Download The 8-Step Process and more Study notes Quality Management in PDF only on Docsity!
The 8-Step Process
A System-wide Approach for School Improvement
Training facilitated by Patricia Davenport and Peggy Hinckley School Improvement Consultants
Description of Program and Services
Pat Davenport’s reform efforts in Brazosport, Texas – where she served as Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction—were chronicled in the best-selling book: Closing the Achievement Gap: No Excuses (2002). There, when low-income students attending the district’s south-side schools routinely failed the same standardized tests their more affluent north-side counterparts passed, parents demanded answers. They weren’t interested in excuses.
Prompted by the realization that teachers weren’t meeting the needs of poor students, the superintendent and his highest level staff (including Pat Davenport who became instrumental in the reform initiative) found the resolve and ability to begin the arduous process of change. Their reform strategies were greatly influenced by a school board member, an executive with Dow Chemical (the largest employer in the area), who convinced education leadership to embrace W. Edwards Deming’s Total Quality Management (TQM) approach and Deming’s famous four- part improvement cycle based on the Shewhart Cycle of Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) used by businesses for continuous improvement.
The vital roles of critical elements—such as collaboration and empowerment, data-driven decision making, core beliefs and values, and leadership—are embedded and demanded in the implementation of this intervention strategy that turned around performance in Brazosport, Texas. Davenport’s reform process is based on this integrated system comprised of Effective Schools Research , Total Quality Management principles and an eight-step continuous improvement model that employs data-driven decision making and collaboration between teachers to improve academic achievement in their schools.
The 8-Step Process was developed by teachers who were having success with all of their students, as evidenced by State testing achievement scores, particularly with at-risk students— those labeled as special education students, English language learners and students of poverty. It works because it is a process —not a program —and teachers manage it through the use of quality tools and specific process strategies. Implementation of this process addresses both equity and excellence for teaching and for learning.
In Indiana, Pat partnered with the Metropolitan School District of Warren Township and its superintendent, Peggy Hinckley, over the past nine years in implementing the Eight Step Process in this K-12 urban district with an approximate poverty level of 70% among its diverse student body. As a result of their success, Dr. Hinckley has worked with Pat Davenport to implement Pat’s training model as a school improvement model for the Indiana Department of Education for schools in various levels of school improvement within Indiana’s accountability system. They have now worked with about 130 schools across Indiana, not only providing the initial training but also supporting those schools over a two year period with process checks during the year. Warren Township was featured in Key Work of School Boards, a publication by the National School Boards Association.
Description of the 8-Step Process
Unlike other turn-around models calling for school closures and the firing of existing staff, proponents of the 8-Step Process believe that with the right tools, school leaders and teachers can produce different results.
Intensive week-long professional development gives teachers and administrators basic exposure to and practice with Effective Schools Research, the analyses of root causes for low student achievement, and team problem-solving strategies. Throughout the training, each of the following components of the 8-Step Process is taught and supported during monthly site-based Process Checks conducted by Pat Davenport and Peggy Hinckley.
and share best practices.
While disaggregating test data results, teachers identify mastered and non-mastered content areas objectives by examining individual test items that require improvement. By identifying how many students passed/failed specific objectives (e.g., measurement, estimation, algebraic concepts), weaker objectives are established as high priorities, with data made available before the school year begins.
Data Walls keep the focus on students’ achievement, visually displaying the status of learning by employing color-coding systems that are universally used by all teacher teams. Every student is represented on the teacher work room data walls – giving data a “face.” Students who are performing well-above expected levels are coded with BLUE cards (or blue dots on their longitudinal data cards); GREEN indicates students who are on-track; YELLOW is used for those who are just below standard and need assistance; and RED reflects students who have not mastered standards and need intensive support.
At a glance, principals and teachers can readily see the status of students, by grade level and content area. The data walls are updated following each formative and summative assessment so that progress can be seen and so that continuing need is immediately identified for purposes of intervention.
STEP 2: Instructional Calendar The instructional timeline is actually a calendar that visually shows the allocation of the instructional year to State academic standards, assigns when that focus is initially covered and intermittently reviewed across the school year (maintenance), and establishes dates for formative assessments.
8 - Step Process
- Data Disaggregation 2. Instructional Calendars 3. Instructional Focus
- Assessment 5. Tutorials
- Enrichment
- Maintenance
- Monitoring
The instructional calendar provides a logical sequence of concepts that are taught. Used school-wide, the calendars divide each 9-week grading period into 3-week blocks showing which standards will be covered each week. In school districts with intra-mobility, use of this strategy district-wide ensures that students do not miss important concepts that have “already been taught” when school transfers occur.
Teacher representatives (Calendar Committee) – supported by central office staff -- create the calendar before school begins, allowing all teachers to have an overall instructional plan at the start of the school year. Grade level/subject area calendars are annually reviewed and revised based on data analyses of assessment results to make necessary adjustments that will improve classroom instruction and increase student learning.
Curriculum mapping for covering standards and pacing instruction is complex work, reliant upon the clear understanding of academic standards both within and across grade levels – as well as those power standards that cut across content areas. The Instructional Calendar should reflect an alignment of written curriculum, taught curriculum and tested curriculum. It represents the non-negotiables when it comes to teaching. Calendars drive what is taught; teachers retain flexibility in how they teach—provided that they employ best practices resulting in increased student achievement.
Calendars use all of the available instructional days from the beginning of the school year up to the State testing days near the end of the year. This helps teachers understand that spring testing will occur before the instructional year ends, so time across the instructional year must be used wisely to ensure adequate coverage of important concepts. The 8-Step Process also employs special “Countdown Calendars” during key testing periods across the school year.
Displayed in classrooms, in the hallways, the cafeteria, the gymnasium, and on web sites – in an 8-Step Process school the Instructional Calendar is available and visible to teachers, students, parents or community members who may be in the school building.
influence decisions about necessary instructional adjustments to better meet all students’ needs.
Routine, sometimes daily, assessments should continuously inform the school reform work. After the instructional focus has been taught within a 3-week Instructional Calendar period, the 8-Step Process requires a formative assessment (administered on a 3-week/monthly basis) to identify mastery and non-mastery students.
Naturally, those 3-week assessments are aligned with the State Academic Standards (to be adjusted to Common Core Standards) and the school’s Instructional Calendar. The formative assessments are designed to reflect the format and rigor of the state’s ISTEP+ and ECA tests.
These short, frequent assessments allow teachers to: Check for understanding Tell which students are learning and which need more help Chart student progress Adjust teaching methods to achieve better results Modify the Instructional Calendar as needed for re-teaching or acceleration
Following the formative assessments, Learning Log (data) meetings are scheduled to facilitate the exchange of instructional strategies and determine additional supports needed by students. Through the 8-Step Process , for a half-day each month, the principal and building leaders (assistant principals, literacy and math coaches, LEP and special education experts) meet with grade level/content area teams to analyze data results from the formative assessments.
Teachers bring their classroom results (documented on a Learning Log Form ) from their most recent 3-week assessment to examine outcomes, aggregate and disaggregate results, discuss what’s working, and to determine where more effort is needed. Assessment results are reported by standard/indicator tested and during Learning Log meetings the principal (and leadership teams) use completed Learning Log forms to:
Examine each teacher’s overall results
Look for patterns across all grade level/content area teachers (knowing that similar patterns of deficiency across all teachers suggests curricular adjustments are needed, as opposed to instructional adjustments that may be needed for a single teacher whose students have not mastered a particular indicator) Ask questions and guide discussions about strategies for struggling students or teachers with unacceptable results on a particular standard/indicator (sharing successful strategies used among teachers) Track progress of concerns targeted for improvement in prior Learning Log meetings Continuously reference and update the Data Wall results and trends Confirm the teachers’ “Success Period” lists (where students will be placed for their daily extra remediation, maintenance or enrichment instruction) Tell teachers what to anticipate during upcoming classroom walkthroughs
The constant goal is to think not in terms of teachers and teaching, but instead in terms of data and learning. The most important element of the Learning Log process is getting teachers to look at data. This examination clearly answers the question, “What do we do next?”
It is also worth noting that during Learning Log meetings, examining student results across grade level/content area teachers is not about identifying the better teachers. It’s about identifying mastery where we find it so that others can emulate that behavior. The teacher who can convey a particular lesson and get desirable results then shares strategies and material with other teachers. This accomplishes several things:
We no longer blame students We eliminate territorial behavior and negative competition among teachers We help everyone deliver the best instruction possible
Within the 8-Step Process , teachers also come to understand the importance of students “owning” their own data. That way, students also share the benefits of knowing where they stand, what they need to improve and how the improvement can best be achieved. Strategies to
races to reference materials are more the style as teachers “ Teach on Their Feet: Not from Their Seat” during Success period. Students look forward to Success, as they mix with other classroom students and work with other content teachers. Students and teachers alike enjoy fresh perspectives and new challenges.
Although the atmosphere is fun, the work is real. Tutorials help students who did not master assessed standards/indicators. After concepts have been re-taught, students are re-assessed. Those who master skills assessed participate in Enrichment activities that provide intellectual challenges.
Implementing a Success Period within a high school context presents unique challenges that require both modification from the elementary/middle school strategy and creative thinking— resulting in strategies that will vary across individual high schools. Based on Davenport’s work with Warren Township secondary schools and 8-Step Process schools in South Bend, Lake Ridge and Marion, potential strategies for adoption by 8-Step Process high schools are shared (e.g., Regrouping of all students within E/LA and Algebra teachers for “Reteach Wednesdays”; Use of “Star” Periods implemented in the South Bend model; Mini courses for freshmen and sophomores used in Lake Ridge that target specific needs—shifting every three weeks—that also enable students to earn partial elective credit).
Step 7: Maintenance Maintenance is a key in any long-range strategy to improve schools, and it is an especially powerful tool for at-risk students. Just because something has been taught and initially mastered doesn’t mean that students will retain that learning.
The mastery of skills, facts and concepts takes time. While some students learn quickly, most need repetition for mastery to set in. Model teaching strategies--used by highly-effective classroom teachers—includes the regular review of skills and concepts previously taught. Review and maintenance of what has been learned begins immediately after a new idea has been
8 - Step Process
- Data Disaggregation
- Instructional Calendars 3. Instructional Focus
- Assessment
- Enrichment^ 5. Tutorials 7. Maintenance 8. Monitoring
introduced and continues across the school year.
Teachers help students maintain skills learned through periodic and cyclical review of standard indicators taught. This can occur through any number of options or combination of strategies, such as: During class starters such as “Bell-work” Through “Daily Oral Language” and “Daily Oral Math” activities PLATO learning software can support on-going skill maintenance
While the Maintenance step primarily is the responsibility of the classroom teacher, well- designed formative assessments periodically include test items taught in previous 3-week Instructional Calendar windows to ensure that students are maintaining their understanding of previously-taught skills and concepts. Success Period teachers also support the maintenance of students’ prior learning.
Step 8: Monitoring The instructional process is continually monitored by teachers, principals, parents, and central office administrators. Accountability for students mastering standards is shared by all. Within the 8-Step Process , process and practices are monitored – not people.
Monitoring the instructional process at every level is the chief responsibility of the school principal —who monitors the fidelity of the 8-Step Process. Starting with their first training, Pat Davenport and Peggy Hinckley tell principals that, “If you’re managing the 8-Step Process , then you’re managing curriculum and instruction.” Of all of the demanding responsibilities of the school principal, their most important role is that of instructional leader.
The 8-Step Process calls upon the principal to: Conduct classroom walkthroughs on a regular basis to observe a continuum of teacher efforts – rather than the occasional 45-minute “show” (e.g., Principals are expected to do at least two classroom walkthroughs each day, totaling 10 per week per)
8 - Step Process
- Data Disaggregation
- Instructional Calendars 3. Instructional Focus
- Assessment 5. Tutorials
- Enrichment
- Maintenance 8. Monitoring
forward are identified—with the person(s) responsible determined, and timelines established.
These meetings are held in a large conference room within the school. Central office administrators and the school principal and assistant principal(s) begin the Process Check by presenting and reviewing overall school progress – supported by evidence and data documentation.
Over the next several hours, each grade-level/content area team brings its Process Check Form and supportive data to the conference table. The form is a running record of the team’s Accomplishments , Work in Progress , and Areas Needing Assistance in the school’s implementation of the 8-Step Process. The meeting gives building staff the opportunity to show their progress from the previous Process Check meeting, identify challenges, and discuss strategies for the resolution of any issues raised.
Below are some examples of findings that evolve through Process Checks :
Learning Log meetings (following formative assessments) and content area Department meetings reflect “changed conversations” as colleagues disaggregate formative test results, identify gaps, learn from each other, and develop consistency in their implementation of effective practices and grading procedures (e.g., rubric scoring on writing samples) Formative data results are examined to determine if the school’s 3-week assessment scores are accurate predictors for summative ISTEP+ and ECA student performance assessments. Findings prompt increasing the rigor of Language Arts formative assessments Grade level and content-area team Data Walls of ISTEP+ and ECA and 3-week formative assessment results are established, posted, and routinely updated and referenced by teachers School-wide common Vocabulary Word Walls reflect the instructional terminology used on ISTEP+ and ECA assessments Classroom walkthroughs conducted by principals and Success walkthroughs conducted by assistant principals are viewed as important to keeping staff focused and ensuring teachers’ implementation of desired practices Maintenance (the periodic re-teaching of previously-learned concepts) is built into class
starter activities. Now all “Bell-work” activities align with the ISTEP+ applied skills format and the upper levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (analyze, justify, compare/contrast) Strategies for conducting student Test Talks are in place Disappointment in student performance results on ISTEP+ English/language arts test prompt data disaggregation, vigorous discussion, instructional practices analysis (classroom audits to track how time is actually used), and the development of an action plan to adjust instructional strategies to increase learning
The Top Ten Reasons Why the 8-Step Process Works
- Strong instructional leadership
- Alignment of curriculum and assessments to the State’s Academic Standards and assessments
- High expectations for all students and teacher behaviors that convey those expectations
- A school-wide and broadly-understood instructional focus supported by effective instructional practices
- Support for teachers through professional development and school-based literacy and mathematics coaches
- Support for students through tutorials and enrichment activities
- Fidelity of implementation of the non-negotiables
- Continuous assessments of students’ performance
- Ongoing accountability through routine Process Checks
- Hard work, teamwork – and commitment!
Beginning in 2002-03, MSD of Warren Township piloted Indiana’s first 8-Step continuous school improvement initiative in its lowest-performing schools. Immediate increased student achievement prompted full implementation in all elementary schools, followed by middle schools. The chart below compares 2001-02 achievement levels (the year prior to 8-Steps implementation in Warren Township) to the 2008-09 data. This diverse, urban district had poverty rates ranging from 43.9 percent at Lowell Elementary to 82.4 percent at Heather Hills.
8 - Step Process
**1. Data Disaggregation
- Instructional Calendars
- Instructional Focus 4. Assessment
- Tutorials
- Enrichment
- Maintenance
- Monitoring**
8 - Step Process Schools: Comparison Data for Spring 2009 and Spring 2010 ISTEP+ District School Name
2009 Passing ELA
2010 Passing ELA
2009 Passing Math
2010 Passing Math
2009 Passing both ELA & Math
2010 Pass both ELA & Math
ppt Gain E/LA &^ Both Math
# 2010 Test Takers New Castle Community School Corporation Eastwood Elem 58.38% 58.00% 57.30% 59.50% 48.11% 48.00% - 0.11 200 James Whitcomb Riley 83.42% 87.00% 90.67% 93.50% 81.35% 83.50% 2.15 200 Westwood Elem 82.04% 73.12% 79.64% 84.41% 71.26% 68.28% - 2.98 186 Parker Elementary 67.48% 71.63% 67.48% 78.37% 59.71% 67.79% 8.08 208 Wilbur Wright Elem 63.69% 75.18% 65.92% 82.27% 54.19% 70.21% 16.02 141 Sunnyside Elem 87.67% 81.51% 79.45% 78.77% 76.03% 72.60% - 3.34 146 Greenstreet Elem 72.53% 67.06% 63.74% 77.65% 57.14% 61.18% 4.04 85 South Bend Community School Corporation Coquillard Primary 43.80% 58.87% 33.58% 49.19% 27.01% 42.74% 15.73 124 Marquette Montessori 43.75% 53.27% 37.50% 44.86% 28.57% 39.25% 10.68 107 Lincoln Primary 42.35% 52.61% 38.78% 49.29% 29.08% 40.76% 11.68 211 Muessel Primary 47.24% 51.10% 38.04% 41.21% 29.45% 34.62% 5.17 182 Monroe Primary 50.00% 60.81% 34.09% 56.08% 30.30% 50.68% 20.38 148 Navarre Intermediate 33.97% 42.14% 41.11% 51.86% 25.24% 34.36% 9.12 617 Wilson Primary 53.76% 67.42% 43.93% 65.73% 37.57% 56.18% 18.61 178 Madison Primary 43.09% 40.54% 31.91% 41.08% 24.47% 28.65% 4.18 185 Perley Fine Arts Acad 50.89% 67.46% 54.46% 64.29% 44.64% 55.56% 10.92 126 Harrison Primary 35.40% 49.67% 46.72% 51.32% 27.37% 39.07% 11.7 302 Muncie Community Schools Longfellow Elem 41.86% 57.96% 38.37% 63.69% 29.65% 49.68% 20.03 157 Sutton Elem 64.00% 6 4.34% 65.78% 64.73% 53.33% 56.20% 2.87 258 West View Elem 67.63% 78.48% 63.58% 72.15% 55.49% 65.82% 10.33 158 North View Elem 73.72% 72.73% 59.62% 70.63% 55.77% 59.44% 3.67 143 South View Elem 59.27% 63.25% 55.64% 67.22% 46.18% 56.29% 10.11 302 Storer Elem 78.13% 67.39% 81.77% 70.29% 74.48% 58.70% - 15.78 138 Grissom Elem 53.99% 55.33% 56.34% 57.79% 42.72% 45.49% 2.77 244 Mitchell Elem 79.44% 76.80% 69.16% 70.40% 61.68% 62.40% 0.72 125 Lafayette School Corporation Thomas Miller Elem 65.05% 64.44% 6 8.28% 75.56% 55.91% 59.26% 3.35 135
Encouraged by the results of 8-Step Process implementation to improve teaching and learning in struggling elementary schools, the Indiana Department of Education again engaged Pat Davenport to provide this intervention strategy in some of the state’s lowest-performing high schools during SY 2010-11. Leadership teams from the following five high schools worked
closely with Davenport, implementing 8-Step Process improvement strategies to successfully increase student achievement on required End-of-Course Assessments.
Data comparing performance in 2010 (baseline) to spring 2011 results demonstrated impressive gains within all five high schools, following the initial year of implementing the 8-Step Process improvement model—both in English 10 and in Algebra I End of Course Assessments.
End of Course Assessments (ECA) English 10 Algebra I Spring 2010
Spring 2011
Percentage Point Gain^ Spring 2010
Spring 2011
Percentage Point Gain
Muncie Central High School 58.6% 70.8% 12.2 40.5% 44.6% 4. Marion High School 50.8% 52.6% 1.8 20.5% 43.2% 22. Calumet High School (Lake Ridge) 42.3%^ 50.9%^ 8.6^ 8.1%^ 30.2%^ 22. Riley High School (South Bend) 55.8%^ 65.6%^ 9.8^ 30.7%^ 55.1%^ 24. Washington High School (South Bend) 40.3%^ 59.7%^ 19.4^ 14.4%^ 33.8%^ 19.
Each of these high schools had persistently remained on Academic Probation under the state’s Public Law 221 accountability system. Through the use of the 8-Step Process and with support provided by Davenport, all five high schools exited school improvement and probationary status based on spring 2011 achievement performance and improvement results.
Public Law 221 Category Placements 2008 2010 2011 Muncie Central High School Probation Probation Academic Progress Marion High School Probation Probation Academic Progress Calumet High School Probation Probation Academic Progress Riley High School Probation Probation Academic Progress Washington High School Probation Probation Academic Progress
Fortified by impact data in Year 1, the leadership teams within each of these high schools were eager to continue their 8-Step Process implementation work with Davenport.
environment in which to learn. The adults work in a collaborative, cooperative environment.
- Achievement is an indicator of program success. Student academic progress is measured frequently through assessments, using results to improve teaching and support student learning.
Total Quality Management is designed to improve any organization at any level – classroom, school or administration. Built on the premise that reduced variation in the system produces a more consistent result, practitioners understand that doing it right the first time eliminates re- work. A 20-80 Rule prompts the focus on the 20 percent of objectives that produce 80 percent of the results. And the TQM system honors the belief that, “In God we trust; all others bring data.”
Through his research, Dr. W. Edwards Deming advocated the Plan- Do-Check-Act Cycle – used in Effective Business Models – as an approach to process analysis and improvement. This 4-step cycle involves constantly defining and redefining the customers’ needs and wants. Within the 8 -Step Process, adherence to this cycle ensures that improvement remains continuous and that the power to make changes lies squarely with those on the front line: our teachers and our principals.
Plan: Staff buy-in; data disaggregation; development of instructional calendar Do: Instructional focus supported by research-based effective practices Check: Frequent assessments; maintenance; and process monitoring Act: Tutorials and enrichment
External Research Supporting the 8-Step Process: Strategic Learning Initiatives (SLI), a Chicago-based nonprofit consulting group, began its work in 2006 with10 high-poverty, low- achieving Chicago elementary schools slated for restructuring or closure. Based on the impressive reform work at Brazosport, Texas, SLI partnered with Dr. Patricia Davenport to shape the design and implementation of its new four-year comprehensive school reform model called the Focused Instruction Process (FIP). The FIP model aligns with 8 - Steps stressing shared leadership, professional development, and continuous improvement strategies drawn from best practices identified by educational and management research.
The SLI’s 2009 report and its 2011 updated draft report, How Eight Failing Schools in Chicago Were Turned Around Within Three Years ( click for link to
report ) reports FIP implementation findings, including: Eight of ten schools turned around over three school years (2007 through 2009); Six schools sustained their gains; and Two schools had the highest gains on the Illinois Standards Achievement Test of 473 Chicago schools (Cather in 2007 from 36.1 percentage points to 50.5; and Cardenas from 48.8 percentage points to 71.7 in 2008).
The American Institutes for Research (AIR) validated the impact ( click for link to report ) of the FIP model and summarized their findings saying, “It is clear, on the basis of the ISAT Reading scores for the percent of students meeting or exceeding proficiency in ten Chicago elementary schools for the period 2001-2008, that the FIP intervention has had a positive and significant impact on student achievement in the cohort of ten schools that participated in the FIP model from 2006 to 2008. Whether compared to pre-intervention achievement, or to the entire set of Chicago elementary schools, or to a carefully-selected set of matched schools, the data suggest that FIP has resulted in gains that are very unlikely to have occurred without the intervention.”
