School administration practicum_portfolio2_-_fall_2010_-_spring_2011 (1)

School Administration and Supervision Practicum Portfolio

Submitted by: Lorenzo R. Prillman

Bowie State University

School of Education/Department of Education Leadership

ESAS 828/858 Seminar & Practicum in Education Leadership

Instructor: Dr. Barbara Jackson

Submission Date: May 05, 2011

0

Table of Contents
Site Practicum Description ........................................................................................................................... 1
Professional Resume………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……...2 - 3
College Transcripts…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….…..4 - 5
Teacher Certification .................................................................................................................................... 6
Philosophy of Education Leadership……………………………………………………………………………………………….7 - 8
Professional Internship Project #1…………………………………………………………………………………………….….9 - 28
Professional Internship Project #2…………………………………………………………………………………………………29 - 41

ISLLC Activities: Standards 1 – 6………………………………………………………………………………………….…………42 - 48

Vignette Activities: Standards 1 –6……………………………………………………………………..…………………………49 - 63

Novice Principal Professional DevelopmentPlan…………………………………………….…………….………………64 - 75

Novice Principal Work Entry Plan…………………………………………………………………………..………………………76 - 81

Six School Administrators Responsibilities………………………………………………………………….…………………82 - 84

Practicum Reflections Log………………………………………………………………………………………………………………85 - 92

Certificates/Awards……………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………….93 - 103

Site Supervisor’s Evaluation…………………………………………………………………………………………………..…..104 - 106

i

Description of Practicum Site
Benjamin Banneker Middle School is a public school located in the suburbs of
Burtonsville, Maryland. The school district in which BBMS resides is
Montgomery County Public Schools. The Burtonsville community is
predominantly a blue-collar, working class community. Approximately fifty-one
percent of adults twenty-five years and older hold advanced degrees. The median
family income for this city is approximately one-hundred and five-thousand
dollars. The demographics of the middle school are approximately 61% African-
American, 15% Caucasian-American, 11% Hispanic-American, and 13% Asian-
American. There are a total of approximately seven hundred and sixty kids that
attend BBMS. The students who attended this middle school range in age from
eleven to fourteen. The middle school provides educational services for students in
grades six through eight. Additional educational services are also offered to ESOL
(English for Speakers of Other Languages) and Special Education students. The
annual academic goals for the school and school district are for students to achieve
a score of proficient or advanced on the reading/math portion of the Maryland
State Assessment exam, and to have students take more rigorous course work
(e.g., advanced English, Social Studies, Science, and Math).

Benjamin Banneker Middle School
14800 Perrywood Drive
Burtonsville, Maryland 20866

1

Philosophy of Education Leadership

My philosophy of education leadership stems from the beliefs of presidential biographer

and professor James MacGregor Burns. Transformational leadership was a concept established

by Burns in his research on prominent political leaders. Transformational leadership is defined as

a leadership approach that causes change in individuals and social systems. Leaders who adopt a

transformational leadership style develop followers into leaders. According to Burns, the

transformational leadership approach creates significant change in the lives of people and

organizations (Burns, 1978). Transformational leaders develop the ability to create positive

change through modeling expected behavior for individuals, team members, the organization,

and/or community. Therefore, my philosophy of education leadership focuses on developing

people into leaders who facilitate decision making and promote change. Burns states ―followers

of transformational leaders feel trust, admiration, loyalty, and respect for the leader because of

their willingness to work harder than originally expected.‖

I believe transformational leaders appeal to the heart of individuals because they are self-

motivated as well as motivate the people around them. According to Thomas Sergiovanni, the

heart of leadership deals with a person’s beliefs, values, dreams, and their commitment to

another person’s vision (Sergiovanni, 2009). Transformational leadership allows for a school

leader to develop and shape school culture through dedication and hard work of invested

stakeholders. As a transformational leader, I will ensure students, teachers, and parents are

involved in the decision making process regarding educational issues like school curriculum,

new technology, diversity training, and school-based management. Finally, it is important to note

that transformational leaders are not afraid to take risks in order to improve student achievement

and/or school culture.

7

Bibliography

Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York, New York: Harper & Row.

Sergiovanni, T. J. A (2009). The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective. Boston,

Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.

8

Internship Project #1: Co-Teaching Analysis Study
2010 - 2011

Artifact for Standard 2: Social Studies Department Co-Teaching Model Study Results

Names of Artifact(s): Co-Teaching Model Analysis Data Collection Excel Sheets and Co-
Teaching Model Study Results

Date: May 05, 2011


Montgomery County Public Schools

Artifacts
The artifacts listed above illustrate my role as department chair of the Social Studies Department
which requires me to evaluate the co-taught (inclusion) instructional model. The quantitative
research study was supported by teachers in the Social Studies Department who assisted with
collecting Special Education students’ achievement data over the course of three marking
periods. Student achievement data was collected on Excel spread sheets and analyzed using
SPSS software. A data analysis report was completed on student achievement results of Special
Education students in Social Studies classes. The Social Studies Department Co-Teaching
Analysis Study was conducted as a result of the need to give meaningful and timely feedback on
the progression of our Special Education population within the full inclusion instructional model.
In addition, the study wanted to show whether or not the co-taught instructional model was more
beneficial for male or female students. The results of the study were used to make decisions
about teacher instructional practices under the co-teaching model, and the structure of classes for
Special Education students for next school year.

Reflection Narrative
Following the end of the first marking period, the Special Education department chair,
administration, and the Social Studies department chair held a meeting to discuss ways to
improve the co-teaching instructional model. Banneker Middle School is currently in the second
year of implementing the co-taught instructional model for full inclusion of Special Education
students. During the meeting, leaders discussed ways in which the school could improve the
academic performance of Special Education students under the co-taught model. As chair of the
Social Studies department, I gave the suggestion of collecting student performance data on
Special Education students receiving instruction within the full inclusion model. Although this
was the first year for the Social Studies department participating in the full inclusion model, I
wanted to ensure teachers in my department that the proper steps would be taken to improve the
academic performance of Special Education students for the following school year. Therefore, I
volunteered to have the Social Studies department collect summative assessment data of Special
Education students in their co-taught classrooms.

9

During the first three marking periods, teachers collected end of unit assessment exam scores of
students which were later used to measure the impact of the co-taught instructional model on
male and female Special Education achievement. Using SPSS software, student scores were
analyzed to see if the co-taught instructional model had a greater impact on male or female
students. The scores of students were analyzed in this manner due to the lack of student
performance data from year one implementation of the co-taught teaching model. In addition to
collecting and analyzing student test scores, students were also given a student questionnaire to
complete which gathered information on their beliefs about the relevancy of the co-taught
instructional model. The data analysis results for the student end of unit assessment scores
revealed that the majority of Special Education students, across grade levels, were performing at
a below average (66.6%) rate. Although students were performing at a below average rate, the
student questionnaire revealed that the majority of students believed the co-taught instructional
model made a significant impact on their learning, believed the instructional pace of their classes
were fairly appropriate for their learning styles, and wanted to remain in the co-taught
instructional model in the future. Despite the positive feedback of students thoughts about the
relevancy of the co-taught instructional model, the below average student test scores of students
was a cause for concern.

The co-taught instructional model data analysis report made a few recommendations on how to
enhance the academic performance of Special Education students’ in the future. First, it was
agreed upon by the Social Studies Department and Special Education Department teachers that
more frequent checks for student understanding was needed. Second, alternative ways to
assessing student mastery of concepts such as product-based assessments was also needed. The
two recommendations that were made to improve the academic performance of student
achievement led to the development of my second internship project which involved all six
members of the Social Studies department collaborating on writing goals and objectives for their
Professional Development Plans which related to the instructional needs of Special Education
students. Overall, the report raised the questions about whether the placing of Special Education
students in advanced courses, which usually move at a faster instructional pace, is appropriate for
the learning challenges they endure. A follow up study was recommended to be conducted on the
impact of the co-taught instructional model on male and female Special Education student’s
academic achievement which would encompass all four core academic subject areas (English,
Social Studies, Math and Science).

10

Impact of Co-Teaching Model on Male and Female Student Achievement

Professional Internship Project 1 - Social Studies Department Co-Teaching Model Study Results

2010 - 2011

Research Conducted by: Lorenzo R. Prillman

Research Assistants: Tiffany McEwan, Adrienne D’Orazio, Cari Huffman & Sabrina Khan

Bowie State University

School of Education

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Leadership

ESAS 828/858, Practicum/Seminar in School Administration and Supervision

Dr. Barbara Jackson

May 05, 2011

11

Analysis of the Data

This academic study examined the impact of the co-teaching model on student achievement for

special education students. The Null Hypothesis for this study stated there was no significant difference

betweenacademic performance of male and female special education students receiving regular classroom

instruction under the co-teaching model. The significance level for this study was set at .05. The research

study explored one essential question pertaining to the importance of the co-teaching model:

1. Did the co-teaching model impact male and female special education student’sacademic

achievement differently?

The study also observed the level of student interest with attending classes under the co-teaching

model, and their conviction about the impact of the co-taught instructional model on their learning. The

four student questionnaire questions analyzed for this portion of the study were as follows:

1. Did special education students enjoy attending instructional classes under the co-teaching model?

2. If given a choice of remaining in the co-taught instructional model or transitioning back into

small instructional classes, which instructional model would they choose?

3. Did special education students believe the co-taught instructional model had a significant (major)

impact on their learning (improved reading, writing, and communication skills)?

4. Did the instructional pace of the class allow for special education students to learn and retain

information (educational concepts) long enough to consistently perform successfully on formative

and summative assessments?

12

Results

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence
Interval of the

Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Difference

F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

Unit1 Equal variances .346 .560 1.105 44 .275 4.46857 4.04537 -3.68434 12.62149
assumed

Equal variances 1.112 43.532 .272 4.46857 4.01859 -3.63283 12.56997
not assumed
Unit2 Equal variances .000 .998 1.071 43 .290 4.35119 4.06427 -3.84518 12.54757
assumed
Equal variances 1.072 42.436 .290 4.35119 4.05832 -3.83634 12.53872
not assumed
Unit3 Equal variances 2.169 .148 .903 43 .372 4.11310 4.55443 -5.07180 13.29799
assumed

Equal variances .926 40.617 .360 4.11310 4.44085 -4.85794 13.08413
not assumed

The Independent Samples T- Test was utilized to determine if the variance in scores

between male and female special education students were equal. The variance in student scores

for each end of unit assessment, reflected the null hypothesis which stated there was no

difference in the variance of scores between male and female special education students because

P = .275 > .05 (Unit1), P = .290 > .05 (Unit 2), and P = .372 > .05 (Unit 3). Due to the critical

value (t) of 1.105 (Unit 1), 1.071 (Unit 2), and .903 (Unit 3) falling inside the acceptance region

of the interval scale, the variance in student assessment scores were not considered statistically

significant. The results of the test supported the generalization that majority of the male and

female students who participated in the co-taught instructional model would benefit

academically in similar ways.

13

Table 2
Expected Frequency Counts for Question 3 of Student Questionnaire
Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-
Value df sided) sided) sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square .621 1 .431
b
Continuity Correction .194 1 .660
Likelihood Ratio .628 1 .428
Fisher's Exact Test .503 .332
Linear-by-Linear Association .607 1 .436
N of Valid Cases 45

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.13.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

In the Pearson Chi-Square test for independence, the frequency of student responses to

four questionnaire questions were analyzed to determine student preference for attending

instructional classes, under the co-teaching model, was directly related to gender. Results of the

Chi-Square data analysis for question three of the student questionnaire reflected the null

hypothesis which stated there was no significant difference between special education students’

gender and their preference for attending instructional classes under the co-teaching model

because P = .431 > .05. Due to the critical value (a) of .621 falling within the acceptance region

of the interval scale, frequency results for question three of the student questionnaire was not

considered statistically significant. The Results of the test supported the generalization that

majority of male and female students who participated in the co-taught instructional model had

similar views regarding their preference for attending class. Out of forty-five special education

students surveyed, seventeen boys and seventeen girls stated they liked attending classes under

the co-teaching model. Nonetheless, seven boys and four girls stated they did not like attending

classes under the co-teaching model (See Appendix D).

14

Table 3
Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 1.503 2 .472
Likelihood Ratio 1.545 2 .462
N of Valid Cases 45

a. 2 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 1.87.

The results of the Chi-Square data analysis for question four of the student

questionnaire reflected the null hypothesis which stated there was no significant difference

between male and female special education students’ beliefs about academic achievement due to

them attending classes under the co-teaching model because P = .472 > .05. Due to the critical

value (a) of 1.503 falling inside the acceptance region of the interval scale, frequency results for

question four of the student questionnaire were not considered statistically significant. Results of

the test supported the generalization that majority of male and female students who participated

in the co-taught instructional model had similar views about whether or not the co-taught model

had a significant impact on their learning. Out of forty-five special education students surveyed,

ten boys and seven girls believed the co-teaching model had a significant impact on their

learning. Eleven boys and thirteen girls believed the co-teaching model somewhat impacted their

learning. Three boys and one girl believed the co-teaching model did not have a significant

impact on their learning (See Appendix E).

15

Table 4
Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-
Value df sided) sided) sided)
a
b
Continuity Correction .082 1 .775
Fisher's Exact Test .743 .387
N of Valid Cases 45

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.07.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

The results of the Chi-Square data analysis for question five of the student

questionnaire reflected the null hypothesis which stated there was no significant difference

between male and female special education students academic performance on formative and

summative assessments due to the instructional pace of co-taught classes because P = .538 >

.05. Due to the critical value (a) of .379 falling inside the acceptance region of the interval scale,

frequency results for question five of the student questionnaire were not considered statistically

significant. Results of the test supported the generalization that majority of male and female

special education students, who received instruction under the co-teaching model, had similar

views as to whether or not the instructional pace of the class enhanced or did not enhance their

performance on formative and summative assessments. Out of forty-five special education

students surveyed, eighteen boys and fourteen girls stated they believed the instructional pace of

the co-taught class provided them the ability to perform successfully on formative and

summative assessments. Six boys and seven girls stated they did not believe the instructional

pace of the co-taught classes provided for them the ability to perform successfully on formative

and summative assessments (See Appendix F).

16

Table 5
Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
a
N of Valid Cases 45

a. 1 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 4.67.

The results of the Chi-Square data analysis for question six of the student questionnaire

reflected the null hypothesis which stated there was no significant difference between male and

female special education student’s preference for attending classes under the co-teaching model

or returning to small instructional classes because P = .733 > .05. Due to the critical value (a) of

.621 falling inside the acceptance region of the interval scale, frequency results for question six

of the student questionnaire were not considered statistically significant. Results of the test

supported the generalization that majority of male and female students who participated in the

co-taught instructional model had similar views as to whether or not they remained in the co-

taught instructional model or return to smaller instructional classes. Out of forty-five special

education students surveyed, twelve boys and twelve girls stated they wanted to continue

attending classes under the co-taught instructional model. Seven boys and four girls stated they

wanted to return to smaller instructional classes. Five boys and five girls stated the instructional

model in which they attended classes did not have any relevance (See Appendix G).

17

Summary and Conclusions

Data results for the essential question of this academic study failed to reject the Null

Hypothesis which stated there was no significant difference between the academic performance of male

and female special education students receiving regular classroom instruction under the co-teaching

model, due to the variance in student end of unit assessment scores not being considered

statistically significant. The small variance in special education students’ end of unit assessment

scores from the mean score of each assessment revealed the majority of students, male or female,

were consistently performing academically on the same level. Special education students

combined average mean scores for all three end of unit exams was sixty-six percent, a below

average assessment score.

Data results for questions three, four, five, and six of the student questionnaire failed to

reject the Null Hypothesis for each question due to the frequency results of student responses not

being considered statistically significant. The Null Hypothesis for each question stated the

following:

Question 3 – there was no significant difference between special education students’

gender and their preference for attending instructional classes under the co-teaching model.

Question 4 – there was no significant difference between male and female special

education students’ beliefs regarding academic achievement due to them attending classes under

the co-teaching model.


education students academic performance on formative and summative assessments due to the

instructional pace of co-taught classes.

18


education students’ preference for attending classes under the co-teaching model or returning to

small instructional classes.

Overall results of male and female student responses for each question on the

questionnaire revealed the majority of special education students enjoyed attending class under

the co-taught instructional model, believed the co-taught instructional model made a significant

impact on their learning, believed the instructional pace of their classes were fairly appropriate

for their learning styles, and wanted to remain in the co-taught instructional model in the future.

Recommendations

First, due to the end of unit assessment scores for special education students in Social

Studies averaging sixty-six percent across all three grade levels, an instructional strategy of

providing more frequent checks for student understanding, during the course of a lesson, needs to

be implemented. Second, teachers need to develop alternative ways such as product-based

assessments to measure special education students’ mastery of content learning indicators. Third,

results from the student questionnaire showed how majority of special education students

enjoyed spending their class time learning under the co-taught instructional model. The below

average end of unit scores, across grade levels, in Social Studies raised concerns about whether

the placing of special education students in advanced courses, which usually move at a faster

instructional pace, is appropriate for the learning challenges they endure. Finally, based on

overall results of the data, I recommend a follow-up study be conducted on the impact of the co-

taught instructional model on male and female special education student’s academic achievement

that would encompass all four core academic subject areas (English, Social Studies, Math and

Science).

19

Appendices

Appendix A

Special Education Special Education is the educating of students
with special needs in a way that addresses the
students' individual differences and needs. Ideally,
this process involves individually planned and
systematically monitored arrangements of teaching
procedures, adapted equipment and materials,
accessible settings, and other interventions
designed to help learners with special needs
achieve a higher level of personal self-sufficiency
and success in school and community than would
be available if the student were only given access
to a typical classroom education.

Co-Teaching Model of Inclusion Inclusion in education is an approach to educating
students with special educational needs. Under the
inclusion model, students with special needs spend
most or all of their time with non-disabled students.
Fully inclusive schools, which are rare, no longer
distinguish between "general education" and
"special education" programs; instead, the school is
restructured so that all students learn together.

Sample Group/Population A number of individuals, items or events selected
from a population for a study, preferably in such a
way that represents the larger group from which
they were selected.

Null Hypothesis States there is no significant relation or difference
between variables (independent and dependent).

Alternative Hypothesis States there is a significant relation between
variables (independent and dependent).

P Value The p-value is the probability that a research study
sample could have been drawn from the
population(s) being tested (or that a more
improbable sample could be drawn) given the
assumption that the null hypothesis is true.

Statistical Significance The conclusion of a research study that states the
results are unlikely to have occurred by chance—
that is the observed relation or difference is
probably 1.0 or less.

20

Dependent Variable The change or difference in a behavior or
characteristic that occurs as a result of the
independent or grouping variable. Also called
effect, outcome or posttest variable.

Independent Variable A behavior or characteristic under the control of the
researcher and believed to influence some other
behavior or characteristic. Also called experimental
variable, manipulated variable, cause variable or
treatment variable

Statistical Mean The most common expression for the mean of a
statistical distribution with a discrete random
variable is the mathematical average of all the
terms. To calculate, add the values of all the terms
and divide by the number of terms.

Independent Sample t-test A parametric test of significance used to determine
whether, at a selected probability level, the means
of two independent samples are significantly
different.

Chi Square Test Chi-square is a statistical test commonly used to
compare observed data with data we would expect
to obtain according to a specific hypothesis. The
chi-square test for independence always tests what
scientists call the null hypothesis, which state there
is no significant difference between the expected
and observed result.

Variance Variance is defined as the amount of spread among
scores. If the variance is small, the scores are close
together. If it is large, the scores are more spread
out. Calculation of the variance shows how far each
score is from the mean.

Reliability The degree to which a test (or qualitative research
data) consistently measures whatever it measures.
SPSS Data Software SPSS Inc. is a leading worldwide provider of
predictive analytics software and solutions. SPSS
software assists researchers with computing
statistical data gathered during research.

21

Appendix B

Figure 1.1
Average End of Unit Assessment Scores for Special Education Students
Group Statistics

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Unit1 1.00 25 66.0400 14.11996 2.82399

2.00 21 61.5714 13.10180 2.85905
Unit2 1.00 24 73.5417 13.73659 2.80397
2.00 21 69.1905 13.44477 2.93389
Unit3 1.00 24 67.2083 17.61664 3.59598

2.00 21 63.0952 11.94113 2.60577

74

72

70

68

66 Unit 1
64 Unit 2
Unit 3
62

60

58

56
Male Female

Average Social Studies End of Unit Assessment Scores for Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Grade
Special Education Students

22

Appendix C

In this questionnaire, you will find questions about yourself. Some questions ask
for facts while other questions ask for your opinions.
Read each question carefully and answer as accurately as possible. You may ask
for help if you do not understand something, or are not sure how to respond.

1. Are you a girl or a boy? Check one box only

Girl--------------------------------------------------------------------
Boy--------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Which of the following best describes you? Check one or more boxes

White--------------------------------------------------------------

Black or African American-------------------------------------

Asian---------------------------------------------------------------

Hispanic or Latino------------------------------------------------

American Indian or Alaska Native-----------------------------

Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander--------------------

Mixed Heritage----------------------------------------------------

3. Do you like attending instructional classes under the co-teaching model?

Check one box only

YES---------------------------------------------------------------

NO----------------------------------------------------------------

23

4. Do you believe the co-teaching model has had a significant (major) impact
on your learning (improved reading, writing, and communication skills)?

Check one box only

1 – Significant ------------------------------------------------

2 – Somewhat Significant-----------------------------------

3 – Not Significant-------------------------------------------

5. Did the instructional pace of the class allow for you to learn and retain (hold
on to) information long enough to consistently perform successfully on
formative and summative assessments?

Check one box only

YES--------------------------------------------------------------

NO---------------------------------------------------------------

6. If you had a choice of remaining in the co-taught instructional model or
moving back to small instructional classes, which one would you choose?

Check one box only

1 - Remain in current co-taught instructional model--------------
2 - Return to small instructional classes---------------------------
3 - Instructional model does not matter to me--------------------

24

Appendix D

Figure 1.2
Frequency Count Results for Question 3 of Student Questionnaire
Crosstab
Count

Gender

1.00 2.00 Total

SQQ3R 1.00 17 17 34

2.00 7 4 11
Total 24 21 45

18

16

14

12

10
Yes
8
No
6

4

2

0
Male Female

Question 3: Did special education students like attending instructional classes under the co-

teaching model?

25

Appendix E

Figure 1.3
Crosstab
Count

Gender

1.00 2.00 Total

SQQR4 1.00 10 7 17

2.00 11 13 24

3.00 3 1 4
Total 24 21 45

14

12

10

8
Significant

6 Somewhat Signficant
Not Significant
4

2

0
Male Female

Question 4: Did special education students believe the co-taught instructional model had a significant

(major) impact on their learning (improved reading, writing, and communication skills)?

26

Appendix F

Figure 1.4
Crosstab
Count

Gender

1.00 2.00 Total

SQQ5R 3.00 18 14 32

4.00 6 7 13
Total 24 21 45

20

18

16

14

12

10 Yes
8 No

6

4

2

0
Male Female

Question 5: Did the instructional pace of the class allow for special education students to learn and retain

information (educational concepts) long enough to consistently perform successfully on formative and

summative assessments?

27

Appendix G

Figure 1.5
Crosstab
Count

Gender

1.00 2.00 Total

SQQR6 1.00 12 12 24

2.00 7 4 11

3.00 5 5 10
Total 24 21 45

14

12

10
Remain in Co-Taught Classes
8
Return to Small Classes
6

Instructional Model Does Not
4 Matter

2

0
Male Female

Question 6: If given a choice of remaining in the co-taught instructional model or transitioning back into

small instructional classes, which instructional model would they choose?

28

Artifact for Standard 2: Teacher Professional Development Plans, Montgomery County Public
Schools Standards for Teachers, and Co-Taught Analysis Study Recommendations

Names of Artifact(s): Sample Teacher Professional Development Plans (Department Goals and
Objectives are Related to Internship Project #1)

Date: May 05, 2011



Artifacts
The artifacts listed above were used by members of the Social Studies Department, in a
collaborative way, to improve student achievement for Special Education students and low
achieving comprehensive students. Teachers in the Social Studies department reviewed the
results of the co-taught analysis study to get an idea of what instructional improvements needed
to be made in order to improve student achievement. After reviewing the co-taught analysis
study recommendations, teachers in the Social Studies Department utilized the Montgomery
County Public Schools Teaching Standards Guide to draft preliminary professional development
goals and objectives.

Following the end of the third marking period, teachers in the Social Studies Department came
together to discuss ways of how to improve student achievement for Special Education students
and low achieving comprehensive students. As a collaborative group, the department decided
that there was a need to put an instructional plan together in order to meet the many instructional
challenges faced by teachers in co-taught classes. During the April department meeting, teachers
collaborated together to produce a universal professional development plan which incorporated
department/teacher instructional goals and objectives. Goal one of the Social Studies Department
professional development plan was a shared goal/objectives to be implemented by the entire
department in grades six, seven and eight. Goal one of the Social Studies Department
professional development plan was created to improve the formative and summative assessment
scores of Special Education students. Department members developed a system to consistently
check for student understanding, during the course of a lesson, and a way to develop multiple
product-based assessments. Goal two of the PDP allowed for teachers in the Social Studies
department to address one other professional development need. Teachers used the MCPS
professional growth handbook to choose a teaching standard to address for goal two of their
professional development plans. After department members completed their professional
development plans, they submitted them to their principal and department chair for approval.
The Social Studies Department instructional program has significantly improved as a result of
steps taken to improve the academic outcomes for Special Education students and low achieving
comprehensive students.

29

Professional Development Plan
Name: Lorenzo R. Prillman Date: 04/29/2011

Educator’s School District: Montgomery County Public Schools

Educator’s Employee ID#: 000069337

Educator’s Current Educational Assignment: Content Specialist, Social Studies Department

Number of Year(s) in Current Assignment: 02

Years of Educational Experience: 15

School: Benjamin Banneker Middle School

Length of Professional Growth Cycle: ___X_ 3-years ____ 4-years ____5 years (check one)

Duration of Plan: May 01, 2011 through May 01, 2014

Check – In Dates: December 2011, May 2012, December 2012, May 2013, December 2013 and May 2014

End of PDP Cycle Review: May 2014

Year in Professional Development Cycle: Year 1

Key Note: Prior to developing a Professional Development Plan, teachers should spend some
time reviewing their school district’s goals (School District Improvement Plan), their school’s
goals (School Improvement Plan), and keeping a reflective educational journal that documents
the many challenges faced by the educator during his/her tenure in the present school. Reviewing
both plans will ensure that the Professional Development Plan is aligned with the district’s and
school’s goals for professional development and accountability. Teachers PDP goal(s),
objective(s), and activities(s) must address two or more of the Montgomery County Public
Schools (MCPS) standards for school teachers.

Step 1: Preparing to Write the Plan: Self Reflection(Not required to be included in the PDP)

30

In reflecting upon this past year as an educator at Benjamin Banneker Middle School, which
majority was spent analyzing student academic performance data, I was able to identify two
Montgomery County Public Schools Teaching Standards (MCPSTS) that needed to be addressed
in order to improve student achievement. Improving Co-Taught student performance on
formative and summative assessments (Standard 2) at BBMS was important in order to address
issues of students failing to master the indicators of learning for the Advanced Social Studies
curriculum. In addition, improving student achievement for all ethnic subgroups as defined by
the Maryland State Assessment (Standard 3) was needed in order to facilitate better working
relationships with students and parents that will lead to positive academic outcomes for students.

Step 2: Writing the Plan: Components (At least two professional development goals are
included in the plan)

A. Contextual Description of Job Site: Teacher Situation

I am moving into my second year as the Social Studies Department Content Specialist at
Benjamin Banneker Middle School which is located in the suburbs of Burtonsville, Maryland.
The community in which the school resides is predominantly a blue-collar, working class
community. The demographics of the middle school are approximately 65% African-American,
20% Caucasian-American, 10% Hispanic-American, and 5% Asian-American. The annual
academic goals for the school and district are for students to achieve a score of proficient or
advanced on the reading/math portion of the Maryland State Assessment exam and to have
students take more rigorous course work (e.g., advanced English, Social Studies, Science, and
Math).

o Did you include a description of your teaching position?
o Did you include the number of years you have been a teacher?
o Did you include whether the school is located in an urban, suburban, or rural
setting?
o Did you include the ethnic, cultural, special needs, and socioeconomic makeup of the
school population?
o Did you include your school building and/or district goals? (Optional)

B. Description of the Goal(s) to be Addressed:

31

(It is recommended that you use this stem: I will . . . [research, study, learn, apply,
etc.] So that . . .[describe what you want to see happening differently with student
learning].)

I will improve Co-Taught student performance on Formative and Summative Assessments (Goal
1) by developing a system to frequently check for student understanding and developing product-
based assessments, so students will have greater success meeting the Social Studies Curriculum
indicators of learning. In addition, I will improve student achievement for all ethnic subgroups
define by MSA (Goal 2) through developing a positive classroom climate for all students and
providing on-going student achievement feedback to parents, so students will be able to
maximize their learning and achieve high levels of academic success.

1. What is my desired outcome for professional growth?
o Will your goal(s) impact your professional growth?
o Will the professional growth you identified have an effect on student learning?

C. Rationale for Your Goal(s) and Link to Self-Reflection, Educational Situation, and
Educational Standards
(Relate how your goal(s) is linked to your school district’s goals, your school’s goals,
your self-reflection, educational situation, and list the educational standards that
you will focus on for your professional growth cycle.)

My two professional development goals are linked to my school district and school’s goals by
they both focusing on developing, implementing and assessing activities which will lead to
enhanced student academic achievement. As one of the many educators responsible for
delivering instruction to students at BBMS, my first and foremost priority in the building is to
improve student achievement. The MCPS teaching standards I will be focusing on during the
implementation of this professional development plan will be standard 2 and standard 3.

1. How does the outcome relate to the school district’s goals and my school’s goals
(SIP)
o Does the rationale include how you related your self-reflection to your goal(s)?
o Does the rationale tell how your goal(s) connects to your district/school/teacher
position?
o Did you list the MCPS standards that will promote your professional growth (must
select two or more standards)?

32

D. Plan for Assessing and Documenting Your Goal(s):

Goal 1: Improve Co-Taught Student Performance on Formative and Summative Assessments

Data sources used to establish outcome
Co-Taught Students Formative Assessment Data
Co-Taught Students Summative Assessment Data (Unit Exam Scores)
Co-Taught Students Instructional Survey Responses

Data sources used to assess achievement of outcome
Student Opening, Mid-Point, and Closing Instructional Exit Card Data
Student Produced Vocabulary Booklets
Student Produced End of Unit Movie Posters
Student Produced Visual Representations of Instructional Concepts

Goal 2:Improve Student Achievement for all Ethnic Subgroups Defined by the MSA

Data sources used to establish outcome
School Climate Survey Results (Previous School Year)
School Ineligibility Data (Previous and Current School Year)

Data sources used to assess achievement of outcome
ESOL Student Performance Data on Formative and Summative Assessments
(Current School Year)
Student Ineligibility Data (Current School Year)
Student Classroom Climate Survey Results (Current School Year)
Parent Classroom Climate Survey Results (Current School Year)
School Communication Log Records with Parents (Current School Year)
Teacher-Student Produced Theoretical Framework Models for Student
Achievement (Current School Year)

1. What data sources did I use to establish my outcome? What data will I use to assess
achievement of my outcome?
o Did you include methods to assess your professional growth?
o Did you include methods to assess the effect of your growth on student learning?

33

E. Plan to Meet Your Goal(s): Objectives, Activities and Timelines, and Collaboration:

1. Which of the professional development options/strategies/techniques listed below
will I use?

Collaborative Options Independent Options

__X__ Peer Reflective Conversations __X__ Audio/Videotape Analysis

__X__ Peer Visits with Reflection (*) _____ Delivery of Workshops/Courses

_____ Committee or Task Force Participation __X__ Action Research

_____ Delivery of Workshops/Courses _____ Professional School Site Visits

__X__ Development of Instructional Materials __X__ Review of Professional Literature

__X__ Action Research Study Groups _____ Professional Training

_____ Principal Networking Group _____ school-based workshops

_____ New Curriculum Development ____ Out of school workshops

_____ Professional School Site Visits ____ conference(s)

_____ Other (be specific) __X__ Writing of an reflective journal

(*) Required one year of each evaluation cycle _____ Other (be specific)

2. PDP Support Team (Resource Teacher, Principal, Assistant Principal(s), Staff
Development Teacher, Technology Specialist, etc.)

_______Grade Level Cohort Teacher___________ English Resource Teacher_____

__ Reading Specialist Resource Teacher____ ______ Data Specialist_________

__ Computer Technology Teacher______ ___________Media Specialist_________

34

3. List Anticipated Resources Needed for Accomplishing the Goal(s) of Your
Professional Development Plan.

Goal 1 Resources:

Professional literature on developing formative assessments
Co-teacher planning time to develop Opening, Mid-Point, and Closing exit card
assessments
Co-teacher planning time to develop multiple instructional delivery models to support the
learning style needs of co-taught students
Co-teacher planning time to develop templates for student Vocabulary Books, End of
Unit Movie Posters, and Closed Activities
Grant to fund additional planning time for teachers outside the regular classroom

Goal 2 Resources:

Professional literature on developing classroom learning stations
Co-teacher planning time to develop learning station activities for students
Co-teacher planning time to develop student and parent surveys
Continued professional development on the use of the MCPS communication log
Professional literature on developing theoretical framework models
Co-teacher planning time to develop Parent Contracts and Report Card templates to
upload on departmental website
Co-teacher planning time to communicate with parents about social and academic issues
concerning students

4. Devise a tentative timeline for the implementation of your plan with periodic
benchmarks to judge your progress (Note: Completion date will be filled in as each
objective/activity is completed – refer to next page for action plan guide).

35

Goal 1: Improve Co-Taught Student Performance on Formative and Summative Assessments Date Initiated: August 2011

Objective 1: Develop A System to Frequently Check for Student Understanding Date Completed: June 2014

Activities Timeline Collaboration Date Completed
Assess student August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level Cohorts June 2014
understanding of key Through will meet on multiple occasions, during the
instructional concepts, from June 2014 regular school year, to plan the format and
the previous lesson, through (On-going) frequency of use of the OPENING EXIT CARD
activating student prior assessment during regular instruction. The
collaborative process used will lead to greater
knowledge using OPENING
student success on formative and summative
EXIT CARDS to begin assessments through mastering essential
daily instruction. instructional concepts.
Assess student August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level Cohorts June 2014
understanding of key Through will meet on multiple occasions, during the
instructional concepts, June 2014 regular school year, to plan the format and
learned daily, by requiring (On-going) frequency of use of the MID-POINT LESSON
students to give a 1 or 2 STUDENT LECTURE assessment during
regular instruction. The collaborative process
minute lecture at the MID-
used will lead to greater student success on
POINT of the lesson using a formative and summative assessments through
holistic scoring scale. mastering essential instructional concepts.
Assess student understanding August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level Cohorts will June 2014
of key instructional concepts, Through meet on multiple occasions, during the regular
June 2014 school year, to plan the format and frequency of use
from the current lesson, of the CLOSING EXIT CARD assessment during
through activating student (On-going)
regular instruction. The collaborative process used
knowledge using CLOSING will lead to greater student success on formative and
EXIT CARDS to end daily summative assessments through mastering essential
instruction. instructional concepts.

36

Objective 2: Develop Product-Based Assessments for Student Portfolios Date Completed: June 2014

Develop, implement, and August 2011 Social Studies Content Specialist, English June 2014
assess Student Produced Through Content Specialist, Reading Specialist, and
Vocabulary Books using a June 2014 Social Studies Grade Level Cohorts will meet
holistic scoring scale (On-going) once per quarter, during the regular school year,
(Vocabulary Assessments) to plan the format and frequency of use of the
student-produced vocabulary books during
regular instruction. The collaborative process
formative and summative assessments through
mastering essential vocabulary concepts.
Develop, implement, and August 2011 Social Studies Content Specialist, Computer June 2014
assess Student Produced Through Technology Specialist, Media Specialist, and
End of Unit Movie Posters June 2014 Social Studies Grade Level Cohorts will meet
using a holistic scoring scale (On-going) once per quarter to plan/review the format and
(Summative Assessments) computer guidelines to complete the student
produced assessment. The collaborative process
summative assessments through mastering
multiple learning indicators in a creative way.
Develop, implement and August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level Cohorts June 2014
assess student understanding Through will meet on multiple occasions, during the
of lesson concept(s) through June 2014 regular school year, to plan Closed Activities
using a CLOSED (On-going) for Co-Taught students which requires them to
ACTIVITY with visual explain their level of understanding of a concept
through visual representation. The collaborative
representation. A holistic
planning process used to develop Closed
score scale will be used to Activities will lead to greater student success on
assess student work. formative and summative assessments.

37

Goal 2: Improve Student Achievement for all Ethnic Subgroups defined by the MSA Date Initiated: August 2011

Objective 1: Develop a Positive Classroom Climate for all Students Date Completed: June 2014

Develop and implement August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level June 2014
learning stations for ESOL Through Cohorts will meet on multiple occasions,
students to support student June 2014 during the regular school year, to plan
vocabulary and writing (On-going) Learning Station Activities for ESOL
skills. students which support the instructional
concepts of daily classroom lessons. The
collaborative planning process used to develop
ESOL student learning station activities will
lead to greater student success on formative
and summative assessments.
Develop, implement, and August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level June 2014
analyze quarterly student Through Cohorts will meet once per quarter, during the
survey results regarding June 2014 regular school year, to planthe format and
classroom climate and (On-going) content of Student Quarterly Surveys. The
academic instruction. collaborative planning process used to develop
student quarterly surveys will allow teachers to
make the proper classroom adjustments to
make the educational environment more
conducive to learning for all students.
Develop, implement, and August 2011 Social Studies Department Grade Level June 2014
revisit quarterly a teacher- Through Cohorts will meet once per quarter to plan the
student produced theoretical June 2014 type of theoretical model that will be used to
framework for improving (On-going) chart a collaborative path, between student and
student achievement. teacher, to reach a level of Academic Self-
Actualization bythestudent and teacher.

38

Objective 2: Provide On-going Student Achievement Feedback to Parents Date Completed: June 2014

Develop and implement the August 2011 Teacher will collaborate with parents to June 2014
use of Parent Quarterly Through ensure the academic success of students by
Surveys, Parent Academic June 2014 administering Parent Quarterly Surveys,
Quarterly Contracts and (On-going) Academic Quarterly Parent Contracts and
Report Cards issuing Quarterly Parent Report Cards. The
(Parent access through collaborative process used between the teacher
departmental website). and parents will lead to the lowering of
Ineligibility Rate.
Develop and implement the August 2011 Teacher will collaborate with parents to June 2014
use of Student Academic Through ensure the academic success of students by
Goal Reflection Sheets. June 2014 sharing with them the quarterly academic
(Parent access through (On-going) achievement results of their son/daughter
departmental website). through the use of Student Academic
Goal Reflection Sheets.
Communicate with parents August 2011 Teacher will collaborate with parents to June 2014
on a consistent basis to Through ensure the academic success of students by
inform them of academic June 2014 contacting them by phone or e-mail to
and/or behavioral concerns. (On-going) inform them of academic and/or behavioral
concerns of their son/daughter.
Collaborative dialogue records between the
teacher and parent will be kept in the
school’s Communication Log operated by
Montgomery County Public Schools.

39

Review Checklist for Objectives, Activities and Timelines, and Collaboration:

1. Objectives
o Do the objectives directly address the goal(s)?
o Are the objectives observable and verifiable?

2. Description of Activities and Timelines
o Do the activities align with the goal(s) and objective(s)?
o Do the activities extend throughout the professional development cycle?
o Is the timeline stated?

3. Plan for Collaboration
o Does the plan include collaboration with others? Examples of collaboration may include
the following:
A. Collaboration with colleagues
B. Collaboration with higher education
C. Collaboration with a professional learning community
D. Collaboration with a mentor

40

Professional Development Plan Evaluation Team
Beginning of Year 1 – Professional Development Cycle

Name: Lorenzo R. Prillman Date: 04/29/2011

Educator’s School District: Montgomery County Public Schools

Educator’s Employee ID#: 000069337

Educator’s Current Educational Assignment: Social Studies Teacher

Number of Year(s) in Current Assignment: 02

Years of Educational Experience: 15

School: Benjamin Banneker Middle School

Length of Professional Growth Cycle: ___X_ 3-years ____ 4-years ____5 years (check one)

Duration of Plan: May 01, 2011 through May 01, 2014

Check – In Dates: December 2011, May 2012, December 2012, May 2013, December 2013 and May 2014

End of PDP Cycle Review: May 2014

Year in Professional Development Cycle: Year 1

Social Studies Teacher: _________________________________ _______
(Teacher Signature) (Date)

Department Chair: ____________________________________ _______
(Department Chair Signature) (Date)

Approved by Principal: ________________________________ ________
(Principal Signature) (Date)

41

Artifact for Standard 1: A Vision of Learning

Names of Artifact(s): Benjamin Banneker Middle School Social Studies Department: Monthly
Instructional Focus Matrix, Monthly Lesson Plan Submission Template, and Lesson Plan
Review and Follow-Up Matrix.

Date: November 08, 2010



Artifacts
The artifacts listed above illustrate my role as department chair of the Social Studies Department with
developing a systematic plan to promote a monthly departmental instructional focus and teacher
consistency with developing and delivering rigorous and meaningful instruction.
The Monthly Instructional Focus Matrix, Monthly Lesson Plan Lesson Plan Template, and Lesson Plan
Review and Follow-Up Matrix was developed as a result of a meeting between members of the
Instructional Leadership Team, on Tuesday, September 07, 2010, who were discussing ways to create a
more rigorous instructional program for students during the 2010 – 2011 school year.

After making Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) for the previous physical school year, the Community
Superintendent of Schools wanted the Instructional Leadership Team at Banneker to focus on improving
teacher instruction. The Community Superintendent thought this would be the best course of action to
ensure the school would make AYP for the second straight year, and be removed from the Maryland State
Department of Education school improvement list. All department chairs were given the task of
developing an instructional focus plan for teachers in their department. At the conclusion of the meeting,
the leadership team agreed to assess the progress of teacher instruction by reviewing their monthly lesson
plans.

On Monday, September 13, 2010 the Social Studies department held its monthly staff meeting. The
agenda for the meeting focused on developing an instructional focus for the department. Department
members shared their thoughts on what areas of instruction needed to be improved across all grade levels.
After the meeting, I used the information provided by the teachers and my own ideas (shared vision) to
develop a monthly instructional focus, lesson plan template, and a form to assess the implementation of
key areas of the department instructional program. The department monthly instructional focus and lesson
plan format was reviewed with teachers the following Monday, prior to the start of the regular school day.

Following the implementation of the monthly instructional focus plan and lesson plan template, the Social
Studies Department instructional walk-through team began to see greater consistency from teachers with
demonstrating planning for rigorous instructional practices. In addition, the review of departmental lesson
plans by the Instructional Leadership Team showed that teachers were making progress with supporting
the instructional vision of the department and school.

42

Artifact for Standard 2: School Culture and Instructional Program

Names of Artifact(s): Informal Teacher Observation Write-Up and Social Studies Department
Instructional Walk-Through Capture Sheet

Date: November 03, 2010



Artifacts
The artifacts listed above illustrate my role as department chair of the Social Studies Department that
requires me toevaluate the instructional practices of teachers in which I supervise. The format of the
informal teacher observation write-up is derived from the Montgomery County Public Schools handbook
on the six standards of teaching. The Social Studies Department Instructional Walk-Through Capture
Sheet was developed as a result of the need to give meaningful and immediate feedback to teachers on
their instructional practices. In addition, the instructional walk-through form was developed to follow-up
with teachers on improving certain aspects of their instruction following an informal or formal
observation.

On Wednesday, October 20, 2010 I conducted an informal observation of Ms. Sabrina Khan who is a new
teacher in the Social Studies Department at Banneker Middle School. On this day, I observed Ms. Khan’s
sixth period world studies class. While observing Ms. Khan’s world studies class, there seem to be an
area of instructional concern regarding her ability to plan ―purposefully‖ for instruction. Ms. Khan’s
inability to give students the opportunity to summarize their learning of the lesson objectives led to her
not meeting standard three (teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to
students) of the MCPS handbook on the six standards of teaching. When Ms. Khan and I convened at the
post-observation conference, it was brought to her attention that she needed to put more emphasis on
purposely planning each activity she wants students to complete during the lesson. I offered to assist Ms.
Khan with improving her instructional practices in this area. However, she ensured me that she knew how
to correct the error in her instruction and would like for me to revisit her class on another occasion. I
agreed to revisit her class on another occasion, unannounced, to conduct an instructional walk-through to
look for purposeful planning in her instruction.

On Wednesday, November 03, 2010 I conducted the follow-up instructional walk-through of Ms. Khan’s
sixth period world studies class. Ms. Khan was well provisioned for the class. Ms. Khan used flexible
grouping to seat students for the lesson activity. Ms. Khan’s lesson objective was reviewed with students
and she explained the importance of the mastery objective. Ms. Khan also used ―calling sticks‖ to
purposely call on students who were Maryland State Assessment (MSA) focus kids who needed
additional opportunities to practice responding to critical thinking questions. When Ms. Khan and I
reconvened the following day to review my notes from the instructional walk-through, using the
instructional walk-through capture sheet, she was presently surprised to see that she had made the proper
adjustments to her instruction to meet standard three of the MCPS handbook on teacher instructional
practices. Following our meeting, I continued my monthly instructional walk-through of her classes and
classes of other teachers in the Social Studies Department. The instructional program of the Social Studies
Department has significantly improved as a result of the evaluation process implemented this school year.

43

Artifact for Standard 3: Management

Names of Artifact(s): Benjamin Banneker Middle School Social Studies Department: Grading
and Reporting ProtocolsMonitoring Tool; Benjamin Banneker Middle School Social Studies
Department: Grading and Reporting Consistency ChecklistEvaluative Tool

Date: October 29, 2010



Artifacts
The artifacts listed above illustrate my role as department chair of the Social Studies Department
with developing a systematic plan to promote grading and reporting consistency across grade
levels. The grading and reporting protocols and grading and reporting consistency checklist was
developed as a result of a meeting between my staff development coordinator and the
administrator assigned to my department. The artifacts were developed as a result of the
collaborative meeting held on Friday, October 01, 2010.

After reviewing teacher midterm grade books, for the first quarter, with the staff development
teacher and subject area supervisor, there appeared to be some concern regarding teacher grading
and reporting consistency within the Social Studies Department. As a result of the meeting, the
three of us came to an agreement on some protocols that teachers needed to follow in the future
when assigning student grades. I was given the responsibility of developing a monitoring tool
and evaluative tool for my department. At the conclusion of our meeting, we agreed to revisit
teacher grade books near the end of the first marking period to see if grade level cohorts grading
and reporting would be more consistent by the end of the first marking period.

On Monday, October 04, 2010 the department held its monthly staff meeting. A good portion of
the meeting agenda involved the discussion around grading and reporting consistency. Teachers
were given a chance to review their grades for the midterm reports and given feedback on how to
be more consistent with grading and reporting among grade level cohorts. I presented the
monitoring tool and evaluative tool for grading and reporting which teachers needed to use for
the remainder of the first quarter. Teachers were made aware that they needed to submit a copy
of their Grading and Reporting Consistency Monitoring Tool to the department chair every two
weeks.

On Thursday, October 28, 2010 a meeting was held to take a second look at the grading and
reporting consistency results, for the first quarter, within my department. I attended the meeting
along with the staff development teacher and my subject area administrative supervisor. I opened
the meeting by explaining the steps I had taken to address the problem of grading and reporting
inconsistency within my department. After given a brief overview of the course of action I took
to address the problem, the staff development teacher opened up grade books of teachers who
teach the same subject to see if there had been any improvement since the midterm reports.

44

After reviewing teacher grade books for a second time, following the implementation of the
grading and reporting monitoring tool and evaluative tool, we were able to observe greater
consistency with the reporting of grades among grade level cohorts. Everyone in attendance at
the meeting agreed that the department needs to continue with full implementation of the grading
and reporting monitoring tool and evaluative tool. The grading and reporting consistency tools
will be utilized for the remainder of the 2010 – 2011 school year. After the final marking period
has ended, the staff development teacher, subject area supervisor and I will assess how effective
the tools were with promoting grading and reporting consistency within the department.

Finally, due to the vast improvement with grading and reporting consistency among the
department, administration is considering adopting the monitoring tool and evaluative tool model
to implement school-wide.

45

Artifact for Standard 4: Collaboration with Families and the Community

Names of Artifact(s): Benjamin Banneker Middle School: PTSA Staff Membership
Recruitment Letter

Date: October 18, 2010



Artifact(s)
The artifact listed above illustrates my role as a liaison between parent members of the PTSA
and staff members at Benjamin Banneker Middle School. In recent years at Banneker Middle
School, the lack of staff (teacher) membership in the PTSA has led to a negative relationship
among teachers and parents within the community. At the last PTSA meeting held on Tuesday,
October 12, 2010 the PTSA President discussed the need to have someone take on the
responsibility of getting staff members to join the PTSA. I accepted the responsibility and
eventually decided to solicit teacher support for the PTSA by drafting a letter. The artifact was
developed as a way to promote teacher involvement in the PTSA by having them first pay their
membership dues for the 2010 – 2011 school year.

I have been teaching at Benjamin Banneker Middle School since August of 2003. When I first
joined the Instructional Leadership Team in 2005, there was major concern around the issue of
parents and teachers not working together to improve communication between the two stake-
holder groups. In fact, on many occasions parents and teachers would hardly ever be seen
working together at Back-To-School Night, School Dances, or PTSA meetings.

Over the past few years, I have been contemplating on how to go about improving the
communication between staff members and parents. During this current school year I decided to
become an active member of the PTSA at Benajmin Banneker Middle School. One of the first
assignments the PTSA president gave me to work on was recruiting new members (teachers) in
to the association. I knew this would be a difficult job based on the history between the two
groups (parents and teachers). I started the task by thinking of a way to reach the majority of the
staff without having to meet with each staff member directly. This process eventually led to me
drafting a general letter to staff members at Banneker.

The staff letter sent out to teachers made a general request for staff members to support the
PTSA through helping to provide funds for social events, community outreach programs, and
educational opportunities for students and teachers. The staff letter generated a large response
from the staff that was not really sure how to support the PTSA since the school did not have a
president at the beginning of the school year. I will continue collecting staff membership dues
through next week. I will report out to PTSA board members on Tuesday, November 9, 2010 on
my efforts to raise revenue for the association.

46

Artifact for Standard 5: Acting with Integrity and Fairness, and in an Ethical Manner

Names of Artifact(s): Controversial Advisory Reading on Pakistan’s Staggering Disaster

Date: September 23, 2010



Artifacts
The artifact listed above illustrates my role as a member of the school leadership team who is responsible
for treating all staff members with integrity, fairness, and always acting in an ethical manner. The artifact
is an article which was used as a school-wide reading exercise for students during advisory (Maryland
State Assessment prep class). The reading itself discussed some recent economic/environmental problems
the people and government of Pakistan were currently facing. However, the reading questions students
needed to answer, following the reading, were not a direct match to the article. In fact, the questions
created some animosity between a Muslim teacher in my department (Social Studies)and the English
department chair that was responsible for selecting the reading for student advisory classes.

The day after students read an article on Pakistan, the English department chair approached me to discuss
what he was hearing from another teacher in his department about one of the Social Studies teachers
being upset with the advisory reading article. The teacher was Muslim and apparently she took offense to
the racial undertone of the reading questions at the end of the article. A few of the questions asked the
following:

What is the nature of the ―extremist groups‖ in Pakistan?
What is the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan?
How do Pakistanis view the U.S.?
How does the Afghanistan war affect Pakistan?

The English department chair asked me if I could talk with the teacher in order to de-escalate the issue
between both of them over the advisory reading article. I told the English department chair that I would
be willing to assist him in helping to solve the problem. However, I also stated to the English department
chair that he needs to look at the issue from both sides of the lens. Although the issue could have been a
misinterpretation on both parts, the offended teacher’s reality is her reality. Once we concluded our
conversation about the issue, I went to visit the seventh grade social studies teacher who was offended by
the advisory article. When arrived to her class, I asked the teacher to give her thoughts about why she felt
the way she did about the article. I never attempted to justify what was or was not in the article or attempt
to make it seem like it was all one big misunderstanding. However, I did ask her how we can better
communicate with each other as a school to ensure that another culturally sensitive article is not placed
before the staff and student body in the future? I wanted the teacher to feel like her feelings and opinions
were being heard and that she was also going to be a part of the solution to make sure something like this
would not happen again. At the conclusion of our meeting, I apologized for the controversial and
offensive nature of the article and ensured her that the advisory reading selection team will take a closer
look at articles in the future before they are selected. The issue was resolved to the satisfaction of the
teacher without involving the Principal or other school level administrators.

47

Artifact for Standard 6: The Political, Social, Economic, Legal and Cultural Context

Names of Artifact(s): Co-Teaching Model Job Responsibilities Checklist, Special Education
Accessibility Planner, and Special Education Accommodation Quick Reference Guide

Date: December 20, 2010



Artifacts
The artifacts listed above illustrate my role as department chair of the Social Studies Department that
requires me toevaluate the instructional practices of teachers who are responsible for meeting the
educational needs of all students. The Co-Teaching Model Job Responsibilities Checklist, Special
Education Accessibility Planner, and Special Education Accommodation Quick Reference Guide was
developed to assist regular classroom teachers and co-teachers, in the Social Studies Department, with
meeting the educational needs of Special Education students placed in their classes as a result of full-
inclusion state laws.

Prior to the start of the 2010 – 2011 school year, the Social Studies Department at Benjamin Banneker
Middle School was one of two departments school-wide that had not participated in full-inclusion
classrooms. However, new Special Education laws for the state of Maryland required all schools to
eventually move toward full-inclusion classes. The Principal and his staff decided to move forward with
the full-inclusion model school-wide for the 2010 – 2011 school year. At the start of the school year,
many teachers in the Social Studies Department were feeling a great deal of anxiety about teaching under
a co-taught model of instruction. After a month into the school year, teachers in the department were
frustrated with the lack of academic production of the Special Education students and did not know how
to address the problem in the classroom. In addition, teachers were also frustrated with the lack of
instructional knowledge of their co-teachers and work production. During the month of November
department meeting, following the conclusion of the first marking period, the teachers and I developed
some strategies to assist the Special Education students with improving academically and I developed a
Roles and Responsibilities worksheet for the general education teacher and para-educator to agree upon
some assigned classroom tasks.

Three weeks into the second quarter, teachers in the department were beginning to have more success
with providing the proper academic support for special education students in their classes. Teachers were
using the Accessibility Planner more often when planning instruction and were using the
Accommodations Quick Reference Guide to gather strategies for simplifying instructional concepts,
identifying appropriate instructional resources, and modifying testing documents. As a result of
promoting the importance that all students can learn, teachers began to see a vast improvement in the
academic grades of their special education students and began to build better working relationships with
them. Although moving to a co-taught model of instruction was somewhat difficult for teachers in the
beginning, they eventually realized that all children have the same right to a ―free and appropriate
education‖ no matter what their intellectual limitations are they posses.

48

ISLLC Standard I: An education leader promotes the success of every student by facilitating the
development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared
and supported by the community.

The Opportunity

Joe was ready and anxious to find a principalship. He had taught in public schools for ten years.
During that time, he had distinguished himself as a classroom teacher, curriculum innovator, and campus
leader. During the last three years, Joe had completed his master’s degree and principal certification.

Joe was recommended by his university professors for a high school principalship, and the
superintendent of the school district needing a principal asked Joe to come to interview with him and the
school board. Although the school district was over 200 miles from his present home, Joe knew that the
high school had a good reputation in academics and student activities. The school was not too big, nor
was it too small. It was an ideal setting for a new principal to gain experience.

Joe knew that in two years the principal of his present high school (a truly outstanding and high-
paying high school and community) was planning to retire. Joe’s principal had already talked to Joe about
taking his position when he retired, but he emphasized how important it was for Joe to obtain some
experience at a smaller school. The principal, and Joe, too, felt that the superintendent, school board, and
site-based management committee would have a much easier time accepting Joe as a principal if he had
―proven‖ himself elsewhere. In fact, Joe’s principal had already been talking with the superintendent and
school board about bringing Joe back as principal after he had gained experience elsewhere. Everybody
seemed to think that Joe’s chances we’re good to be named principal of his current school after gaining
experience and showing his ability elsewhere.

Upon learning of his selection for an interview, Joe decided that he would call the superintendent.
To his surprise, the superintendent invited Joe to come over for a visit. Joe left early one morning and
planned to spend all day at the school. The superintendent and Joe hit it off immediately. It was as if they
had known each other for years. Joe knew that this was the job he wanted.

As the day wore on, the superintendent called Joe into his office and shut the door. ―Joe, he said,
―I think that I can work well with you. The Board will listen to my recommendation. However, I cannot
answer the questions the Board will ask you. I know that one of the major issues in the selection of a
candidate will be whether they are considering this a long-term commitment or just a stepping
stone. The other two candidates have both stated that they want to come into our community and make it
their home. You need to think long and hard how you want to answer the question when it comes up. I
can honestly say that someone who does not consider this a long-term commitment will have a slim
chance of getting the job‖.

49

Questions for Consideration/Discussion

A. What answer would you give to the “big question” from the Board? Why?

I would accept the position and state that I would agree to join the community long-term.
Nothing in life is guaranteed, so I would not put all of my marbles in one jar. The
principalship that was being guaranteed to Joe might not ever be delivered on. Also, the
community of a school plays an important role in choosing a school leader, so there is no
guarantee that I would be granted the principalship at Joe’s current school.

1. What is your ultimate career goal?

My ultimate career goal is to become Superintendent of a public school system and/or
President of a university.

2. What are your plans to achieve this goal?

First, I will complete my Masters of Arts Program in Administration and Supervision.
Second, I will seek the position of an Assistant Principal in the county where I
currently work, or another county that is looking for innovative leaders.
Third, I will further my education by applying for admittance into a doctorial program for
Educational Leadership.
Finally, while I am finishing up my doctorial program in Educational Leadership, I will work
toward achieving a principalship.

3. Does your career goal and plan to achieve it have any bearing ultimately on your ability
to develop a shared mission/vision for your school?

Yes. The ability to develop a shared mission / vision for my school is important because it
will allow me and the people who work for me to be able to accomplish their professional
goals.

50

B. What ethical questions are raised by this case?

Should personal gain be put before the needs of the people you’re serving within a
community?
Can a leader truly develop a school mission / vision in which they’re not fully invested in
the lives of the staff, children and the community?

1. Is the popular notion “You should tell the truth, but you don’t have to tell all the truth”
ethical in this kind of a situation?

I believe it is ethical to not divulge too much information that will hurt someone’s chances of
moving forward with achieving their professional goals. Was it ethical for the superintendent and
Joe’s current principal to guarantee Joe a principalship without interviewing other candidates or
speaking with teachers and parents?

2. Is it fair for the school board seeking a new principal to expect that the person
employed commit to staying a long time?

I believe it is fair to have a principal candidate agree to a set time period in which they would take
on the responsibility of turning around a failing school or enhancing the academic performance of
a school that was already excelling academically. However, personnel changes are made all the
time by school boards and Superintendents without the consent of the administrator, teachers,
students or the community.

C. Briefly describe a similar ethical dilemma between your interests and those of your
employer you have experienced, and how you resolved it:

There was a situation two years ago when I was interviewing for my current school position as
Social Studies content specialist. During the interview, I was asked by my principal if I was planning to
take on the position for an extended period of time. I told my principal that I would serve in the position
until I was called upon by the community superintendent to take a job as an administrator, once I
completed my administrative and supervision program. I did not commit to taking on the role of Social
Studies Content Specialist long-term because I believed my previous work performance would be
justification for why I was the best candidate for the job. Stability is important in education but it does not
guarantee that a department or school will be governed efficiently.

51

School administration practicum_portfolio2_-_fall_2010_-_spring_2011 (1)

School administration practicum_portfolio2_-_fall_2010_-_spring_2011 (1)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (19)

Destaque

Destaque (17)

Semelhante a School administration practicum_portfolio2_-_fall_2010_-_spring_2011 (1)

Semelhante a School administration practicum_portfolio2_-_fall_2010_-_spring_2011 (1) (20)

Último

Último (20)

School administration practicum_portfolio2_-_fall_2010_-_spring_2011 (1)