NC Fall 2015 Data Collection Report

8/19/2019 NC Fall 2015 Data Collection Report

1/95

i

North Carolina Fall 2015 Data Collection

Executive Summary

In the spring of 2014, Hope Street Group (HSG) and the North Carolina Department of PublicInstruction (NCDPI) entered into an agreement to launch the North Carolina Teacher VoiceNetwork (TVN), broadening its collaboration to include the North Carolina State Board ofEducation in spring 2015. The purpose of the TVN is to positively inform decisions made byeducation policymakers seeking input from educators throughout the state through surveys,focus groups, and Professional Learning Networks (PLN).

Thirty-one educators from across the state became the first group of Network Leaders for theNorth Carolina TVN. They moderated 74 focus groups on the topics selected for the fall 2015data collection. Additionally, 2,347 teachers (2 percent of all North Carolina teachers)responded to survey questions.

The following is an overview of findings and associated recommendations organized by topicarea.

North Carolina Educator Evaluation System

Across surveys and focus groups, teachers expressed concerns about the structure of thecurrent North Carolina Educator Evaluation System (NCEES), particularly about Standard 6,which measures student growth as determined by a value-added metric. Teachers felt that:

Formative and summative assessments offer a clearer picture of student

knowledge and growth than do standardized assessments;

The emphasis on student academic achievement as part of the evaluation

process should be reduced;

Student surveys may be invalid or unreliable measures of teacher

effectiveness; and

Aspects of the evaluation process were too subjective.

Based on these findings, we recommend that NCDPI consider providing teachers with additionalinformation on the use of student surveys in educator evaluations.


2/95

ii

North Carolina teachers may benefit from professional development that shows them

how to use student survey results to individualize instruction.

NCDPI should consider offering principals and teachers additional training on Standard

6 to provide information and clarity on the utility of the student achievement growth

metric in evaluations and how it is calculated. Training would also help principals better

respond to teachers’ questions about the process. NCDPI and the North Carolina Board of Education should take steps to:

o Increase the utility of the evaluation system by providing timely, actionable

feedback and access to further support in areas of need; and

o Reduce the perceived subjectivity of the Educator Evaluation System by

establishing interrater agreement across principals who observe teachers.

North Carolina Standard Course of Study Resources and Professional Development

Most teachers found North Carolina Standard Course of Study resources to be helpful, butapproximately 10 percent of teachers were unaware of these resources. Only about 25 percentof teachers reported that professional development around the North Carolina Standard Course

of Study has helped them to support their peers’ understanding of the standards or their peers’ability to make changes to instructional practice.

Based on these findings, we recommend that NCDPI take steps to:

Ensure that all teachers are aware of NCDPI instructional resources for the Standard

Course of Study;

Encourage districts to bring greater visibility to the instructional resources in the North

Carolina Standard Course of Study through various dissemination platforms (e.g., e-

mails, professional development sessions);

Continue the ongoing development and dissemination of resources, including sample

lesson plans, sample assessment items, pacing guides, and scope and sequence

guides; and

Offer all teachers opportunities to participate in small-group professional development

in the North Carolina Standard Course of Study within local schools or districts,

particularly in instructional strategies related to working with different student groups,

integrating technology into instruction, integrating literacy across content areas,

developing new curricular materials, and understanding the importance of collaboration.

Use of Resources

Teachers expressed concerns about funding limitations and a resulting lack of availableresources (e.g., textbooks, other classroom materials) and staffing. In focus groups, they shared

concerns about educational equity. Specifically, teachers suggested: Providing greater equity in resource funding and distribution;

Reducing class sizes and having smaller teacher-to-student ratios;

Recognizing student demographic differences in testing situations;

Utilizing student growth scores to a greater extent;

Focusing on student performance outside of testing situations (e.g., informal learning);

and

Providing greater access to technology in schools and homes.


3/95

iii

Teachers offered both positive and negative feedback on access to and availability oftechnology in their classrooms. Additionally, survey results indicated they were not using all ofthe available Home Base resources (e.g., accessing lesson plan templates, engaging andcommunicating with parents more deeply).

Based on these findings, we recommend that NCDPI: Offer strategies to districts on how to reallocate existing resources; and

Share with educators how the 2016 state budget allocates additional funds in the areas

of textbook availability and staffing and how that funding will impact districts and

schools.

We recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education:

Consider four key components when implementing new technology initiatives:

o Evaluate the technological requirements and necessary infrastructure to

adequately support the use of technology, including access in students’ homes,

professional development for educators, as well as ongoing support for

educators;

o Investigate the specific needs of classrooms related to technology infrastructure;

o Seek teacher input in selecting grade and subject-specific technology resources;

and

o Explore the research evidence and evaluation results for particular technology

curricula currently being used or being considered for future use.

Provide more information to teachers about the value of different Home Base resources,

including lesson plan templates, instructional planning guides, parent engagement

tools, and resources related to understanding assessments.

Approach educational equity as a multifaceted issue embedded within funding

structures and evaluation systems.o NCDPI should consider how current funding is allocated to different schools and

student groups when prioritizing funding or making funding decisions.

o NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education should acknowledge

the wide variance in student demographics across the state and the resulting

importance of working to meet diverse needs and ability levels through testing

and different types of remedial support.

Teacher Voice, Collaborations, and Leadership

Leadership CapacityIn order to build leadership capacity, teachers shared that they need more time and clearerinstructional models in various professional development contexts.

To promote teacher leadership opportunities, we recommend that NCDPI and the NorthCarolina State Board of Education consider how it might support districts in restructuring theschool day or year to provide more time for teachers to:

Collaborate;

Participate in teacher-led professional development; and

Receive one-on-one mentoring or coaching.


4/95

iv

If restructuring is not possible, NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education couldprovide resources to district superintendents to examine current time use within schools to findopportunities for protected planning and professional development time

Charter SchoolsTeachers who participated in focus groups had negative perceptions of charter schools,

believing that these schools: Often take resources and students from regular public schools;

Have lower standards; and

Work in isolation of local school districts.

To encourage positive perceptions and greater awareness of charter schools, we recommendthat NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education provide and encourage effectivecollaboration opportunities between local education agencies and charter schools. Establishingmore collaborative relationships might yield greater understanding by both parties, bettercomparability in course rigor, and more extensive sharing of resources.

ProfessionalismDuring focus groups, teachers shared that being treated as a professional means:

Receiving fair compensation;

Being trusted and valued for their judgments and ideas; and

Being respected.

We recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education consider differentways to increase teachers’ positive feelings regarding their value, voice, and input in theteaching profession as well as in the future direction of education in North Carolina. Forexample, NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education should share with teachersand instructional staff how its staff uses feedback from HSG focus groups and surveys and theNorth Carolina Teacher Working Conditions (2014). Timely responsiveness to teacher input

should be a priority.

http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/


5/95

2

ContentsExecutive Summary .................................................................................................................. i

Background ............................................................................................................................. 3

TVN Activities to Date ............................................................................................................. 4

Fall 2015 Survey ..................................................................................................................... 6Teacher Engagement in North Carolina .................................................................................. 6

Spring 2016 Survey ................................................................................................................. 7

External Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 7

Report Layout and Design ....................................................................................................... 7

Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 9

Survey Data ...........................................................................................................................14

Focus Group Data ..................................................................................................................64

Appendix A.............................................................................................................................75

Appendix B.............................................................................................................................82

Appendix C ............................................................................................................................86

Appendix D ............................................................................................................................89

Appendix E.............................................................................................................................90


6/95

3

Background

In the spring of 2014, Hope Street Group (HSG) and the North Carolina Department of PublicInstruction (NCDPI) entered into an agreement to launch the North Carolina Teacher VoiceNetwork (TVN). After working closely with NCDPI over the course of several months, HSG

invited the North Carolina State Board of Education to join the partnership between HSG andNCDPI. During 2014, HSG also identified other state organizations, such as: Business forEducational Success and Transformation (BEST NC), the North Carolina Association ofEducators (NCAE), the North Carolina Public School Forum, Professional Educators of NorthCarolina (PENC), and the North Carolina School Superintendents Association (NCSSA) thatmight benefit from the work of the TVN and met with them to secure their support and ask themto help recruit teachers to participate in the TVN. As part of the program’s model, HSG hired astate director in March 2015 to run the program locally and serve as the primary point of contactfor the organizations HSG works with in North Carolina.

During March 2015, HSG opened the application process for the North Carolina TVN. Applications were received from more than 500 teachers. After a rigorous review process, 31educators from across the state were selected to become the first group of Network Leaders forthe North Carolina TVN.1 Network Leaders for North Carolina are listed below.

Joni Allison Henderson County Public Schools

Barry Richard Barber Asheboro City Schools

James (Jim) Brooks Wilkes County Schools

Bryan Christopher Durham Public Schools

Myra Creech Columbus County Schools

Yvonne de St. Croix Carteret County Public Schools

John deVille Macon County Schools

Akinyi Edmonds Wake County Public Schools

Melissa Faetz Macon County Schools

Trey Ferguson Wake County Public Schools

Pamela Fitzpatrick Orange County Schools

Mamie Hall Public Charter

Guy Hill Harnett County Schools

Rene Lemons North Carolina Charter

Elliot Lunsford Buncombe County Schools

Hilary Marshall Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Stacey Mrazek Newton-Conover City Schools

Christie Murphy Guilford County SchoolsKelly Norton Pipes Wilkes County Schools

Lucas Pasley Alleghany County Schools

Kayonna (Kay) Pitchford Cumberland County Schools

Brian Randall Asheville City Schools

Jennifer Rosser New Hanover County Schools

1 Since their selection, four teachers withdrew from the program for personal reasons.


7/95

4

Angela (Angie) Scioli Wake County Public Schools

Courtney Sears Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools

Amanda Wallace Watauga County Schools

Bridget Wortman Pender County Schools

Since their selection, the Network Leaders of the TVN have learned about education policy inNorth Carolina and the development of productive partnerships via their participation inindividualized projects and initiatives designed to elevate teacher voice in North Carolina.

TVN Activities to Date

Network Leaders attended an orientation training in Greensboro, North Carolina, that introducedthe TVN program by emphasizing the role of developing a personal narrative. Network Leadersalso heard from a panel of leaders of North Carolina policy organizations and began exploringways to develop networks of peers, known in the program as Professional Learning Networks(PLNs).2

As a follow-up to the orientation, Network Leaders participated in a webinar-based training onbuilding relationships with policymakers. Beforehand, Network Leaders “power -mapped”individuals with an influence on policy in their geographic area and reviewed the process ofdeveloping innovative solutions to solve the myriad of challenges teachers face in theirclassrooms and schools.

Several weeks later, Network Leaders convened again to spend two days planning for the fall2015 data collection, producing action plans for their respective workgroups and undertakingtraining in social media use, as well as effective verbal and written communications. NetworkLeaders developed workgroups in the following areas: legislative engagement, teacherengagement, social media/communications, and editorial procedures. Each workgroup servesas a support structure for all of the Network Leaders as they pursue activities in each area.

The second training also provided Network Leaders with skills in facilitating focus groups of theircolleagues, an essential component of the data collections HSG conducts twice annually inevery state where the program operates.

Monthly group calls and individual check-ins grounded the program in personalized supportfrom the State Director. As needed, the Director provided one-on-one and small-groupmentoring to Network Leaders to help craft meeting agendas, draft e-mails, strategize accessingnew contacts, and troubleshoot issues within the Network as they arose. Additionally, NetworkLeaders received a Purpose Engagement Workbook to encourage discussion about teacherengagement as well as to provide assistance about creative, focused ways to develop othereducators into teacher voice champions.

After the orientation sessions, Network Leaders immediately began developing their individualProfessional Learning Networks (PLNs) to solicit participation in the fall 2015 data collection

2 Professional Learning Networks (PLN) are groups of teachers who have agreed to be engaged at the most basic level (HSGand TVN staff can e-mail them). PLN members are tapped to respond to surveys and participate in TVN activities, and they arenotified when NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education (and, in some cases, other state partners) act uponrecommendations generated from the data.


8/95

5

and to create a community of two-way communication on education policy in North Carolina. Atthe time of the survey launch, Network Leaders’ PLNs included 2 percent of all of NorthCarolina’s teachers.

Network Leaders also engaged in activities to broaden their expertise on education policy. Forexample, in September and October 2015, several Network Leaders provided input to the North

Carolina Academic Standards Review Commission, a body formed by the General Assembly toproduce a report of recommendations on the future of the North Carolina Standard Course ofStudy.

Additionally, in October 2015, three Network Leaders were featured in a video on “Data DrivenInstruction” produced by BEST NC and distributed with help from educational organizationsthroughout North Carolina.

Since the program’s inception, Network Leaders have also:

a) Developed relationships to position the TVN as an asset to North Carolina’s Assessment

Proof of Concept Study;

b) Published writings in EdNC.org, the North Carolina New Schools Project blog, and localnewspapers;

c) Organized teachers in their individual PLNs to attend district school board meetings;

d) Built relationships with education leaders by presenting to school boards on the value of

teacher voice, asking for the active support of superintendents in collecting teacher

feedback, and networking with peer organizations to engage more educators;

e) Aligned their TVN work with professional development and advocacy organizations to

expand their PLNs and amplify teacher voice through personal projects; and

f) Held a statewide Twitter chat on professionalism in education, which reached over

20,000 accounts and made over 215,000 impressions.

During the next six months, Network Leaders will share the contents of this report with theirPLNs, prepare and execute a follow-up spring data collection (to be launched in late January orearly February 2016), and continue to develop relationships with policymakers and educatorsthroughout the state. Network Leaders will: develop three-month plans that address thedevelopment of strategies to expand the size and level of engagement of PLN members, andimplement personal projects related to amplifying teacher voice in North Carolina.

This report will provide the foundation for the Network Leaders’ engagement with policymakersand state organizations in the coming months. Network Leaders are asked to review the datacontained herein and present the data and findings to a variety of state stakeholders. They arealso responsible for communicating the report and its contents to their PLNs. Network Leadersand the state director will jointly develop the communication strategies for disseminating theinformation in this report. Additionally, Network Leaders will evaluate the questions posed in thisreport to provide input on the spring 2016 survey topic.

Network Leaders will also spend time evaluating participation rates for this survey anddeveloping strategies to increase future teacher participation. Given a current 11 percent click-through rate for teachers active within a Network Leader’s PLN, a key engagement tool for theremaining 89 percent of members will be the communication of this report, the responsivenessof NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education to the data and recommendationsin this report, and its subsequent impact on educational policy.


9/95

6

Among the 11 percent of active PLN members, there are educators with a further interest inshaping education policy in North Carolina via the TVN. Network Leaders will identify thoseeducators, and offer opportunities for those teachers to have a greater role in the next datacollection as well as in other TVN activities.

Network Leaders will continue to pursue projects individually and in conjunction with statepartners. For example, several leaders will participate in the Public School Forum of NorthCarolina’s study groups on educational equity. Network Leaders are also responsible fordrafting two written publications over the course of the year.

In the first year, the North Carolina TVN has already surpassed its goal to reach at least 10percent of North Carolina’s teachers. However, Network Leaders will continue to work toincrease their reach. They will also actively engage the leadership of North Carolina’s 115school districts. Moreover, they will continue to build relationships with local legislators byproviding expertise on educational issues and securing other opportunities to work with them.

Fall 2015 Survey

During the onboarding and initial training of the Network Leaders, the North Carolina statedirector was concurrently working with the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction(NCDPI) and the State Board of Education office to develop the items for the fall 2015 survey.The survey opened October 2, 2015, and closed October 11, 2015. Ultimately, 2,347 teachersresponded to the survey, which represents 2 percent of the teachers in North Carolina.

Network Leaders disseminated the survey to their PLN members as well as through thecommunication channels of the NCDPI, the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE),the Kenan Fellows program, the Professional Educators of North Carolina, and many individualschool districts. During a five-day period of the survey window, unprecedented flooding affectedeastern North Carolina, which closed schools for 2-2.5 days over a weekend period. This eventmay have affected survey participation in those areas.

Network Leaders moderated 74 focus groups from September 21, 2015, to October 2, 2015.HSG offered an online option for teachers who wished to respond to the focus group questionsbut could not appear in person, and 30 teachers responded via this option.

The following school districts had the greatest number of respondents to the fall 2015 survey:Durham (9.78 percent), Chapel Hill-Carrboro (8.66 percent), Wake (7.72 percent), Guilford (6.69percent), Watauga (6.18 percent), Orange (5.85 percent), Henderson (4.54 percent), Wilkes(4.26 percent), Jackson (3.18 percent). Response rates for all school districts can be found in

Appendix D.

Teacher Engagement in North Carolina

HSG tracks the engagement of North Carolina teachers to determine our impact. We believethe collective voices of teachers can drive policy change and impact teaching and learningconditions. According to the NCDPI there are 94,566 teachers in North Carolina. There are10,264 teachers in PLNs, representing 10.85 percent of the total teaching population in NorthCarolina.


10/95

7

Of the 10,264 teachers in a PLN, 2,599 teachers responded to an engagement opportunity inNorth Carolina through HSG’s TVN. Responding to an engagement opportunity means that ateacher: a) completed the Fall 2015 survey, b) requested more information on the TVN programin North Carolina, or c) participated in a HSG sponsored Twitter chat.

Additionally, 426 teachers in PLNs actively participated in HSG’s activities. Participating in an

activity, means a teachers: a) attended a HSG focus group session, b) engaged in onlineconversation from a HSG post, or c) attended a HSG session at a state or local conference ormeeting. This kind of participation represents the highest level of engagement anddemonstrates deep connection between Network Leaders and their colleagues.

Spring 2016 Survey

Work will begin in December 2015 with NCDPI and North Carolina State Board of Educationleadership to identify a topic(s) for the spring 2016 data collection. Network Leaders haveprovided the state director with some ideas about a potential topic, which will be presented toNCDPI and North Carolina State Board of Education leadership for further consideration.

External Evaluation

Education Policy Initiative at Carolina (EPIC) is conducting the year one external evaluation ofthe North Carolina Teacher Voice Network. Over the coming months, EPIC will attend TVNtrainings and meetings as well as interview teachers and state partners to document and assessthe extent to which the Network Leaders in the TVN impact policy in North Carolina. They willalso examine how thoroughly TVN trainings meet the needs of the Network Leaders. EPIC willalso make data-based recommendations to HSG on how to improve the program and theresources provided to Network Leaders.

Report Layout and DesignIn the spring of 2015, HSG secured the services of Magnolia Consulting, located inCharlottesville, Virginia, to conduct an analysis of the data. Magnolia Consulting independentlyanalyzed survey and focus group data findings. HSG and Magnolia Consulting co-developedthe recommendations in this report. All of the recommendations are based on the data collectedfrom the survey and focus groups.

The layout of this report is consistent with the standard format of reports in states where thisprogram is in operation.3 The Recommendations, the Survey Data, Focus Group Data, andappendices follow this section. Appendix A includes the survey and focus group questions,

Appendix B includes visualizations for the survey demographic data, and Appendix C includestext box responses from the surveys.4 Appendix D lists the response rates in each district.

Appendices E and F address the representativeness of the survey respondents and technicalissues with interpreting the data.

HSG is committed to making changes to the design and organization of this report to helpNCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education better understand and act upon the

3 HSG operates the program in: Hawaii, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee.4 The content of Appendix C should be reviewed. HSG can, at the request of NCDPI or the North Carolina State Board ofEducation, conduct an analysis of those data.


11/95

8

data and recommendations. As such, HSG welcomes feedback on the report from NCDPI andthe North Carolina State Board of Education. The North Carolina state director and supportingstaff in the national office will promptly attend to any feedback.


12/95

9

RecommendationsThe following is an overview of findings and associated recommendations organized by topicarea.

North Carolina Educator Evaluation System

Across surveys and focus groups, teachers expressed some concerns about the structure ofthe current North Carolina Educator Evaluation System (NCEES). For example, teachers notedthat formative and summative assessments tend to offer a clearer picture of student knowledgeand growth than standardized assessments. During focus groups, many teachers alsoexpressed concerns about Standard 6 of the evaluation system, which measures studentgrowth as determined by a value-added metric.

In the survey, teachers shared that student surveys may be invalid or unreliable measure ofteacher effectiveness. Based on these findings, we recommend that NCDPI considerproviding teachers with additional information on the use of student surveys in educator

evaluations. For example, the MET project (2012) offers various resources on the utility ofstudent surveys, including a two-page document on the benefits of student surveys andstrategies for overcoming implementation issues. In terms of expanding utility, North Carolinateachers may benefit from professional development that shows them how to use studentsurvey results to individualize instruction. This strategy may be effective in helping address theconcerns teachers in focus groups raised about the use of student surveys and help themeffectively use the results in other ways, which speaks to their interest in broadening the utilityof the metrics used in the NCEES.

Further, it is recommended that NCDPI take action to implement a recommendation madeby Consortium for Educational Research and Evaluation—North Carolina (SERVECenter)(2015) in its report on the NCEES that principals and teachers receive training onStandard 6 as a means to provide additional information and clarity on the utility of thestudent achievement growth standard in evaluations.5 Consistent with the findings detailedin the SERVECenter report, teachers in focus groups expressed concerns that could potentiallybe addressed through information about how Standard 6 is calculated. Additional training forprincipals may help alleviate teachers’ concerns if they are better equipped to respond toteachers’ questions about both the utility and calculation of Standard 6 .

During focus groups, teachers suggested reductions to the current emphasis on academicachievement in teacher evaluation practices and advocated decreasing the subjective nature ofobservations. Additionally, they suggested increasing the utility of evaluation findings forteachers. Therefore, we recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board ofEducation take steps to increase the utility and reduce the subjectivity of the EducatorEvaluation System. Increasing utility for teachers involves providing timely, actionablefeedback and access to further support in areas of need (Hamilton et al., 2014; Mathers, Olivia,& Laine, 2008; MET Project, 2012). As an example of utility, principals could provide new andexperienced teachers with constructive feedback on areas for improvement based on evaluationresults, using the Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina Teachers as a guide. If time allows,principals could also visit classrooms more often and provide teachers with more extensive,

5 Davis, C., Bangert, L., Comperatore, A, & Smalenberger, M. (2015). Teacher and Principal Perceptions of the North CarolinaEducator Evaluation System. Consortium for Educational Research and Evaluation—North Carolina.

http://www.metproject.org/resources.phphttp://www.metproject.org/resources.phphttp://www.metproject.org/resources.phphttp://cerenc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TLEE-teacher-and-princ-perceptions-FINAL-9-15-15.pdfhttp://cerenc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TLEE-teacher-and-princ-perceptions-FINAL-9-15-15.pdfhttp://cerenc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TLEE-teacher-and-princ-perceptions-FINAL-9-15-15.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttp://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/February2008Brief.pdfhttp://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/February2008Brief.pdfhttp://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/February2008Brief.pdfhttp://www.metproject.org/downloads/Asking_Students_Practitioner_Brief.pdfhttp://www.metproject.org/downloads/Asking_Students_Practitioner_Brief.pdfhttp://www.metproject.org/downloads/Asking_Students_Practitioner_Brief.pdfhttp://www.metproject.org/downloads/Asking_Students_Practitioner_Brief.pdfhttp://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/February2008Brief.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttp://cerenc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TLEE-teacher-and-princ-perceptions-FINAL-9-15-15.pdfhttp://www.metproject.org/resources.php


13/95

10

actionable feedback on their instruction. Because responding to this request would requireadditional time from principals, NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education shouldconsider how it might use state policy to empower teacher leaders (and instructional coaches)to visit classrooms and offer constructive feedback. Recent initiatives offer successful examplesof using this approach, such as when schools create regular opportunities for feedback,reflection and tailored support from other teachers (Bramschreiber, 2012; Grimm, Kaufman, &

Doty, 2014). Providing this additional support from peers and administrators could also promoteteacher retention in schools and the profession (e.g., Guarino, Santibañez, & Daley [2006] provide a review of research on factors related to teacher recruitment and retention).

Teachers might also have more positive perceptions about observations if they believe they areappropriately and uniformly implemented (Hamilton et al., 2014). For example, NCDPI couldtake steps to establish interrater agreement across principals who observe teachers, as onemethod of reducing the subjective nature of teacher evaluation (see Focus Group Question 5).

North Carolina Standard Course of Study Resources and Professional Development

Most teachers found North Carolina Standard Course of Study resources to be helpful, butapproximately 10% of teachers were unaware of these resources. Thus, we recommend that

NCDPI take steps to ensure that all teachers are aware of NCDPI instructional resourcesfor the Standard Course of Study. Furthermore, NCDPI could encourage districts to bringgreater visibility to their instructional resources in the North Carolina Standard Courseof Study through various dissemination platforms (e.g., e-mails, professionaldevelopment sessions). Because teachers believed a variety of instructional resources wouldbe helpful, we recommend the ongoing development and dissemination of resources,including sample lesson plans, sample assessment items, pacing guides, and scope andsequence guides (see Survey Questions 3, 4, and 5). NCDPI should consider how toinvolve teachers in the process of developing such resources as teacher input may wellincrease the quality and utility of resources.

Based on requests for continued support, we recommend that NCDPI ensure all teachers

receive opportunities to participate in small-group professional development in the NorthCarolina Standard Course of Study within local schools or districts. More specifically,NCDPI should consider providing additional professional development in multiple content areas,particularly instructional strategies related to working with different student groups, integratingtechnology into instruction, integrating literacy across content areas, and developing newcurricular materials.

NCDPI should pay close attention to the responses to question 10. Follow-up to professionaldevelopment appears to be low. Teachers benefit from follow-up support after participating inprofessional development opportunities. A wealth of research suggests that opportunities forpractice during professional development, as well as regular follow-up support afterwards, canencourage greater retention and potential knowledge transfer into the classroom (Hattie, 2009).6

“Student Achievement through Staff Development” provides additional information and insighton knowledge retention and transfer following professional development opportunities (Joyce &Showers, 2002).7 (see Survey Questions 7, 10, 11, and 12). NCDPI should consider further

6 Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement . New York, NY:Routledge.7 Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (2002). Student Achievement through Staff Development (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov12/vol70/num03/Taking-Peer-Feedback-to-Heart.aspxhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov12/vol70/num03/Taking-Peer-Feedback-to-Heart.aspxhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov12/vol70/num03/Taking-Peer-Feedback-to-Heart.aspxhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may14/vol71/num08/Rethinking-Classroom-Observation.aspxhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may14/vol71/num08/Rethinking-Classroom-Observation.aspxhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may14/vol71/num08/Rethinking-Classroom-Observation.aspxhttp://www.mathforamerica.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=6&name=DLFE-637.pdfhttp://www.mathforamerica.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=6&name=DLFE-637.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1000/WR1033/RAND_WR1033.pdfhttp://www.mathforamerica.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=6&name=DLFE-637.pdfhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may14/vol71/num08/Rethinking-Classroom-Observation.aspxhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov12/vol70/num03/Taking-Peer-Feedback-to-Heart.aspx


14/95

11

investigating the extent to which follow-up to professional development does not occur and thendetermine if a strategy needs to be developed to address the lack of follow-up.

Approximately 24 –29 percent of teachers reported that professional development around theNorth Carolina Standard Course of Study has helped them to support their peers’ understandingof the standards or their peers’ ability to make changes to instructional practice. If these areas

are goals of professional development, we recommend that NCDPI incorporate specificsteps to ensure professional development attendees develop a solid understanding ofthe importance of collaboration (see Survey Question 9).

Use of Resources

Given teachers’ concerns about funding limitations and a resulting lack of available resources(e.g., textbooks, other classroom materials), we recommend that NCDPI offer strategies todistricts on how to reallocate existing resources. NCDPI should consult the U.S.Department of Education website, which offers resources that provide additional guidance inthis area (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Education Resource Strategies (ERS) offers ahost of resources to districts on using available funding strategically. ERS also offers tools forassessing current spending to determine where cost savings can be achieved and how

realigned funds can help districts better align their spending to efforts that improve studentoutcomes. Furthermore, because textbook availability and staffing were common concerns,NCDPI should share with educators how the 2016 state budget allocates additional fundsin these areas and how that funding will impact districts and schools (see Survey Question6 and Focus Group Question 1).

In focus groups, teachers offered positive and negative feedback on technology use in theirclassrooms. Therefore, we recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board ofEducation consider four key components when implementing new technology initiatives:a) evaluate the technological requirements and necessary infrastructure to adequatelysupport the use of technology, including access in students’ homes, professionaldevelopment for educators, as well as ongoing support for educators; b) investigate the

specific needs of classrooms related to technology infrastructure; c) seek teacher inputin selecting grade and subject-specific technology resources; and d) explore theresearch evidence and evaluation results for particular technology curricula currentlybeing used or being considered for future use (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2015; Noeth & Volkov, 2004). For additional insight and guidance around teacher use and perceptionsof educational technology, we recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board ofEducation review, “Teachers Know Best: What Educators Want from Digital Instructional Tools2.0” (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2015; see Focus Group Question 1).

Because teachers were not using all of the available Home Base resources (e.g., accessinglesson plan templates, engaging and communicating with parents more deeply), werecommend that NCDPI provide more information to teachers about the value of different

Home Base resources, including lesson plan templates, instructional planning guides,parent engagement tools, and resources related to understanding assessments (seeSurvey Question 13).

In focus groups, teachers shared that multiple measures are important for achieving educationalequity. Specifically, teachers suggested: a) providing greater equality in resource funding anddistribution; b) reducing class sizes and having smaller teacher-to-student ratios (thissuggestion is supported by North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions data [2014] that indicatethat 60.2 percent of respondents agree that class sizes are “reasonable”); c) recognizing student

http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/department-education-provides-promising-practices-productivity-flexibilityhttp://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/department-education-provides-promising-practices-productivity-flexibilityhttp://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/department-education-provides-promising-practices-productivity-flexibilityhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/resource_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/resource_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/resource_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_checkhttp://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/http://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/https://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/school_tech.pdfhttps://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/school_tech.pdfhttps://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/school_tech.pdfhttp://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/http://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/http://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/results/report/149/62124http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/results/report/149/62124http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/results/report/149/62124http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/results/report/149/62124http://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/https://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/school_tech.pdfhttp://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/2015/10/what-educators-want-from-digital-tools-2-0/http://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_checkhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/resource_checkhttp://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/department-education-provides-promising-practices-productivity-flexibility


15/95

12

demographic differences in testing situations; d) utilizing student growth scores to a greaterextent; e) focusing on student performance outside of testing situations (e.g., informal learning);and f) providing greater access to technology in schools and homes. Based on this feedbackand available research, we recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board ofEducation approach educational equality as a multifaceted issue embedded withinfunding structures and evaluation systems. First, NCDPI should consider how current

funding is allocated to different schools and student groups when prioritizing funding or makingfunding decisions. For example, NCDPI could provide equitable funding for support staff,resources, and technology across schools and districts (U.S. Department of Education, 2013).Because many funding decisions are made locally, NCDPI could share resources (such as theones detailed here) with district superintendents. Second, NCDPI and the North Carolina StateBoard of Education should acknowledge the wide variance in student demographics across thestate and the resulting importance of working to meet diverse needs and ability levels throughtesting and different types of remedial support (U.S. Department of Education, 2013). The U.S.Department of Education (2013) report, “For Each and Every Child: A Strategy for EducationEquity and Excellence,” provides additional guidance, detailing five key actions for achievingeducational equity (see Focus Group Question 4).

Teacher Voice, Collaborations, and LeadershipTo promote teacher leadership opportunities, we recommend that NCDPI and the NorthCarolina State Board of Education consider how it might support districts inrestructuring the school day or year to provide more time for teachers to collaborate,participate in teacher-led professional development, and to receive one-on-onementoring or coaching. If restructuring is not possible, NCDPI and the North Carolina StateBoard of Education could provide resources to district superintendents to examine current timeuse within schools to find opportunities for protected planning and professional developmenttime (e.g., Kaplan, Chan, Farbman, & Novoryta, 2014). For additional guidance related toextending teacher time, NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education should reviewthe National Center on Time and Learning report, “Time for Teachers: Leveraging ExpandedTime to Strengthen Instruction and Empower Teachers,” which explores 17 high-performing

schools that restructured their schedules to provide more protected planning and professionaldevelopment time for teachers (Kaplan et al., 2014). Education Resource Strategies (ERS) alsohas a number of resources for districts on how to use time differently and how to assess currenttime usage as a means to restructuring available time to maximize educator collaboration.8 (seeSurvey Questions 15 and 16).

We also recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Educationexamine the lessons learned from Public Impact’s work in Charlotte-Mecklenburg andCabbarus Counties to determine if the efforts there to provide teachers withopportunities to assume leadership responsibilities merit scaling via a statewide pilot (see Survey Questions 15 and 16).

Teachers who participated in focus groups had negative perceptions of charter schools,believing that these schools often take resources and students from regular public schools, havelower standards, and work in isolation of local school districts. To encourage positiveperceptions and greater awareness of charter schools, we recommend that NCDPI and theNorth Carolina State Board of Education provide and encourage effective collaborationopportunities between local education agencies and charter schools. Establishing morecollaborative relationships might yield greater understanding by both parties, better

8 See: http://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_design and http://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/resource_check

https://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttp://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttp://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttp://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttp://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttp://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttp://www.erstrategies.org/http://www.erstrategies.org/http://www.erstrategies.org/http://www.erstrategies.org/cms/files/1352-school-design-analyses-and-worksheets-section-2.pdfhttp://www.erstrategies.org/cms/files/1352-school-design-analyses-and-worksheets-section-2.pdfhttp://www.erstrategies.org/cms/files/1352-school-design-analyses-and-worksheets-section-2.pdfhttp://opportunityculture.org/http://opportunityculture.org/http://opportunityculture.org/http://opportunityculture.org/http://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_designhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_designhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_designhttp://www.erstrategies.org/assessments/school_designhttp://opportunityculture.org/http://www.erstrategies.org/cms/files/1352-school-design-analyses-and-worksheets-section-2.pdfhttp://www.erstrategies.org/http://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttp://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/time4teacherses.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdfhttps://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdf


16/95

13

comparability in course rigor, and more extensive sharing of resources. As examples of potentialcollaborations, NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board of Education could review the Centeron Reinventing Public Education (2013) report on LEA and charter collaborations across 16cities (Yatsko, Nelson, & Lake, 2013) and the American Institutes for Research National CharterSchool Resource Center (2013) website for stories of successful LEA and charter collaborationsin Boston, MA; Hartford, CT; Atlanta, GA and other regions across the country (see Focus Group

Question 2).

During focus groups, teachers shared that being treated as a professional means receiving faircompensation, being trusted and valued for their judgments and ideas, and being respected.Consequently, we recommend that NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board ofEducation consider different ways to increase teachers’ positive feelings regarding theirvalue, voice, and input in the teaching profession as well as in the future direction ofeducation in North Carolina. For example, NCDPI and the North Carolina State Board ofEducation should share with teachers and instructional staff how its staff uses feedback fromHSG focus groups and surveys and the North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions (2014).Timely responsiveness to teacher input should be a priority. (see Focus Group Question 3).

http://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://collaboration.charterschoolcenter.org/homehttp://collaboration.charterschoolcenter.org/homehttp://collaboration.charterschoolcenter.org/homehttp://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://www.ncteachingconditions.org/http://collaboration.charterschoolcenter.org/homehttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/Compact_Interim_Report_6_2013.pdf


17/95

14

Survey DataPer NCDPI’s request, Magnolia Consulting presents aggregated and disaggregated (i.e., byeducation district, see Figure 1) survey data in Figures 1-20.

Source: North Carolina State Board of Education (2015).

Figure Map 1

http://stateboard.ncpublicschools.gov/about-sbe/sbe-districts.pdfhttp://stateboard.ncpublicschools.gov/about-sbe/sbe-districts.pdfhttp://stateboard.ncpublicschools.gov/about-sbe/sbe-districts.pdfhttp://stateboard.ncpublicschools.gov/about-sbe/sbe-districts.pdf


18/95

15

Q1. Which of the following possible evaluation components do you think mostaccurately measures a teacher’s level of effectiveness? You may choose morethan one.

Figure 1.a

Analysis Overall, student growth on school or teacher-developed assessmentswas selected most often as an accurate measure of teachereffectiveness, followed by principal or other supervisor observationsand peer observations. Student growth on local assessments was thenext most frequently noted measure, followed by student growth onstatewide assessments, student surveys, and parent surveys. Of theresponse options available, respondents were least likely to report that

NONE OF THE ABOVE

STUDENT GROWTH ONLOCAL ASSESSMENTS

PRINCIPAL OR OTHER SUPERVISOROBSERVATIONS

STUDENT SURVEYS

SCHOOLWIDE GROWTH ON STATEWIDEASSESSMENTS

26percent

33percent

62percent

49percent

38percent

PARENTSURVEYS

PEER OBSERVATIONS

STUDENT GROWTH ON SCHOOL OR TEACHER-DEVELOPED ASSESSMENTS

STUDENT GROWTHON STATEWIDEASSESSMENTS

26percent

17percent

10percent

7percent


19/95

16

schoolwide growth on statewide assessments accurately measuresteacher effectiveness.


20/95

1

Figure 1.b

Student growth on statewide assessments Student surveys

Student growth on local assessments Parent surveys

Student growth on school or teacher-developed assessments Schoolwide growth on statewide assessments

Principal or other supervisor observations None of the above

Peer observations

31%

24% 25%30%

48%

28%

34%

41%

72%

61%64%

62%59%

43%

50%

35%

28%

37%41%

28%

34%

26% 27%

21%

31%

16%18% 18%

3%

10% 10%

16%

3%

10%6% 6%

Northeast Southeast North Central Sandhills


21/95

1

Figure 1.c

Student growth on statewide assessments Student surveys

Student growth on local assessments Parent surveys

Student growth on school or teacher-developed assessments Schoolwide growth on statewide assessments

Principal or other supervisor observations None of the above

Peer observations

Analysis Teacher responses regarding accurate measures of teacher effectiveness were fairly consistent acrossregions, with teachers most frequently selecting student growth on school or teacher-developed assessmentsin each region. Teachers in all regions indicated that schoolwide growth on statewide assessments was theleast accurate measure.

25% 26% 25%28%

34%30%

32% 31%

65% 65%

60%

54%

50%52% 52% 50%

34%38%

40%37%

29%26% 26%

23%19%

13% 15% 15%11% 11% 10%

8%4%

10% 8%10%

Piedmont Triad Southwest Northwest Western


22/95

19

Q2. Which measures should be considered when evaluating teachers on Standard 6? You may choose more than oneresponse.

Figure 2.a

Analysis Half of teachers indicated that either students’ formative or summative test scores, or both, should beconsidered when evaluating teachers on Standard 6. Fewer teachers selected student survey results orschoolwide summative tests as measures for consideration in the evaluation of Standard 6. More than a quarterof teachers noted that measures other than the available options were important for consideration (see

Appendix C for write-in responses to this survey item).

STUDENTS’ SUMMATIVE TEST SCORES

STUDENT SURVEYRESULTS

SCHOOLWIDESUMMATIVE TESTSCORES

OTHER*

50percent

52percent

23percent

19percent

27percent

STUDENTS’ FORMATIVE TEST SCORES


23/95

20

Figure 2.b

Students’ summative test scores Schoolwide summative test scores

Students’ formative test scores Other

Student survey results

55%

44%

50%

58%

52% 53% 51%48%

31%

20%24%

13%

7%

19% 20% 20%24%

39%

27% 25%



24/95

21

Figure 2.c

Students’ summative test scores Schoolwide summative test scores

Students’ formative test scores Other

Student survey results

Analysis Across the eight regions, teachers most frequently selected students’ formative and summative test scores asthe two measures that should be considered in the evaluation of teachers on Standard 6. The next two mostfrequently selected measures were student survey results and schoolwide summative test scores, with theexception of the Sandhills region, in which teachers selected schoolwide summative test scores morefrequently than student survey results. Across regions, considerable percentages of teachers noted that othermeasures should be considered when evaluating Standard 6, especially in the Southeast and Southwestregions.

49%46%

51% 50%51% 51%

57%53%

28% 27%

20%23%22% 21%

17% 17%

24%

31%

24%29%



25/95

22

Q3. How helpful are the instructional resources prepared by DPI for teaching the NorthCarolina Standard Course of Study?

Figure 3.a

Analysis Over 75% of teachers found the NC DPI’s instructional resources to be atleast somewhat helpful. Nearly a quarter of teachers were either notaware of the resources or did not find them helpful.

Not helpfulat all13%

Somewhathelpful

51%

Helpful21%

%

I am not aware ofthese resources.

11%

Very helpful5%


26/95

23

Figure 3.b

Very helpful Not helpful at all

Helpful I am not aware of these resources.

Somewhat helpful

Analysis Across all regions, a majority of teachers were aware of the NC DPI’s instructional resources and found theresources to be at least somewhat useful. Notably, the Northeast region had the highest percentage of teacherswho found the NCDPI resources helpful or very helpful. Of all regions, Piedmont Triad and Southwest had thehighest percentage of teachers who found these resources unhelpful.

3% 6%14% 9% 12% 10% 7% 11%

7% 11%

13%

7%

17% 17%

10%

13%

45%

56%

51%

50%

47% 53%

51%

51%

34%

21% 18%

24%

21% 18%26%

23%

10%5% 5% 10%

3% 2%6%

3%

Northeast Southeast North Central Sandhills Piedmont Triad Southwest Northwest Western


27/95

24

Q4. How helpful are the instructional resources prepared by your district for teachingthe North Carolina Standard Course of Study?

Figure 4.a

Analysis Over 75% of teachers found their district’s instructional resources forteaching the North Carolina Standard Course of Study to be at least

somewhat helpful. Nearly a quarter of teachers were either unaware ofthese resources or did not find them helpful.

Not helpfulat all13%

Somewhathelpful

41%

Helpful26%

Very helpful10%

%

I am not aware of

these resources.10%


28/95

25

Figure 4.b

Very helpful Not helpful at all

Helpful I am not aware of these resources.

Somewhat helpful

Analysis Across all di stricts, except for the Northeast, teachers were most likely to rate their district’s instructionalresources as somewhat helpful or helpful. In the Northeast region, teachers most often rated the instructionalresources as helpful. However, compared to teachers in other regions, a larger percentage of teachers in theNortheast were either unaware of these resources or did not find them helpful.

21%

10% 7% 11% 8% 10%13% 14%

21%

13%14% 7% 16%

16% 11%14%

14% 50%

42%35%

44% 38%36%

39%

34%

19%25%

33%

26% 28%31%

26%

10% 7% 12% 14%6% 8% 9% 7%



29/95

26

Q5. Which instructional resources should DPI provide? You may choose more thanone of the following.

Figure 5.a

Analysis Teachers most fr equently indicated that NCDPI should provide sampleassessment items, followed closely by websites with sample lesson

plans. Additionally, more than half of teachers selected either pacingguides or scope and sequence guides, or both, as instructional resourcesthat NCDPI should provide.

PACING GUIDES

WEBSITES WHERE TEACHERS CANACCESS SAMPLE LESSON PLANS

SAMPLE ASSESSMENTITEMS

OTHER*

57percent

56percent

76percent

78percent

15percent

SCOPE AND SEQUENCE GUIDES


30/95

27

Figure 5.b

Pacing guides Sample assessment items

Scope and sequence guides Other

Websites where teachers can access sample lesson plans

41%

73%

57%

64%59% 59% 58%

50%

69%

80%76%

79%

69%

79% 77%81%

17%14%

16%11%



31/95

28

Figure 5.c

Pacing guides Sample assessment items

Scope and sequence guides Other

Websites where teachers can access sample lesson plans

Analysis Across all regions, teachers most often indicated that NCDPI should provide teachers with sample assessmentitems, websites containing sample lesson plans, or both. There was some minor variability in teachers’responses across the different regions, most notably with regard to pacing guides.

55% 55%53%

57%57%

48%53%

58%

79%

74%69%

75%

80%84%

80%

75%

12%16%

12%17%



32/95

29

Q6. Do you have the textbooks (digital or print) you need to teach your students?

Figure 6.a

Analysis Sixty-five percent of teac hers lacked the textbooks needed to teachstudents.

Yes35%

No65%

%


33/95

30

Figure 6.b

Analysis The Southeast and W estern regions had the greatest shortage of textbooks with nearly three-quarters of theteachers in each region indicating that they did not have the textbooks needed to instruct students. Althoughthe Sandhills region had the greatest percentage of teachers with the needed textbooks, this percentage wasstill less than half.

66%73%

65%53%

68%62% 57%

72%

34%27%

35%47%

32%38% 43%

28%


N o

Y e s


34/95

31

Q7. Have you ever received professional development about the North CarolinaStandard Course of Study?

Figure 7.a

Analysis Most teachers recei ved professional development on the North CarolinaStandard Course of Study. However, this professional development hasnot been provided to nearly a third of teachers.

Yes

68%

No32%

%


35/95

32

Figure 7.b

Analysis The majority of teachers in all regions received professional development on the North Carolina StandardCourse of Study. The Northeast region had the greatest percentage of teachers who received professionaldevelopment in this area and the Southeast region had the least percentage.

17%

41% 37%

20%35%

24% 22%32%

83%

59% 63%

80% 65% 76% 78% 68%


N o

Y e s


36/95

33

Figure 7.c

Analysis There was a positive relationship between teachers’ receipt of professional development in the North Carolina Standard Course ofStudy and their years of teaching experience. Experienced teachers weremore likely to have received professional development in this area thanrelatively less experienced teachers.

60%

38% 28% 25%

40%

62%72% 75%

Less than 4 years 4-9 years 10-14 years 15 years or more

N o

Y e s


37/95

34

Q8. Who provided the professional development? You may choose more than one ofthe following.

Figure 48.e

Analysis The majority of t eachers who had received professional developmentnoted that local school districts had provided it to them. Local schools

also provided a fair amount of professional development while NCDPI provided less. Associations and teachers’ other response options werenoted as providing the least amount of professional development.

DPI

LOCAL SCHOOL

ASSOCIATION

OTHER*

21percent

83percent

41percent

8percent

6percent

LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT


38/95

35

Figure 8.f

DPI Association

Local school district Other

Local school

29% 30%

18%

30%

79%

86%

79%

89%

42%

29%

45%

35%

13%

5%8%

5%

13%9% 7% 5%



39/95

36

Figure 8.g

DPI Association

Local school district Other

Local school

Analysis Across all regions, the t eachers who received professional development reported that local school districts provided the greatest percentage of professional development activities, followed by local schools and theNCDPI. The only exception to this trend was in the Southeast region, where NCDPI provided slightly moreteachers with professional development than local schools.

21%18% 20%

24%

86%

78%

86%89%

39%

46%41%

32%

9%

3%

8% 9%7%

1%5% 5%



40/95

37

Q9. In which way(s) has the professional development you received prepared you toteach the North Carolina Standard Course of Study? You may choose more thanone of the following.

Figure 89.i

Analysis The teachers who received professional development on the standardsfound it had the greatest perceived impact on their understanding of thestandards, followed by their understanding of how to change instructional

practice to teach the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. Lessfrequently noted was the impact of professional development onteachers’ support of peers. Nearly a fifth of teachers indicated that the

professional development did not help prepare them to teach thestandards.

IT HAS IMPROVED MY UNDERSTANDING OF THESTANDARDS THEMSELVES.

IT HAS HELPED ME

SUPPORT MY PEERS’UNDERSTANDING OF THESTANDARDS.

IT HAS HELPED ME SUPPORT MYPEERS IN MAKING CHANGES TOINSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICE.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT HAS NOTHELPED ME PREPARE TO TEACH THESTANDARDS.

66percent

45percent

29percent

24percent

17percent

IT HAS HELPED ME UNDERSTAND HOWTO CHANGE MY INSTRUCTIONALPRACTICE TO TEACH THE NORTHCAROLINA STANDARD COURSE OF


41/95

38

Figure 9.j

It has improved my understanding of the standards themselves.It has helped me support my peers in making changes toinstructional practice.

It has helped me understand how to change my instructionalpractice to teach the North Carolina Standard Course of Study.

Professional development has not helped me prepare to teach thestandards.

It has helped me support my peers’ understanding of the standards

54%

60%65%

70%

42%

35%

45%

62%

21%

28%32%

25%25%

16%

27%24%

21%

28%

16%14%



42/95

39

Figure 9.k

It has improved my understanding of the standards themselves.It has helped me support my peers in making changes toinstructional practice.

It has helped me understand how to change my instructionalpractice to teach the North Carolina Standard Course of Study.

Professional development has not helped me prepare to teach thestandards.

It has helped me support my peers’ under standing of the standards

Analysis Across all regions, teachers who received professional development found it had the greatest perceived impacton their understanding of the standards and their understanding of how to change instructional practice toteach the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. The Southwest and Southeast regions had the highest

percentage of teachers who indicated that professional development had not helped them prepare to teachthe standards.

59% 57%

70%73%

42%

30%

49%

40%

23% 22%27%

32%

24%19% 19%

24%21%

27%

15% 15%



43/95

40

Q10. After receiving professional development related to teaching the North Carolina Standard Course of Study, whichtypes of follow-up have you received? You may choose more than one of the following.

Figure 10.a

Analysis Over a third of t eachers who received professional development on teaching the North Carolina StandardCourse of Study reported that they had not received any follow-up. When teachers received follow-up, it wasmost often in the form of coaching from a teacher leader, followed by online communities/Professional LearningNetworks. Teachers received follow-up least often in the form of webinars, other online modules, or principalcoaching.

COACHING FROM YOUR PRINCIPAL

WEBINARS OR OTHERONLINE MODULES

COLLABORATION VIA ONLINECOMMUNITIES/PROFESSIONALLEARNING NETWORKS

I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY FOLLOW-UP TO THEPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT RELATED TO TEACHING THE

NORTH CAROLINA STANDARD COURSE OF STUDY

14percent

35percent

19percent

24percent

37percent

COACHING FROM A TEACHER LEADER


44/95

41

Figure 10.b

Coaching from your principal Collaboration via online communities/professional learning networks

Coaching from a teacher leaderI have not received any follow-up to the professional developmentrelated to teaching the North Carolina Standard Course of Study.

Webinars or other online modules

17%

9%

16%18%17%

31%34%

50%

33%

19%16%

32%

17% 18%

23%27%

50%

41%39%

25%



45/95

42

Figure 10.c

Coaching from your principal Collaboration via online communities/professional learning networks

Coaching from a teacher leaderI have not received any follow-up to the professional developmentrelated to teaching the North Carolina Standard Course of Study.

Webinars or other online modules

Analysis Regions varied with regard to whether teachers received follow-up to their professional development on theNorth Carolina Standard Course of Study. Only a quarter of teachers in the Sandhills region did not receivefollow-up, a percentage that nearly doubles for both the Northeast and Southwest regions. When teachersreceived follow-up, they indicated that it was most frequently through coaching from a teacher leader in eachregion, except for the Northeast region, where teachers more often selected webinars or other online modules.

13%9%

11%14%

29%25%

35%

41%

21%18% 18% 19%

27%22%

24%28%

40%

47%

35%33%



46/95

43

Q11. Which professional development setting would be most useful in supporting yourteaching of the North Carolina Standard Course of Study? You may choose morethan one of the following.

Figure 11.a

Analysis In supporting t he teaching of the North Carolina Standard Course ofStudy, teachers most often indicated that professional developmentwould be most useful in a small-group setting within their school ordistrict.

SMALL-GROUP PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENTWITHIN YOUR SCHOOL OR DISTRICT

COACHING

WEBINAR ORONLINEMODULE

OTHER*

83percent

20percent

34percent

23percent

8percent

LARGE-GROUP PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT, SIMILAR TO A STATEWIDECONFERENCE


47/95

44

Figure 11.b

Small-group professional development within your school or district Webinar or online module

Large-group professional development, similar to a statewideconference

Other

Coaching

83% 83% 84% 82%

17%21% 19%

26%

17%

35% 37% 33%34%

21%24%

27%

10%7% 8% 7%



48/95

45

Figure 11.c

Small-group professional development within your school or district Webinar or online module

Large-group professional development, similar to a statewideconference

Other

Coaching

Analysis Teachers in all regions would most prefer professional development to occur in a small-group setting withintheir school or district. The next preferred setting in all regions was coaching, except for the Northeast region,in which teachers preferred webinars or online modules more than coaching.

84%

79%

82% 84%

18%21% 21% 20%

33%

24%29%

35%

24% 22%20%

22%

8%11%

8% 9%



49/95

46

Q12. Which professional development content would help support your implementationof the North Carolina Standard Course of Study? You may choose more than oneof the following.

Figure 12.a

Analysis Overall, a wide variety of professional development content areas wouldbest support teachers. More specifically, teachers most frequentlyindicated that professional development related to instructional strategieswould help support their implementation of the North Carolina StandardCourse of Study. Instructional strategies to support students withdisabilities and/or English Language Learners and strategies for

OTHER*

INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES TO SUPPORTSTUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES AND/OR ENGLISHLANGUAGE LEARNERS

IMPLEMENTING THENEW CURRICULARMATERIALS

DEVELOPING NEW CURRICULARMATERIALS

METHODS FOR SUPPORTINGPARENTS WITH THE NORTHCAROLINA STANDARD COURSE

32percent

55percent

48percent

INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES TOSUPPORT ACADEMICALLY ANDINTELLECTUALLY GIFTED STUDENTS

STRATEGIES FOR INTEGRATINGLITERACY ACROSS THE CONTENTAREAS

STRATEGIES FOR INTEGRATINGTECHNOLOGY INTO INSTRUCTION

INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES TO SUPPORTIMPLEMENTATION OF THE STANDARDS

36percent39percent

25percent

7percent

38percent

DECONSTRUCTING THECONTENT OF THESTANDARDS

27percent

63percent


50/95

47

integrating technology into instruction were the next two most frequentlychosen content areas for professional development.


51/95

48

Figure 12.b

Deconstructing the content of the standards Strategies for integrating literacy across the content areas

Instructional strategies to support implementation of the standards Developing new curricular materials

Instructional strategies to support students with disabilities and/orEnglish language learners

Instructional strategies to support academically and intellectuallygifted students

Strategies for integrating technology into instructionMethods for supporting parents with the North Carolina StandardCourse of Study

Implementing the new curricular materials Other

38%

28%30%

33%

62% 62% 61%

71%

45%

53%

59%

54%

38%

43%

49% 50%

21%

28% 28%

33%31%

36%39% 39%38%

31%

36% 37%

28%

39% 40% 40%

17%

27%25%

29%

10%

5%

8%

1%



52/95

49

Figure 12.c

Deconstructing the content of the standards Strategies for integrating literacy across the content areas

Instructional strategies to support implementation of the standards Developing new curricular materials

Instructional strategies to support students with disabilities and/orEnglish language learners

Instructional strategies to support academically and intellectuallygifted students

Strategies for integrating technology into instructionMethods for supporting parents with the North Carolina StandardCourse of Study

Implementing the new curricular materials Other

Analysis With regard to professional development content areas, teachers in all regions most often indicated that professional development in instructional strategies would support them in their implementation of the NorthCarolina Standard Course of Study. Although teachers were fairly consistent across the regions, there weresome variations from this trend in four regions, most notably in the Northeast and Southeast.

36%

31% 32%33%

60%

66% 65%61%

54%

44%

52%50%

53% 52%

46% 45%

30%28%

26%22%

42%

35% 35% 35%39%

45%

36%32%

40%

34%

40%

34%

26%24%

27%23%

9%7% 7% 6%



53/95

50

Q13. I use Home Base for the following: (You may choose more than one response)

Figure 13.a

Analysis Teachers most frequently noted using Home Base to access PowerSchool. Given these available options, 14% of teachers did not use HomeBase for any of the other purposes.

I HAVE NOT USED HOME BASE

ACCESSING LESSON PLAN TEMPLATES

ACCESSING POWER SCHOOL

ENGAGING AND COMMUNICATING WITHPARENTS MORE DEEPLY

UNDERSTANDINGASSESSMENTS BETTER

5percent

9percent

85percent

7percent

14percent

8percent

PLANNING INSTRUCTION AROUNDSTANDARDS


54/95

51

Figure 13.b

Accessing lesson plan templates Engaging and communicating with parents more deeply

Planning instruction around Standards Understanding assessments better

Accessing Power School I have not used Home Base

3% 4% 4%6%

3%7% 9%

17%

79%

87%84%

87%

10%5% 6%

7%10% 9%

6%11%

21%

11%14%

10%



55/95

52

Figure 13.c

Accessing lesson plan templates Engaging and communicating with parents more deeply

Planning instruction around Standards Understanding assessments better

Accessing Power School I have not used Home Base

Analysis Teachers in all regions primarily used Home Base to access Power School. Teachers rarely used Home Basefor other listed purposes, but when teachers did use it, the frequency of these uses varied slightly dependingon the region. The Northeast, Piedmont Triad, and Southwest regions had the highest percentage of teacherswho had not used Home Base.

13%

3% 5%7%

14%

5%7% 9%

82% 82%87% 85%

11%

3%6%

9%10%6%

10% 11%17% 15%

12% 12%



56/95

53

Q14. What are the challenges, if any, associated with using student perceptionsurveys? You may choose more than one of the following.

Figure 14.a

DON’T KNOW

OR NO OPINION

DON’T TRUST THERESULTS

STUDENTS LACK SERIOUSNESS AND PERSPECTIVE

THE DATA WON’T BE

USEFUL

THERE ARE NO CHALLENGES

44percent

28percent

23percent

THESURVEYDESIGN

TIME TOADMINISTERTHE SURVEY

STUDENTS FEARLACK OF PRIVACY

INABILITY TO BE OBJECTIVE

9percent14percent

2percent

19percent

16percent

DEVELOPMENTAL APPROPRIATENESS

58percent

46percent


57/95

54

Analysis The majority of teachers saw challenges with the use of student participation surveys. The most frequentlynoted challenge was that teachers perceived students as lacking seriousness and perspective. The next mostnoted challenges regarded developmental appropriateness and an inability to be objective.

Figure 14.bDevelopmental appropriateness Time to administer the survey

Inability to be objective The data won’t be useful

Don’t trust the results The survey design

Students fear lack of privacy There are no challenges

Students lack seriousness and perspective Don’t know or no opinion

24%

44% 47%

35%

55%

44% 45%

37%

14%

30%

25%

37%

24%21% 21% 22%

48%

57%53%

65%

14%

9%

17%14%

7%4%

9% 10%

21%

11%15%

10%

0% 1%2% 3%

21% 22% 22%



58/95

55

Figure 14.c

Developmental appropriateness Time to administer the survey

Inability to be objective The data won’t be useful

Don’t trust the results The survey design

Students fear lack of privacy There are no challenges

Students lack seriousness and perspective Don’t know or no opinion

Analysis Teachers in all but one region most frequently expressed that students’ lack of seriousness and perspectivewas a challenge in using student perception surveys. The Northeast region, however, was more frequentlyconcerned with an inability of students to be objective.

40%44%

42% 43%46%

56%

49%51%

29%32%

28% 30%

24%

31%

24% 23%

64%68%

62% 63%

18% 16% 16% 15%

8%

13% 12%10%

13%

18%14% 13%

1% 0%2% 3%

17%

11%

21%

15%



59/95

56

Q15. Which support(s) would teachers need to build their leadership capacity withintheir school or district while staying in the classroom? You may choose morethan one answer.

Figure 15.a

Analysis In order to build classroom teachers’ leadership capacity, teachers mostfrequently indicated that they would need time released from non-instructional duties. Next, nearly half of the teache

NC Fall 2015 Data Collection Report

Documents

Transcript of NC Fall 2015 Data Collection Report