inclusive, Collaborative and Culturally

Responsive Schools

Hope is “believing you

have both the will and the way to

accomplish your goals.”

-- C.R. Synder, “The Will and the Ways:Development and Validation of an IndividualDifferences Measure of Hope,”1991

Agenda Learning About Data Purpose, Collection

and Analysis to Create Change Understanding a Process from

Exclusionary Practices to Inclusionary Practices

Discovering Two Effective Change Models

Discovering Teaming Tools Planning for the Future

Outcomes

By the end of this session, you will be able to say…

I know how to use data to create a sense of urgency for my school.

I have several team tools I can begin using right away.

I can implement the change process. I have reflected on my own beliefs and values

relative to what I’ve learned today and identified needs for next year.

M & M Reflections….HandoutSelect 3 different colors of M & M’s, find a partner with the same color, and answer that question…once done, move to the next partner with another color until all three are used.

Weeds or Wildflowers…

Discuss the following: Partner #1 - Who are the weeds and

wildflowers in your school? Partner #2 - Why are they viewed

differently? Partner #3 - What would it take to have all

students viewed as wildflowers?

MMSD Profile Madison – population of 221,551 (State Capital & home of Univ. of Wisconsin)

School district enrollment of 24,268 (Sept. 2007 K-12 enrollment) Grades K-5 = 11,266 Grades 6 – 8 = 5,104 Grades 9 – 12 = 7,898

Special Education K-12 enrollment of 3,766 (15.52% of district enrollment)

ELL enrollment of 3,566 (14.51% of district enrollment)

Schools 32 elementary schools (grades K-5) average class size 13.41 11 middle schools (grades 6-8) average class size 21.3 4 comprehensive high schools – average class size 23.6

Alternative Schools/Programs 13 alternative schools/programs (early childhood programs and

alternative programs at the secondary level (6-12).

A Story of Change

Leading a comprehensive, multi-year improvement effort to become more

inclusive, collaborative and culturally responsive

It all began 10 years ago…

A growing group of parents were questioning our special education practices

Incoming Superintendent and Director concluded that change was needed

Beginning with a “vision” supported by core beliefs and values

Change = Becoming inclusive, collaborative and culturally responsive

Change process

Theory of change

Essential principles of change

Putting theory into practice

Plan of Improvement

So What Did This Change Represent?

Old System Categorical funding,

thinking, and organizational boundaries

Label, deficit driven Conflicting values, beliefs

(e.g., school placement) Negative language

New System Eliminate categorical

barriers Needs-based Build on strengths Share common values

and beliefs for all kids Language that is positive,

affirming and respectful

Significant Events 1997 – Incoming Superintendent and Director shared a

common vision for special education

1999 – Conducted focus group interviews to solicit thoughts, concerns and interests regarding the state of special education in MMSD

1999-2000 – A Report to the Superintendent outlined vision and recommendations from report

2000 – Comprehensive, Multi-year Professional Development Plan – retooling for change

2002 – Instructional Design

2003 – Race & Equity Work (Courageous Conversations)

2006 – Development of Culturally Responsive Checklist

Key Observations There is inter-relationship between the various

district improvement initiatives.

This remains a collaborative “work in progress”… the more we learn, the more we realize what we don’t know!

Easier to initiate change at elementary level

It is about taking risks and learning from our successes and failures.

Continuously examining our data remains essential to evaluating the success of our efforts.

DATA An important part of our story

Prevalence

Referrals/ placements

Least restrictive environment

Disproportionality

High school completion, attendance, suspensions, expulsions

MMSD Special Education Prevalence Rate

23,227 23,806 24,223 24,452 24,872 25,046 25,158 25,113 24,943

2,416 2,547 2,640 2,836 3,010 3,131 3,170 3,267 3,566 3,791

25,327

10.4% 10.7% 10.9% 11.6% 12.1% 12.5% 12.6% 12.9%14.2%

15.2%

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00

School Year

Nu

mb

er o

f S

tud

ents

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

Pre

vale

nce

Rat

e

District Enrollment- using 3rd Friday - Sept. Spec Ed Enrollment -using 3rd Friday Sept.

Projected SE Prevalence Rate Actual SE Prevalence Rate

MMSD Special Education Prevalence Rate

25,087 24,893 24,966 24,888

4,089 4,232 4,269 4,181 4,250 4,188 4,202

24,71024,57624,490

16.3%17.2%

18.2%19.1%

20.0%

16.3%17.0% 17.1% 16.8% 17.2% 17.1% 17.1%

21.0% 21.9%

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

School Year

Nu

mb

er o

f S

tud

ents

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

Pre

vale

nce

Rat

e

District Enrollment- using 3rd Friday - Sept. Spec Ed Enrollment -using 3rd Friday Sept.

Projected SE Prevalence Rate Actual SE Prevalence Rate

cost savings: $9,669,291 savings for 06-07

K-12 Initial Referrals and Placements into Special Education

440 408 389328 327 314

280 255176

108 175

204 184 205216

160

194

219

80%

70%

64%62%

64%61%

56%61%

48%

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

98-99 99-00CCIS

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07

School Year

To

tal S

tud

en

ts R

efe

rred

an

d P

laced

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Pla

cem

en

t as %

of T

ota

l Refe

rrals

Total Students Placed Total Students Not Placed Placements as a % of Total Referred

Attend Neighborhood School, 90%

Not Neighborhood

School - Parent Initiated Internal

Transfer, 6%

Not Neighborhood School - IEP

Placement, 4%

2007-2008

Special Education Enrollment (K-12) in

Neighborhood School

2005-2006

Neighborhood School

91%

Not Neighborhood School - Parent Initiated Internal

Transfer6%

Not Neighborhood School - IEP Placement

3%

Special Education K-12 Enrollmentby Least Restrictive Environment

(special education services outside general education classroom)

Substantially Separate

> 60%

Partial Inclusion21-60%

Full Inclusion < 21%

72%

12%

16%

2005-06 2007-08

Full Inclusion

< 21%

Partial Inclusion 21-60%

Substantially Separate

> 60%

68%

19%

13%

MMSD District and Special Education Enrollment

Comparison of 2002-03 and 2007-08

Ethnic Group

Special Education Enrollment

Special Education

PercentageDistrict

Enrollment District

Percentage

Percent of Ethnic

Group in SE

02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08 02-03 07-08

African American 1,526 1,582 34% 38% 4,764 5,653 19% 23% 32% 28%

White 2,311 1,890 52% 45%15,17

112,78

1 61% 52% 15% 15%

Hispanic 311 419 7% 10% 2,331 3,360 9% 14% 13% 13%

Native American 44 42 1% 1% 166 172 1% 1% 27% 25%

Asian 236 226 5% 5% 2,534 2,577 10% 10% 9% 9%

  4,428 4,159 100% 100%24,96

624,54

3 100% 100%    

Data

2006-07 School Year

  ELLSpecial

Ed District

High School Completion  73.00% 81.00% 91.00%

Attendance  92.56% 90.50% 93.20%

Suspensionsper 100 students 14.5  24.7 11.3

Recom. for Expulsion  0.25% 1.26% 0.37%

Enrollment (K-12)  3,566 3,766 24,268

% of District Enrollment  14.51% 15.52%  

Answer questions on the following page about data analysis in your school.

Think – Pair – Share:

Reflect on the data story just shared. What kinds of data do you use in your school or district to tell a story and create a sense of urgency?

What is the principal’s role in the development and sharing of data?

2002 The Beginning of the Instructional Design Model

Using inclusive practices Becoming collaborative

through the teaming process, and

Becoming culturally responsive to student needs

Today, Response to Interventions Provides Another Need for the Instructional Design Model RtI is the practice of:

High-quality instruction and interventions matched to student needs.

Monitoring the rate at which students learn and the level at which they perform.

Using student performance data to make decisions about instruction, goals, eligibility for special education programs and services, and other critical educational decisions across general, remedial, and special education.

Response to Intervention

Tier 3IntensiveIndividual

Intervention

Tier 2Targeted Interventions

15% of Students

Tier 1Core Instructional Practices

80% of Students

5%

Instructional Design

The MMSD Instructional Design Model…

The Instructional Design Model is the way we place students, use our adult resources, and deliver services to our students in a collaborative, inclusive manner.

The MMSD Elementary Instructional Design Model is based on three fundamental district concepts

Student engagement, learning, and relationships are equally important in their growth process.

Systematic, district-wide supports are critical to support changes in schools.

A collaborative culture in which adults share responsibility and embrace all students.

The expectation is that all three components of the Instructional Design must be present in all schools…. Inclusive practices for Special Education,

ELLs, and Title I eligible students

Class Placement through clustering

Collaboration through teaming

Beliefs…Why Promote Teaming for Inclusive Practices?

We bring services to students. It builds collaboration among staff. Easier to differentiate instruction to meet the

needs of all students. Human resources are used well. It builds the capacity of all teachers to work

with all students. Easier to establish relationships with all

students because conversations are about all students.

The expectation is that all three components must be present in all schools….

Inclusive Practices

Class Placement

Collaboration

And…

Resources are aligned and distributed based on this expectation (will be discussed later).

District support is available to support the change process.

What Does it Look Like?

Examples of the teaming process in elementary, middle, and high schools to support inclusive, collaborative, and culturally responsive classrooms

Class Placement Inclusive Beliefs

& Best Practices

Team Structures

Missing the team structure

Missing the class placement processMissing Inclusive

Beliefs and Best Practices

Sound Instructional Design

What does a School Using Inclusive Practices Look Like?

Integrated, heterogeneous classrooms, where all students belong, are successful and have their individual needs met by highly qualified teachers.

What does a School Using Inclusive Practices Look Like?

These highly qualified teachers know how to co-plan and co-teach together through collaborative teaming structures.

What does a School Using Inclusive Practices Look Like? Serves ALL students in the regular

education classroom, regardless of ability/disability, language, or educational need.

Brings services to students instead of pulling them out to a special program.

How Does the Instructional Design Model Work?

Characteristics:

Organized into teams.

Time for team meetings.

Common values, beliefs, and assumptions about teaching and learning.

Share a common vision for what the school will be like and have selected goals to help achieve the vision.

Teams are given significant responsibility contribute to decisions and work to implement agreed upon changes.

Teams plan and implement curriculum and assessments for students.

Teams use data to identify challenges and school-wide solutions

Teams know what other teams are working on through effective communication practices.

Students, teachers, and parents all know what the school is doing to improve.

Answer questions on the following slide about teaming structures in your school.

Learning Partners What team structures do you have in

place at your school?

How do your teams align with the characteristics just shared?

Do the teams support culturally responsive, inclusive practices for all students?

The Role of the School Leader is to Build Capacity of Teaming

Start with teams that are ready

Promote skillfulness and trust for change

Let go of authority…inspire change through beliefs

Build in accountability

Share learnings

Provide structure and support (Team planning and coordination handout)

Lambert, Leadership CapacityFor Lasting Improvement (2003)

Again, the expectation is that all three components must be present in all schools….

Inclusive Practices Class Placement Collaboration

And…resources are aligned and distributed based on this expectation

And…district support is available to support change

(Refer to the two allocation analysis handouts)

District Support and ResourcesAnalysis of Service Delivery Plan for MMSD Elementary Schools (2/5/08) - Revised May 2003

Purpose:

- Review of current design for planning. - Problem-solving adjustments to make during the school year. - Request for addl alloc

GUIDING PRINCIPLE ASSESSMENT STATUSMISALIGNMENT AND CAUSE OR REASON

ACTIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS

TIMELINE TO IMPLEMENT . . . .

Special education students are assigned to a regular education class.

Aligns Completely Aligns Partially Does not Align      

Case management assignments are by grade or level, not categorical label.

Aligns Completely Aligns Partially Does not Align      

Case management assignments are balanced by student need, type, and amount of special education service using a weight system.

Aligns Completely Aligns Partially Does not Align

     

District Support and ResourcesCurrent Special Education Staff Configuration

GradeRegular Ed

TeacherTotal # of Students

# CC Students

Special Education Teacher FTE

Caseload Number . . . . .

K

1

2

3

“People must learn themselves through

change.”

Linda Lambert

Building Leadership Capacity

in Schools (ASCD, 1998)

Begin with a Theory of Change

Managing Complex Change: (Lippett, Knoster, Ambrose)

VisionSkills

IncentivesResources

Action Plan

Refer to Handout

Implementing the Change Process(Michael Fullan)

Initiation-Planning

Implementation

Institutionalization

Success Factors of Change Projects~ Huberman and Miles and Fullan

InitiationLinked to high profile needClear model of implementationOne or more strong advocates

(staff and parents)Active initiation

Implementation CoordinationShared controlPressure and supportOngoing assistance Early rewards for teachers

Success Factors of Change Projects~ Huberman and Miles and Fullan

InstitutionalizationEmbeddingLinks to instructionWidespread useRemoval of competing prioritiesContinuing assistance

Success Factors of Change Projects~ Huberman and Miles and Fullan

One More Step for Classroom Change to Measure Success…Develop an ID Rubric

Inquiry Initiation Implementation Institutionalization

2006-07 Elementary Schools as a District(31 MMSD Elementary Schools)

02468

1012#

of S

choo

ls

Inquiry

Initi

atio

n

Implem

enta

tion

Insti

tutio

naliza

tion

Stages

2008-09 Elementary Schools as a District(31 MMSD Elementary Schools)

02468

1012

# of

Sch

ools

Inquiry

Initi

atio

n

Implem

enta

tion

Insti

tutio

naliza

tion

Stages

Next Steps…. Develop three cohorts of principals

(mixed schools) to meet monthly for the purpose of continuing the change process by improvingCollaboration Inclusionary PracticesCulturally responsive classrooms

For student success….

What are your next steps?

How does your district philosophically align with this model?

What are the apparent conflicts? If your district is not aligned, how can you

share this vision and work together to make this a reality?

Anyone too busy to reflect on one’s practice is also too busy to improve.Robert Garmston

Anyone too busy to reflect on one’s practice is also too busy to improve. 

Robert Garmston