Greetings All --

 

David had asked me to expand on a few of my original answers, so I've
completed the last two questions.

 

 

"Ohio was seeking a systematic approach to program improvement and the state
leadership saw EFF as the tool for this system-reform to happen in Ohio.
Alignment of all components of the ABLE system was our goal."  In what ways
have you seen programs improve? Is there a pattern? And what evidence do you
have (or look for) of their improvement? 

 

Ohio has shown continuous improvement in federal performance measures and
student outcomes of reaching their long-term goals over the timeframe from
2003 until present.  Total numbers of students receiving GEDs and advancing
to post-secondary education/training have also steadily improved over this
time.  Ohio has met or exceeded core indicator of performance #1 - students
completing one or more educational functioning levels - as measured against
the minimum performance goals.  A desk review (like a report card) is
completed for each program annually to evaluate program effectiveness.
Measure #1 of the desk review covers student achievement.  For more
information about what is tracked on the desk review, check out
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3
<http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&Top
icRelationID=882&ContentID=6828&Content=33778>
&TopicRelationID=882&ContentID=6828&Content=33778.  Anecdotal records are
also kept as site visits are completed by state consultants.

 

 

"Resistance to change is a strong force and needs to be addressed during
your development process, consider the sacred cows in your system and
address them as part of the process.  Many programs saw EFF as an add-on, or
something they were already doing, leading to confusion, others thought this
was just another mandate and would eventually go away."  Can you say more
about what has helped you to overcome this resistance?

 

Fortunately for Ohio, we had a few risk-takers that were willing to take the
leap of faith needed to initiate this process.  Also, acknowledge that there
will always be resisters, no matter what you do.  Listen and pay attention
to them as they may help you better understand their issues and give you
insights about how to address them.  Skeptics have a way of vetting the
change idea so the process can be improved.  If the change is worthwhile, it
probably isn't perfect from the start, but will need to be honed and shaped
continuously.  Allowing folks to vent their emotional feelings of being
over-loaded and overwhelmed, but then turning the negative into positive by
helping them find solutions to their issues, was the proactive approach our
state leadership took. 

 

Focus on teachers and administrators that can see the benefits to the change
- keeping the big picture in front of them and using them as advocates - is
important.  Practitioners need role models for the new behavior - we used
pilot programs to model the changes they were experiences in their
programs/classrooms (at both levels).  This is why we're always seeking more
creative ways to demonstrate how standards can work in the classroom, by
providing teachers with model lessons and administrators with staff
development options.

 

Our Standards Institute was "mandated" for all 134 programs.  We had
established pilots and had gone from 9 to 30 programs, but now we wanted ALL
programs to be using standards in their programs.  Using the team concept,
we presented the newly developed benchmark charts at a two-day training.
Our state director presented the rationale/plan for SBE (standards-based
education) and trainings were developed to address each of the standards.
We established 2 core trainings for additional and new staff and have
presented those regionally, statewide and continually since the 2003
Institute.  In our current revision process for our PD system, we are
considering how to present the sequence of standards-based trainings at each
level of our professional development strands for novice to expert staff.
As you can see, building competency is a never-ending job, given the nature
of staff turnover and that reinforcement has to continuously happen or
practitioners will go back to their old skill sets and progress won't be as
steady, continual evaluation and adaptations are necessary considerations as
you build your system.

 

 

Hope this helps,

Judy

 

 

Judy Franks

Literacy Projects Coordinator

Ohio Literacy Resource Center

330-672-0753

jfranks at literacy.kent.edu

  

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20080616/da310251/attachment.html