Case+Studies

=ESU #3 Collaborative Day January 18, 2010= The following documents provide a brief look at the work the ESU professional development team headed by Pam Krambeck and John Thomsen, completed in the first effort to create ongoing learning communities for singleton teachers in some of the ESU #3 smaller school districts.


 * Collaborative Day Agenda: [|CSDD Agenda.pdf>]
 * Collaboartive Day Program:[|CSDD Program.pdf]
 * Collaborative Program Insert:[|CSDD Program Insert.pdf]
 * Collaborative Facilitator Checklist:[|CSDD Facilitator Checklist.pdf]

This effort matches well with the descriptors and research shared about adult learners. __Relevance__: The morning included a presentation by the Omaha Chamber of Commerce with a focus on employment in the Omaha area and was followed by a panel discussion including a community representative from each of the content areas included in the day. All other sessions were break out sessions in which the content teams met to share ideas, ask and respond to questions and ideas. The music, physical ed/health, and arts group commented that did not find the Chamber speech or the panal discussion relevant to their work. __Learning Design:__ The statements generated below reflect the processes of the days events. Reflection on practices was a focus as teachers shared experiences and examples of classroom practices. Several groups want to meet at schools to see equipment, facilities, etc. __Outcomes:__ Each break out session was 'manned' by an ESU pd person with the responsiblity for taking notes which were later shared out with the whole group. Individual accountability was not a focus unless district's required something specific from their attendees. __Networking:__ This was the focus of the day. Participants had the opportunity to learn from one another about the content relevant to their work. __Community:__ I was somewhat disappointed that the content groups with the exception of the World Language teachers did not request for additional collaborative days beyond a one day experience each year nor did they look to establish any electronic means of future collaboration or communication. We will meet with district administration for additional feedback and requests for next steps.

=**ESU 6 Blue River Cohort Spring Curriculum Training**= Five schools have become a cohort of schools to work on curriculum and collaboration. The teachers from the schools have been organized into 10 curriculum groups with each group to meet this spring. The training sessions were based on the following · Participants will develop curriculum products. · Participants will design collaboration networks.
 * Goals**

· Determine common curriculum · Begin to develop a common unit of instruction for fall semester · Design interim communication tools and processes · Determine interim activities
 * Objectives for the Day**

The following describes how this fits into the adult learning design: Relevance: The group will work on one unit that they currently teach. The idea is to collaboratively develop one unit very well as a jumping off point to further work. The plan is to teach the unit in the fall of 2010 and reflect on the strengths and weaknesses during and after the project.

Learning Design: An overview of curriculum components was provided with teachers given ample time to discuss potential topics. The teachers are responsible for creating the knowledge from their experiences with the curriculum topics.

Outcomes: Each group had the initial task of answering the following questions: The next step will be for the teachers to design and implement the unit of study.
 * What unit/big topic will be used?
 * What big ideas should students understand?
 * What projects could be designed for the unit
 * What are the objectives/learning goals?
 * What assessments will be used to measure learning?

Networking: A wiki was created for each group with pages built for collaboration and discussion boards. You may see examples at http://esu6sscohort.wikispaces.com/ or http://esu6mathcohort.wikispaces.com/ The expectation is that teachers will use this tool to post continued work and collaborate between sessions. These wikis also house the materials for each training session.

Community Early survey data indicate the teachers are on the path to community.

__Relevance__
 * Engaged Adult Learning . . .**
 * job responsibilities
 * need or question
 * targeted skill
 * past experience
 * professional growth
 * college credit or monetary gain
 * social
 * mandatory
 * home responsibilities
 * monetary reasons
 * vacation
 * religious reasons
 * School/organization events

__Learning Design__ Characteristics of the experience that will engage participants in a sustainable learning community: What new learning will be shared by the group? In what ways are spontaneity and creativity embedded in the learning experience? How are participants able to construct new knowledge? How is new learning connected to past experiences? When will participants reflect on their learning? How will participants reflect on their learning? What is the structure of ongoing learning experiences? (i.e. physical presence, webinars, Skype session, Google Docs, Angel)
 * facilitates leaning/transfer (personal meaning of the learning) - pursues knowledge rather than assumes knowledge (art example of all agreeing to learn a new technique from outside expert)
 * models the facilitation of new knowledge vs. imparting knowledge (provide questions vs. answers) - self discovery
 * connects past experience, current learning and future practice through individual and group reflection (scaffolding)
 * incorporates spontaneous learning and creativity (Disrupt the norm)
 * facilitates sustainable learning through multiple modalities (physical presence, webinars, Skype session, Google Docs, Angel)

__Outcomes__
 * provides time to work on a practical product
 * incorporates accountability

__Networking__
 * leverages (builds, expands, authenticates . . .) individual learning by partnering with other
 * builds upon and fosters social relationships among participants
 * allows time to talk to each other, explore tangents, come to common understanding

__Community__

=ESU 10 Classroom Instruction that Works Webinars-Spring Semester 2010= posted by Julie Everett 3/25/10

This Spring, the Professional Development Department and Technology Integration Specialists at ESU 10 teamed up to facilitate webinars on the instructional strategies from Marzano's book __//Classroom Instruction That Works//__. Every other Tuesday, teachers and administrators could tune in to learn more about the strategies, and how to apply them into their daily routines and curriculum lessons.


 * GOALS:**
 * Participants will develop a deeper understanding of Marzano's 9 instructional strategies
 * Participants will learn how to apply Marzano's 9 instructional strategies using websites, resources, and materials provided by ESU 10 as references throughout each webinar
 * Participants will network via Adobe Connect to learn, share, and network across ESU 10's thirty-four school districts
 * Participants will build relationships with other participants in a global sense, through these webinars

I facilitated two webinars on Cooperative Learning and Non-Linguistic Representation with Deanna Stall. I selected our Cooperative Learning webinar for the focus below:


 * OBJECTIVES:**
 * Participants will learn how to apply cooperative learning groups into their daily classroom routines and lesson plans
 * Participants will learn how to use the National Archives to connect globally with others in a cooperative learning activity
 * Participants will network with others from the ESU 10 area to practice the research-based strategy of Cooperative Learning


 * RELEVANCE**:

The focus of our Cooperative Learning webinars, in relationship to our adult learning design research, is to improve instruction in classrooms. The learning environment created within the webinar is to be directly related to, applicable to participant's classroom settings, so they can take the ideas back to their classroom the following day.

From our research, adults like to be self-directed in their learning. They also like their learning to be relevant to their daily roles. Our webinars have been designed to provide practical application, focusing on aspects of lessons that are useful to them in their unique work.

The learning provided in our webinars is highly interactive, where participants can share their thoughts, ideas, and opinions in a small group setting. In the cooperative learning webinar, participants actually worked on a project in a global setting using the internet.


 * LEARNING DESIGN:**

The webinar provided teachers with Marzano's research and generalizations about his research. The teachers are responsible for collaborating through the chat boxes or microphones to contribute to the conversations about our learning together. In this particular webinar on Cooperative Learning, participants worked in small groups to research the National Archive selection we gave them. They read information found in the archived article, shared their new learning in their team chat area, and then disseminated the information from the experience to the rest of the webinar participants, applying cooperative learning group roles and responsibilities. The participants were given a rubric before their work began so they knew the expectations for their learning and group activity, and then assessed themselves as a group at the conclusion of the group activity.


 * OUTCOMES:**

Each participant was encouraged to use [|www.rubistar.4teachers.org] to design rubrics for setting expectations and objectives in cooperative learning groups. I went over the rubric expectations for learning and group work prior to the participants had the opportunity to engage in the activity with the National Archives website. Each participant was able to assess their group through the rubric after completing their group activity. The participants applied the research learned, the expectations set forth, and the assessment rubric as part of the process of a cooperative learning group.


 * NETWORKING:**

The webinar, rubric, and resources were posted to our ESU 10 site( []), so participants could share the information presented with their colleagues, parents, or students. Participants were encouraged to network with fellow participants, or other schools globally through SKYPE and the National Archives for instructional purposes with cooperative learning in mind.


 * COMMUNITY**:

Many participants continue to join in on the webinars. The webinars seem to be making an impact on their desire to learn and grow. Deanna and I have received positive feedback about the instructional strategies and engagement of the webinars.

=
The Perkins grant incorporates the use of a Design Team (6 individuals from ESU 1 and 8 schools, as well as 2 from ESU 17) to provide guidance for writing the grant proposal. To support this need, professional development and corresponding equipment/software is provided to the Design Team members to inspire creative, innovative thinking. During October, several Design Team members traveled to Cupertino, CA to attend an Apple Briefing. Based on reflective feedback upon return, an iPod training opportunity was provided during Winter and Spring 2010.======

=
Each session (two days in February and 1 Follow-Up session in April) provided time for team members (teacher and tech savvy student) to explore, investigate, and problem-solve. Attendees reported this was invaluable to the process—and rarely occurs in other workshop settings.======

=
Each participant (teacher and student) created personal goals and included them in the Design Team wiki. At the Follow-Up session, each attendee shared iPod applications investigated and used; in addition, other outcomes from working with the iPod were shared which included a teacher presentation conducted by the participating student and increased use of the iPod by teachers for classroom instruction.======

=
All Design Team members were asked to bring a tech savvy student with them to the training. Many chose to bring a Freshman or Sophomore to ensure a longer partnership upon conclusion of the experience. Having students with the teacher provided several interesting observations including the following:======

=
As teachers and students worked together, it was obvious that relationships were comfortable and collaborative. In addition, students built a collaborative relationship with the trainer, Lynne Herr, often communicating via Skype.======

=
Design Team members were invited to participate—never required. However, by voluntary participation, five out of the 6 ESU 1 Design Team Members participated. Of those 5, four brought a student with them for the duration of the training.======

=
Because of the vast array of applications available to iPod users, both teachers and students had the opportunity to explore a variety of applications pertinent to their interests and needs. In addition, one student wrote an App for the iPod and submitted it for consideration. Even though it was not chosen as an App, the process was invaluable for both the student and teacher. The wiki also provided a structure for capturing the “intrinsic motivation” that was utilized throughout the project. Both teachers and students used the wiki extensively.======

=
Both Design Team members and their respective students were asked to include their goal(s) on the wiki—updating them before returning to the April Follow-Up. At the start of the Follow-Up, each attendee highlighted what they had done since the February workshop series. It was powerful! To conclude this activity, attendees were asked to update the wiki (if they had not already) and/or get assistance from one another regarding new Apps that they had learned about that morning.======

=
At the conclusion of the April Follow-Up, learners were asked to work individually to reflect on the experience. Reflections were added to the wiki and organized according to “teacher” or “student”. Because it’s a wiki format, everyone has access to the information (which is fantastic!).======

=
During the second day of training, the iPod App, Air Mouse, was highlighted. It was a perfect learning opportunity for adding the app by using an iTunes card, learning how it worked and trying it out throughout the building. It was discovery learning at its best.======

=
Both Lynne and Mark, as presenters, were exceptional in modeling two-way learning and facilitation. As learners (both teacher and student) shared new knowledge, Lynne and Mark participated just like any other attendee. Nobody “held all the knowledge”.======

· Skype sessions: Planning for the iPod training (Lynne and ESU 1, 8 & 17 Perkins Coordinators); spontaneous conversations between Lynne and students.
Melanie Olson, ESU #2
 * ESU #2, New Teacher Academy **

Does the opportunity for engaged learning originate from common ground?
What is the motivation to participate in this opportunity for engaged learning? Have external factors affecting adult learners been considered? __ Learning Design __ Characteristics of the experience that will engage participants in a sustainable learning community: What new learning will be shared by the group? · Six strands: o Lesson Design o Instruction o Assessment o Professional Responsibilities o Classroom Management o Technology In what ways are spontaneity and creativity embedded in the learning experience? · Time for group discussion · many opportunities for small group work · differentiating products · group problem solving How are participants able to construct new knowledge? · Printed resources, · instruction from a variety of instructors · participants present information · strands are explored throughout the class and information is connected to the strands · Participants are asked to do a protocol to examine teaching as a profession. How is new learning connected to past experiences? · Self assessment, · self reflection · pre-assessment and post assessment · information is connected through six strands. When and How will participants reflect on their learning? · Each session students are asked to reflect throughout the class time and to do an exit pass. · Participants share progress, success, and questions, they have about information related to teaching. · Last session participants will complete a reflection brochure to be passed on to new New Teacher Academy cohort to begin networking/mentoring for the next year. What is the structure of ongoing learning experiences? (i.e. physical presence, webinars, Skype session, Google Docs, Angel) · Physically meet at the ESU seven sessions throughout the year. Communicate via e-mail for questions and case studies. · Teachers from first year cohort will continue to a year two cohort and meet again as well as serve as mentors/advisors for New Teachers cohort. __ Outcomes __ · Increased knowledge of essential elements of education. · Increased implementation of differentiated instruction and technology integration. · Improve retention rates for teachers in their first three years at all districts. · Empower new teachers to be leaders at their district. · Improve student learning and student success. · Increase teacher job satisfaction · Decrease teacher stress. __ Networking/Community __ · Structured and information discussion time · Small group work time · Analyze case studies · Celebrate successes
 * First year or two of teaching
 * Predominately smaller districts, maybe fairly isolated as few with the same job or few new teachers.
 * Research shows strong support of new teachers increases retention in the profession.
 * professional growth
 * social, networking, meet new other new teachers
 * mandatory
 * Home responsibilities: Very little outside of “class” work, instruction on stress management,
 * School extra duty responsibilities: Very little out of “class” work, instruction on stress management, problem solving/case study for assistance opportunities
 * Monetary reasons: breakfast and lunch provided, before contract year extra pay from district, support on continuing education opportunities, book resources provided.
 * School/organization events: full day sessions held before district contracted days, half day sessions during the school year, dates are chosen to stay away from school activities such as state sport contests and parent teacher conferences.
 * Address concerns and questions

=**ESU6** **Technology Integration Group **= The work of the cohort includes:
 * Case Summary:** In the fall of 2008, ESU 6 began facillitating a collaborative cohort focused on integrating technology resources into the local curriculum. The Technology Integration Group (TIG) is comprised of representatives from each of the 16 school districts. Each district was guaranteed one elementary and one secondary seat on the cohort, for a total size of 32. In order to build capacity in local districts, participants are limited to a two year term in the cohort. In subsequent years past cohort members will be expected to serve as mentors for the new cohort members.
 * Training on research based instructional practices from: __Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works__, (Pitner, H. et.al, 2007)
 * Registration and substitute reimbursement for the NETA conference
 * Training on best practices and resources to integrate technology into the local curriculum and classroom instruction
 * Improved knowledge of technology resources.
 * Recommendations of effective resources based on student achievement data.
 * $1000 per district for purchasing technology resources to support the work of the TIG participants in the classroom
 * The accumulation of a database of effective software resources.
 * Focused input about ESU 6 Professional Development opportunities.
 * The opportunity to build local capacity thro ugh showcasing effective technology resources and applications.

//originates from common ground// TIG cohort members were selected by local district administrators with the above criteria outlined in advance. There was as assumption that administrators would select teachers who had a strong interest in technology, as well as the motivation to implement the resources discovered through TIG into their classrooms. For the most part, TIG participants in round one fit that description, although a common "missing element" was the teacher's ability or willingness to share information with others back in their schools. There was a wide range of skill levels in the group, from technology experts to technology novices.
 * Case Analysis**:

//provides time to work on a practical product.// Each year we host 3-4 TIG meetings, and each meeting allows TIG participants to work both individually and collaboratively in practicing the use of resources shared through the sessions. Each teacher has personal choice among the tools introduced each day so they could work on the tools that they decided best fit into their teaching practice. Each session was focused on choosing tools and creating curriculum examples to be used with students in the classroom, as well as shared with colleagues.

//facilitates leaning/transfer (personal meaning of the learning)// At the beginning of each TIG meeting, members report on their use of tools introduced at the previous session and work collaboratively to troubleshoot issues, compare results and ask questions. The work encourages teachers to explore tools of interest to them individually that can be used immediately with students and colleagues.

//leverages (builds, expands, authenticates . . .) individual learning by partnering with others// While TIG was designed as a collaborative cohort, the most challenging aspect of the project has been to get teachers to work collaboratively outside of our time together. Within the TIG meetings, the group works collaboratively throughout the day, but once they leave the service unit, it has been challenging to get them to work collaboratively despite the introduction of and practice with social networking tools, collaborative workspaces and team building work during the meetings. It has been especially challenging to get TIG members to share their work with others back at school.

//builds upon and fosters social relationships among participants// One reason we asked that each school send two participants to the TIG cohort was to encourage those two teachers to develop a support system for each other back at school. This was moderately successful in smaller schools, but communication seems to be lacking between buildings in our larger schools. During TIG sessions, multiple opportunities are available to collaborate although many teachers chose to work alone much of the time. Teachers had an unstructured lunch time each day where they could socialize, but my sense was that no strong social ties were developed between participants from different school districts.

//recognizes the shift from mandated work to voluntary participation.// Because this was our first TIG cohort, it was largely an adventure of faith for the participants. For the most part, I think most teachers chose to be involved voluntarily, but some administrators appointed folks to come and it was less successful for those participants that for people who want to be there voluntarily. I expect round 2 of TIG, which launches next year, to have a different collective feel because teachers have heard about the work of TIG back at their schools and are asking their administrators to send them. There will competition for the "slot" in some of our schools, especially of the round one TIG representative has done any sharing about their work back at school.

//originates from and leads to intrinsic motivation vs. external motivation// While the TIG concert does involve some extrinsic motivation such as attendance at the NETA conference, the external "rewards" are still in line with the goals of the project. There was an evident spectrum of folks involved with TIG, from those who were mandated to attend to those you chose on their own to attend.

//incorporates accountability// At the end of year one, each TIG member completed a thorough review of the TIG process, as well as a plan for spending their $500 of technology incentive funds. At each meeting, teachers were asked to report on their work with tools that were introduced in the previous meeting. The majority of TIG work was done collaboratively and shared via our wikispace to make it easier for teachers to share resources at school. While I reported on TIG work to our Professional Development Advisory Committee (PDAC) and at the principal's and superintendent's network meetings, I'm not sure where was much carryover for the administrator to take interest in the work back at school.

//connects past experience, current learning and future practice through individual and group reflection (scaffolding)// Each TIG meeting reviewed the resources provided at the last meeting and asked teachers to report on their use before moving on to the new resources introduced at that day's session.

//incorporates spontaneous learning and creativity (Disrupt the norm)// The TIG agendas are fluid and participants are encouraged to add agenda items, share resources not on the agenda and work in a way that best helps move their work forward.

//pursues knowledge rather than assumes knowledge (art example of all agreeing to learn a new technique from outside expert)// The goal of TIG is to improve knowledge and skills around the area of technology resources for use in the classroom. While we explored new tools and ways of thinking each session, folks who had weaker general technology skills sometimes struggled with feeling overwhelmed by the introduction of the new tools. Often the focus was on moving the folks with weaker skills forward and allowing the "high flyers" to work independently.

//allows time to talk to each other, explore tangents, come to common understanding// Each day was very informal and allowed participants to socialize and work together, although as mentioned previously often teachers chose to work alone or socialize only with teachers from their own districts.

//models the facilitation of new knowledge vs. imparting knowledge (provide questions vs. answers) - self discovery// Typically, each days focused resources were posted on the TIG wiki, introduced briefly through quick, whole-group demonstrations and participants were then encouraged to choose tools of most interest and applicability to them to work with. Context for each tool was always stressed, with an emphasis on improving general instructional practice as well as incorporating new tools into the curriculum.

//facilitates sustainable learning through multiple modalities (physical presence, webinars, Skype session, Google Docs, Angel)// TIG cohort met about once each quarter. While I introduced twitter and Angel as ways to stay connected between meetings, most teachers did not use those tools. The TIG wikispace was a valued tool among participants and many TIG members started their own wiki to share resources with teachers. Twitter is blocked in many of our schools despite continued efforts to educate administrators and tech folks about the value of social networking tools to facilitate learning and sharing among teachers.

Submitted Lisa Smith, ESU 9 // During a Data Retreat in May of 2009, the steering committee determined that to address concerns regarding the impact of grading policy and practice, a team would form and be supported by ESU 9 facilitation to //// work through a strengths-based process of change, with the objective of this project to develop a replicable model for system change by engaging staff in shared leadership. System focus for this work was the policy and practice of grading district-wide. The certificated staff consists of 42 people, 13 (K-12 cross-curricular representation, SPED staff, and 2 counselors) were dedicated to the project along with the Elementary and High School principals. Board members were invited to attend at-will. Board was given an overview of progress following every work session and the vision retreat. // __ Gain Support __ : //Opening day with all staff and board representatives// · Shared outcomes of the project, developed a language of support, assured no change until the entire staff was involved in some way. Developed a ‘best hopes’ statement and ensured support from the entire staff for the efforts of the team __ Session 1 __ : 2-day, August ** Originates from and leads to intrinsic motivation vs. external motivation; Pursues knowledge rather than assumes knowledge ** · Developed background knowledge of best practice with regard to grading · Identified critical questions
 * Elements for Engaging the Adult Learner **
 * (Grade for Learning Project: Doniphan-Trumbull) **
 * Originates from common ground **
 * Year-long Project: **** Provides time to work on a practical product; Allows time to talk to each other, explore tangents, come to common understanding; Models the facilitation of new knowledge vs. imparting knowledge (provide questions vs. answers) - self discovery **
 * // ( //**// Session was facilitated by Lisa Smith; workbooks were created for each participant that contained study materials, research summaries, graphic organizers, material for exploration; Team participated as individuals, small groups, large groups; Facilitation provided opportunity for dialogue, reflection, problem solving, critical questioning) //

__ Session 2 __ : 2-day, November ** Connects past experience, current learning and future practice through individual and group reflection (scaffolding). ** · Developed background knowledge regarding examples of policy with regard to best practice · Further developed critical questions · Initiated exploration of personal professional practice by identification of an action research project
 * // ( //**// Session was facilitated by Cassie Erkins and Lisa Smith; additions to the workbooks were created for each participant that contained study materials, research summaries, graphic organizers, material for exploration; Team participated as individuals, small groups, large groups; Facilitation provided opportunity for dialogue, reflection, problem solving, critical questioning; Each individual identified an area to explore for active research of their personal practice) //

__ Session 3 __ : 2-day, January ** Facilitates leaning/transfer (personal meaning of the learning); Incorporates spontaneous learning and creativity (Disrupt the norm). ** · Individual or small group review of action research with project facilitators at which time they identified their critical question, identified action taken, shared outcomes, identified strengths and challenges, and developed for next steps) · Whole group celebration of new understandings and personal/professional growth  · Identified potential impact on system  · Develop best hopes statements for district  · Develop range of ideas that would move district to best practice __ Session 4 __ : 2-day, March ** Leverages (builds, expands, authenticates. . .) individual learning by partnering with others; Incorporates accountability ** · Identify “Growth Mindset” as a desired outcome for all stakeholders · Developed (through shared leadership) and outcome statement for the project  · Developed goals for the following year to engage all staff, more board members, parents and students  · Developed focus circle packets for stakeholders (to start in April with students and staff) to gather further information regarding current practice implications and best hopes for process  · Identified year-long plan for all staff professional development __ Vision Retreat __ : 2-day, March ** Recognizes the shift from mandated work to voluntary participation; Incorporates accountability ** · Engaged in problem solving strategy development as a team  · Build collegiality, shared language for meeting challenge  · Engaged in dialogue about strengthening the Growth Mindset __ Vision Retreat __ : 2-day, May ** Facilitates sustainable learning through multiple modalities (physical presence, webinars, Skype session, Google Docs) ** Ongoing Cohort work: Podcasts on Systems Change/Shared Leadership Professional Development Link (All staff): Mindset work (Carol Dweck)
 * // ( //**// Session was facilitated by Cassie Erkins and Lisa Smith; workbooks were created for each participant that contained study materials, research summaries, graphic organizers, material for exploration; Team participated as individuals, small groups, large groups; Facilitation provided opportunity for dialogue, reflection, problem solving, critical questioning) //
 * // ( //**// Session was facilitated by Cassie Erkins and Lisa Smith; additions to workbooks were created for each participant that contained study materials, research summaries, graphic organizers, material for exploration; Team participated as individuals, small groups, large groups; Facilitation provided opportunity for group led dialogue, reflection, problem solving, critical questioning) //
 * // ( //**// Session was facilitated by Patti Digh and David Robinson from Circle Project; journals were provided; Team participated as individuals, small groups, large groups; Facilitation provided opportunity for dialogue, reflection, problem solving, critical questioning) //