FEEDBACK ON 2ND SCHOOL STATNET MEETING: Educator Hiring, Induction, PD, and Evaluation, Oct. 8th, Worcester What did you like best about the meeting?  Selection of data and ensuing insightful discussions.  Love sharing data. The small group discussions are also excellent.  I thought Erin's data was tremendously informative.  The wide demographics of participants at the meeting.  The opportunity to hear from other districts on topics of interest.  The information presented was useful and I appreciated the opportunity to meet other people interested in improving the public education system.  I enjoyed the chance to meet with colleagues who are focused on data issues. I also liked the size of the group -large enough to get a diversity of viewpoints, but small enough to feel relaxed and informal, which led to more people sharing their experience.  Meeting others in similar positions, hearing what others are doing.  Using what I learned from the discussions as contextual data for how to understand how our district is performing and progressing in each topic. I also liked the length of time we spend on each topic on the agenda. We covered a lot of ground but the facilitators really kept the meeting moving. Thanks - it was a great meeting.  Discussing common issues (i.e. DDM's, teacher recruitment/hiring).  The tone and the pace - it was an efficient meeting and at no time did I (and I don't think anyone else, either) feel like folks were rambling. Stephanie did a great job of facilitating and keeping it moving. It was invigorating. What suggestions do you have for improving future meetings?  Perhaps fewer topics so we can dig deeper.  Try and lengthen the sessions and have fewer.  We probably need to lengthen the meetings or reduce the number of topics so we don't have to cut discussion short.  Provide summaries of research findings on meeting topics (e.g. what does research say about what hiring processes have greatest impact on teacher effectiveness and retention?)  Good meeting.  I would have enjoyed spending even more time in focused conversations in small groups, learning about how others address such issues in their own districts. It would even be interesting to survey StatNet participants and ask them: "What is the one most impactful policy change your district has implemented in the past two years?" I have no doubt that this would spark an interesting dialog -- what are we doing to drive achievement, and do we really have systems in place for measuring the success of such initiatives? One other thing that might be interesting would be a summary of the most impactful practices in public education. I'm not talking about a new study carried out by StatNet members, but a sort of "review of literature." Like many people, I don't have the time or resources to delve deeply into the most current research, but I'd love to know what steps I can take right now to improve student outcomes. Between sessions, I spoke with Sarah Glover, and it became clear that she had a wealth of information about recent research. I wish there were a way for research on best practices to move from academics, who are well-placed to monitor the research, to school administrators, who are in a position to implement it.  The agenda was too crowded. Many of the topics deserved 20-30 minutes of discussion, but were limited by the 15 minute windows which were allotted. I realize it is what members called for from previous meetings, but creative solutions require time to develop and grow.  I think the breakout groups are great and Stephanie does a really good job getting everyone to talk, that should continue. Do you have any suggestions for outreach for future meetings?  Ask attendees to present session.  I'm not sure what was done before, but I would think being clear about the agenda and purpose would help, as well as participants' feedback (i.e. positive quotes) from past meetings.



More research on teacher effectiveness. Based on years of experience and comparing their impact in the classroom in suburban vs urban districts.

Any other suggestions for the initiative?  Stephanie, you are doing a fine job. The topics are of high interest and pique curiosity about delving further. Will we continue in this way or narrow the lens on any few topics?  What about a web page or list serv to share things that come up between meetings that might be useful to the group?  Research on how districts allocate their budget dollars. It seems that they are always asking for more money, and getting it in many instances, yet the educational results are not yielding results that match the increased spending. With 75% plus of every budget going to salaries and benefits I think there is definitely room for improving how districts allocate their budgets.  This was a wonderful event -- by far the most useful and thought-provoking meeting I have attended in a long time.  (This is how I think...I hope it makes sense...) 1.) I would ground the work that School StatNet is doing in a rubric (like a "key components of using data to improve district effectiveness" rubric). Since people often feel so scattered about all the possibilities of data use in a district, I think this would help alleviate that feeling. 2.) Then, I would identify which areas of the rubric have been talked about so far in the StatNet meetings and which areas of the rubric we are focusing on in each meeting, as we go. I would also map the suggested "projects" listed above to the rubric to help highlight where our interest lies around data use to drive improvement. 3.) At the end of each meeting, and using the contextual data from the discussions, participants could rate their district on the rubric in the specific area(s) discussed that day (I think it's hard to rate yourself without the contextual data). 4.) At the end of the year, the StatNet participants could rate how specific topic discussions thought StatNet helped them move up in areas of the rubric and the specific actions they took that resulted in them "moving up". For example, how did the student placement discussion from this week help districts improve their placement practices for next school year. 5.) Overall, my hope is that the rubric would give participants: a) a vision of what "poor/average/good/great" data use looks like in various areas of running a district, how they're doing, and a concrete way to watch themselves improve; b) a chance to identify with other districts that are at varying levels of proficiency with data use in different areas of the rubric, and to connect with them to share best practices; c) a stronger vision about how becoming great data users is developmental, and a more strategic vision for key areas to prioritize strengthening data use.  Hold meetings in different geographic regions. This might place a burden on some members, but could build a better understanding between members that could lead to further collaborations?  Not a suggestion but a concern: I really support this type of cross-district sharing of ideas to improve efficiency and foster collaboration and collegiality. My only fear is that this is being done in other venues/forums, like Superintendent meetings or other convenings where folks from multiple districts meet. This might make decision-makers leary to participate because they feel it's redundant. What do you think? Category Convene a meeting of MA districts with SchoolSpring developers to request changes (from meeting #2). Research the feasibility of creating an alternative certification program within MA (from meeting #2). Develop analysis on school-related operations topics, such as facilities and energy management (from meeting #2). Work with the State to investigate the demand for and feasibility of creating a statewide Student Information System (from meeting #1). Look into feasibility of creating analytical team that helps districts carry o.ut intervention program evaluation (from meeting #1). Work with State officials to share feedback that came out of the Ed Eval discussion, such as ideas on the pace of the roll-out and on the publication of ed eval results publicly (from meeting #2).

% Interested or Very Interested 27%

Ave Rating

20%

2.50

40%

2.79

40%

2.93

27%

3.15

33%

3.15

2.31

Undertake a pilot analysis using longitudinal SIMS data, such as on how grade 3 retentions or PK enrollment impact long-term student performance (from meeting #2). Continue to research models of metrics of school performance (from meeting #2).

53%

3.71

73%

3.73

In collaboration with State partners, support districts as they work to develop DDMs (from meeting #2). Undertake or help facilitate research on why lower-income students have lower SGPs on average and how State, district, or school-level policies may impact those results (from meeting #2). Research what hiring practices lead to the hiring of the highest performing teachers and develop a recommended protocol (from meeting #2).

60%

3.85

60%

3.93

73%

4.08