|
RLA Home Designing a System Elements of a System District Practices Table Index Local Systems Fed & State Systems Resources |
 |
Contact Ted Bartell, Director of Research and Evaluation tbartell@lausd.k12.ca.us 213.625.6476 Joan Evans, Director of Standards-Based Education jevans1@lausd.k12.ca.us Demographics Summary The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is in the process of expanding a K-12 writing assessment throughout the district. A writing performance task is administered at the end of the year. The assessment package -- prompts, procedures, scoring guides, and model papers -- was developed with assistance from the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) at the University of California, Los Angeles. The district's accountability system provides evidence that instruction and assessment are implemented as intended. Teachers and administrators learn from results to improve practice as part of the accountability process. Professional development preceded the assessment system to ensure that teachers have ample skills and consistency in instructional strategies and assessment judgments. LAUSD's assessment tool is similar to that used by many districts -- a performance task that consists of responding to a prompt for a particular genre of writing. But what is noteworthy is how the district brought in expert consultation and planned steps of a multiyear process to integrate instruction and assessment, and to extend the system and expand to include all teachers. Full Description The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) has 34,000 teachers in 11 local districts, with each district consisting of approximately 60,000 students. Districtwide practices must start at one level or one set of schools, and expand over a number of years. As implementation expands, accountability of program implementation and impact on students are crucial to the district's ability to gauge its progress and adjust the multiyear plan in a timely manner. LAUSD has a comprehensive system of training teachers to teach and assess students and monitoring implementation of a writing program. This is a story in progress for LAUSD. It is about taking research-based practices "to scale:" expanding to all teachers and site administrators, deepening understanding of each educator, and improving practice over years in a large school district. Standards The district created Learning Standards for grades 3, 7, 9, and high school graduation in 1995-1997. During the next two years, the district adopted the state's grade level-specific content standards and developed district Learning Standards in other subject areas. Parent brochures include translations in the district's five dominant languages. LAUSD's Web site presents the Learning Standards and links to the state's Web site for state standards. The district established four performance levels aligned to the state and National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) -- Advanced, Proficient, Basic, and Below Basic. Assessment CRESST helped develop and administer writing performance assignments in grades 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8, and determine validity and reliability in 1997-1999. Since 1999, other assessments were added: the SAT-9 multiple-choice test; and STEPS (Standards Test to Evaluate Performance of Students) at grades 3, 7, and 9. Near the end of the school year, all teachers administer the same performance assignment to all students at each grade level in the district. Teachers at the school sites rate the writing samples for students in their classrooms. Teachers receive training on the Standards-Based Performance Assessment Handbook to ensure a consistent and systematic approach for assessment practices. The handbook also includes generic scoring guides for scoring classroom work in all subject areas (not just writing). A videotape (Performance Assignment Scoring Training and Viewing Guide) is also available from the district. Professional development time for handbook training comes from a district plan for banking minutes. Additional minutes are added to the instructional day through contractual agreement and this time is reserved for mandated professional development. Schools are expected to use 1.5 hours of staff meeting time a week for about 16 weeks to support training that addresses district priorities. After all students are assessed and scored by teachers at the schools, a random sample of 10 percent of papers at each grade level are submitted to the district for central scoring. Teachers are trained to score one student paper in two to three minutes. If additional time is needed to score papers or use results to plan instruction, schools use grade level/departmental meeting time or "Standards-Based Education School Funds" to provide substitute release time. A group of 800 "expert teacher raters" assign a second score to the papers. Feedback is given to the home-site teachers about the level of agreement in ratings with the "experts." Suggestions are provided for teachers whose ratings are notably different from the experts. This is a nonpunitive method to check for rating consistency and gradually improve the assessment process over time. Two days are allocated, one for training raters and one for scoring. "Standards-Based Education School Funds" are used to pay raters. Professional Development In 1996, the district began training teachers in elementary, middle, and high schools to design and teach standards-based lessons in reading and writing. A large committee with state and district representatives identified a "research-based process for planning instruction to accelerate learning." The district's Standards-Based Resource Materials for Educators contain 360 sample lessons and student work. A number of model standards-based lesson plans in language arts and other subject areas are posted on the district's Web site: http://www.lausd.k12.ca.us/lausd/offices/instruct/standards After four years, about 23,000 teachers have received training. There will always be the need to train new teachers because of teacher mobility and increasing enrollment. Growing districts face the challenge of differentiated professional learning for veterans and new teachers, as well as administrators who are expected to be instructional leaders. Along with training on standards-based teaching strategies, teachers have learned to rate students' writing performance assignments. CRESST designed a four-point scoring rubric and online interactive scoring practice for teachers in grades 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8. Teachers at every grade level are given model student papers for each performance level. Literacy coaches were placed in elementary schools in 2000-2001 and are being placed in secondary schools in 2001-2002. Coaches help teachers teach, assess, and use results to diagnose student needs and plan lessons. Each school established a five-member Standards-based Education Team. Literacy coaches train these team members to coach their colleagues. The team also provides overall leadership for the standards-based education initiative. This incremental process of first district then site-level training supports "going to scale" in a large district and focusing accountability at the school level. Accountability The University of Pittsburg is conducting an Institute of Learning for principals and area superintendents of the district's 11 local districts (about 60,000 students per small district). These administrators are learning to supervise instruction in a collegial, supportive approach using "learning walks." The Learning Walks are part professional learning, and part supervision and accountability. Area superintendents received training in 2000-2001, and site principals are receiving training in 2001-2002. Again, this is "going to scale" and also serves to field-test the training and accountability model. These administrators are expected to make frequent, systematic classroom visits to observe quality of literacy lessons and ensure that teachers are using assessment results as intended. The process is part of the formal evaluation of site principals and area superintendents in LAUSD. However, the process is not part of formal teacher evaluation in most districts. Typically, it is considered as follow-up professional development and accountability. |