Curriculum Directors Sue Wood of Fort Dodge and Kevin Vidergar of North Polk Community Schools have developed a"calendar of events" for curriculum leads. You can access the full calendar on the Iowa ASCD web page especially for curriculum leads. Check out the document to assure your best work in February. 

Responding to Interventions or RTI is the process in Iowa for being responsive to additional instructional needs of the students we serve. As educational leaders, Iowa ASCD Director Dr. Susan Pecinovsky reminds us to ask ourselves how we will be responsive to the implementation of this learning. For most educators, this will be a change with second order implications. We understand the change, and we understand the leadership responsibilities. How will we manage the change?

According to William Bridges, "It isn't the changes that do you in, it's the transitions." These are not the same thing. The change is contextual, and the transition is the psychological conditions for those experiencing the change. In his book, Managing Transitions: Making The Most Of Change, William Bridges discusses the simple process of helping people move through three phases:

1. Ending, Losing, Letting Go
2. The Neutral Zone
3. The New Beginning

The first phase, "Ending, Losing, Letting Go" refers to the letting go of the old way and creating a new identity for the people involved in the change. It is time for people to deal with their losses and confront the current reality. As an educational leader, you help people to understand what is actually ending and who is losing what. As you plan for institutionalization of RTI and addressing phase one in the district, consider these questions.

•      What is actually going to change?
•      What are the unintended consequences?
•      Who is going to have to let go of something?
•      Is there something over for everyone?

The second phase, "The Neutral Zone" is chaotic and a very difficult time. It might be less challenging if this time was short; however, there is no guarantee. This period could go on for months or years. The dangers that are evidenced in this stage include the following:

• There is much anxiety.
• There is a high degree of absence from the work place.
• Organizational weaknesses become exacerbated.
• There are frequently mixed signals for those involved in the change.

Typically, a challenge to the status quo occurs when an organization is in trouble. Therefore, this may also be a time for organizational creativity. Leadership can support this creativity by providing structure and order during the neutral zone.

• Eliminate/Minimize other major changes going on
• Review the policies and procedures for their alignment to the change.
• Set short-range goals for quick wins.
• Don't over-promise while you are in the neutral zone.  

The final phase, "The New Beginning" is a time for opportunity or a new direction. While this would seem a time for celebration and it is, this is also a challenging time as participants are asked to recommit to this new beginning. People resist new beginnings for a variety of reasons.

• New beginning can reenergize the old anxieties that were part of phase one.
• New beginnings are risky. 
• The idea of risk may reignite memories of unsuccessful attempts.
• For some, it requires them to leave the slower pace typical of the neutral zone.

Consider how you can support the culture during this new beginning, especially for the resistors. To create new beginnings, people need the reminders of the Four P's.

• Explain the purpose behind the change.
• Paint a picture of how this change will look and feel for those experiencing it
• Plan for phasing in the change.
• Identify the parts for each participant in the plan and the results.

The adoption of the Iowa Core/Common Core has allowed for consistency across the state in terms of what we want our students to know and be able to demonstrate. However, the Iowa Core document is not intended to be picked up and be a district's teachable curriculum. So how does a curriculum leader create an effective process to align curriculum, instruction and assessment to the Iowa Core?

Doug Reeves (2011) uses the term "Power Standards" to define how to break down the standards in state documents into student friendly targets so that both the teacher and the student know what is expected in the learning and the teaching. Rick Stiggins (2001) uses the term "targets." No matter what you call them - power standards, benchmarks, enduring understandings, targets, objectives, or expectations - they must be organized in such a way that communicates exactly what students need to know to be successful at the next level of instruction.

Dr. Mary Cooksley, curriculum director of Oskaloosa Community School District, shares a process of interpreting the Iowa Core and creating a viable, usable document that communicates effectively to teachers, students and parents specifically what students should know and demonstrate. Having a K-12 spiral is key, she relates, to reducing gaps and overlaps in your curriculum; therefore, it is wise to develop K-12 teams with representation from all levels in the district when undertaking this work. Having said this, it also takes a resource commitment on the part of the administration and board.

It takes time to bring teacher leaders together to make the critical decisions to create the viable, usable curriculum documents, one that does not remain on the shelf, but becomes a fluid document informing instruction and assessment practices. Cooksley emphasizes the importance of having K-12 teams write and create the curriculum document: "Shortcutting the process can jeopardize the quality and ownership of the document created. Having the critical conversations during the K-12 collaborative time cannot be replaced if you split up the team into grade band teams; it merely segments the process."

Once K-12 Curriculum Teams have been formed, how do you begin the process of determining what students should know and be able to demonstrate at each grade level? There is not just one process that works when analyzing the Iowa Core and developing your district's curriculum. One thing is certain according to Cooksley, "You should not take the Iowa Core's standards and make that your curriculum; it was never intended to be used in that manner. The intention was to look at your current reality and use it to align to existing curriculum." Having said that, she adds, "Some districts are using 'old' standards and benchmarks written from textbooks, national standard documents, etc. In this case, you will undoubtedly want to create new documents aligned to the standards listed in the Iowa Core. If you have a usable document that just needs to be aligned, then by all means, do not reinvent the wheel. Some districts use Google docs, some use a spreadsheet, some use chart paper and make actual curriculum walls. Whatever your method of documentation, your first step is to list what you are currently teaching."

Next, Cooksley goes on to explain that you will want to use the Iowa Core standards and indicators to determine the gaps in your current reality. This requires having each grade level analyze the statements and code in some manner which of the Iowa Core standards you are, indeed, covering to the depth they describe. Once you have completed what you ARE teaching, you should also make a list of things you are NOT currently teaching that the Iowa Core identifies you should be covering. She identifies as a great exercise along the way is to take the Iowa Core statements and have teachers interpret the meaning of them - or you can do that along the way - either way, this will take some time and conversations among grade levels to really understand and internalize the meaning of the Iowa Core document. This takes you to the next critical and most important step.

A cohesive, team-building activity for a K-12 Curriculum Team is to create a Mission Statement - a binding statement of why a content area exists in your district. In addition, each grade level and subject K-12 should produce a course purpose: a description of what students will know and be able to do after the grade or course has been completed. These two activities may not seem required, but if bypassed, your team will not fully realize the K-12 connection in what they are teaching. Cooksley emphasizs, "I would not skip this step!"

The next, and critical, step is creating the actual statements describing what students will be expected to know or demonstrate. Rick Stiggins (2001) talks about creating targets that provide "sharp focus for your assessment exercises and scoring procedures" (p 60). Each Learning Target, or "power standard," drives the summative assessment and should be written as a student-focused statement describing what students will demonstrate after instruction. From this point forward Cooksley recommends we call these statements "Learning Targets." "An important point needs to be made," Cooksley notes. "Not only should this statement be clear and concise, it should be written as a rigorous, relevant, active statement from a student perspective - what the student will do, not what the teacher will do. In addition, this statement can be used to communicate progress to parents as part of the reporting system." The "Learning Target," she advocates, should be written at the top four levels of Bloom's Taxonomy to ensure the most rigorous level of instruction and assessment are provided as culminating learning experiences for the student.

Once the "Learning Target" has been determined, additional statements (i.e., components, benchmarks, objectives) describing the formative process to scaffold instruction need to be formed. Each student-focused statement drives the formative assessments along the route of teaching the "Learning Target." Again, written in terms of what students will know or demonstrate, all levels of thinking will be evident, from the lowest level of Bloom's Taxonomy to the highest level of Bloom's. The K-12 team is critical to the spiraling among grade levels to ensure all Iowa Core standards are present in the "Learning Targets" and "Components." Key decisions regarding the depth of instruction should be made during the collaboration along with elements to include or not include in the curriculum document.

This systematic process works - whether you are a district with only one section per grade level or one with multiple sections and several buildings. The organization of K-12 teams provides any district with consistency and rich collaborative opportunities. Schools can utilize the collaboration time (e.g., professional learning communities, data teams, communities of practice) to further communicate with the other members of the grade level or department. Ongoing conversations about the enactment of the curriculum can be part of collaboration in the future: looking at data around what students are expected to know, how they know students are learning, what they are doing when students are not learning, and how they might extend the learning for students who already know (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008).

Dr. Cooksley emphasizes this systemic process is not just about creating the curriculum document; to have an aligned system you must work on instruction and assessment practices as well. A cycle whereby all elements of the process are addressed should be considered. By creating Curriculum Teams, not only can the curriculum document be created, training on the Characteristics of Effective Instruction can be weaved into a cycle of work as well as into Professional Learning Communities. Common assessments should be created aligned to the "Learning Targets" as part of the triangle of teaching and learning (curriculum, instruction and assessment). The work is not simple or easy, but engaging and worthwhile.

For further information and detailed documents on how to get started on a curriculum process similar to the one described above, go to the Iowa ASCD website.

Sources to assist with further learning

DuFour, Richard, DuFour, Rebecca, and Eaker, Robert (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, Indiana, Solution Tree.

Reeves, Douglas (2005). "Putting it all together: Standards, assessment, and accountability in successful professional learning communities". Edited by DuFour, Richard, Eaker, Robert, and DuFour, Rebecca. On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (pp. 45-63).Bloomington, Indiana, Solution Tree.

Stiggins, Richard (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment. Upper River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc., 3^rd Edition.

The Iowa Core/Common Core Standards have launched a resurgence in the state with Standards-Based Grading and Reporting. Some districts have taken the leap by implementing new report cards to communicate academic progress of their students based on specific standards or outcomes, while other districts are contemplating making the change. This article strives to provide curriculum leaders considerations as they lead their districts toward a standards-based reporting (SBR) system. You might use the list below as a guide or even a checklist to ensure you are covering all the necessary steps in the process.

A consideration for leaders is whether there is support for moving in this direction, first with the administrative team and also with a leadership team consisting of parents and teachers. If not, then a study of what SBR is and how it will benefit teachers, students and parents should be considered as the first step in the process. If there is support for the implementation, then there are things to keep in mind as you begin the journey toward SBR!

The move to successful implementation of SBR is paying close attention to the details - and there are many to consider. The decisions to be made along the way are listed below. By beginning with the end in mind, leaders will avoid obstacles that might otherwise stall or derail the successful implementation.

• Before anything else happens on your journey, do you have a viable, usable curriculum that allows you to move toward a SBR system? If not, you will need to complete this before continuing.
• Do you have a mechanism in place for decision-making? By mechanism, I mean of group of dedicated leaders who will make the necessary decisions. Without both a bottom-up as well as the top-down approach to leadership, you may be stopped before you even begin.
• What is your guiding philosophy for pursuing SBR and why it is important to move to the new reporting system? Do NOT pursue this because it is the newest, greatest thing. Instead, pursue SBR because it will fill a need in your school improvement process and your students' success!
• Have you discussed and agreed as a team the overall purpose of grading and reporting grades?
• Do you have an action plan, identified phases of implementation, and a timeline for implementation?
• How are you including parents in the process?
• How are you communicating to the board of education along the way? Getting and maintaining the school board's approval assists as the process unfolds and second order change begins in earnest. They can help with those who wish to sabotage the process. Having information from you before they hear the negative is proactive and should be done continually before and during the process.
• What is your communication plan for keeping staff up-to-date with progress and decisions? On-going building conversations MUST take place so the more they learn, the better the decisions. They should be not only kept abreast of decisions made at the district level, but provide input at the building level as well.
• Will you be standards-based or standards-referenced? Will you apply mastery learning?
• Will you still give letter grades?
• What code will you use to report out progress on outcomes/standards?
• Have you determined what you will do when a student does not meet your expectations on a standard?
• Have you thought about creating rubrics for the coding you will use so there is consistent application of that coding?
• How will you train teachers on the use of the SBR grade book?
• How will you deal with those glitches that arise in the grade book or with the printing of the report card?
• Have you had discussions about how homework fits into SBR?
• What will the new report card look like? What all will be on the report card?
• Will you include Work Habits and use them to report out behaviors instead of combining them with academic performance?
• Will you include ALL subjects and grades on the card the first year?
• How does special education grading change in the SBR system? This is much larger than it might appear!
• Do you have common summative assessments or plan to have them completed during the process?
• How will you communicate with students and align the report card to Learning Targets in the classroom? Students should be partners in learning; common language and vocabulary need to be shared and become part of everyday conversations.
• Are you providing enough Learning Supports to assist struggling learners?
• Do you have a plan if students can demonstrate mastery of the standards prior to taking the course?
• What will the minimum performance expectation be for students to be moved on to the next grade or course? Will you retain students?
• Communication, Communication, Communication!!!!! There will never be enough or the right type of communication throughout this process. Come up with a plan and maintain the integrity of that plan!

 Whether you take one, two, or more years to fully implement standards-based grading and reporting, these are the items you should consider before implementation. Plan, Plan, Plan and make sure someone is monitoring the details - usually it is you, the curriculum leader - and critical to success means that feedback and communication is maintained at all times. The path to implementation of SBR may not be smooth; at times you may wonder why you decided to pursue SBR at all, but when the smoke clears, you will find that SBR will improve your school in many ways.

Standards-Based Reporting will provide many benefits to your school improvement process: Curriculum, or Learning Targets, are clear, organized and usable and appear on the report card so parents and students know exactly what they are being "graded" on, what areas are strengths and what areas need more attention. Teachers will think more critically about what tasks they are having their students complete - and determine what should be graded to measure learning, and assessments begin to drive instruction on a formative and summative level. The report card itself is not magic; it is simply a piece of paper, but if the principles of SBR are implemented in the classroom on a consistent and quality basis, you will see a difference in instruction, assessment practices, feedback to students, and ultimately student performance will increase.  

To access documents related to the process of moving to Standards-Based Reporting, go to the Iowa ASCD website and to the Oskaloosa Standards-Based Reporting site. 

Sources to assist you with Standards-Based Grading

Effective grading practices. Educational Leadership. November 2011, Volume 69 (3). (The entire publication is devoted to the topic of grading).

Marzano, Robert J. (2006). Classroom assessment and grading that work. Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Marzano, Rober J. and Kendall, John S. (1996). A comprehensive guide to designing standards-based districts, schools, and classrooms. Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

O'Shea, Mark R (2005). From standards to success. Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Be among the first to learn about the Iowa Department of Education's expectations for RTI!

Learn the relationship among the Iowa Core, RTI and Iowa's Blueprint! Learn from school districts currently implementing RTI and seeing results!! All of this will happen at the 11^th Annual Iowa ASCD Curriculum Academy.

We are pleased to announce that Iowa ASCD is collaborating with the Iowa Department of Education for a series of presentations regarding the implementation of RTI in Iowa. Connie Maxson, Dave Tilly and the State's RTI team will be featured speakers throughout the Curriculum Academy which will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn in Johnston, Iowa, on April 11th^th and 12^th, 2012. Jason Glass, Director of Education at the Iowa Department of Education will present an afternoon keynote on the relationship of Iowa's Blueprint and RTI.

The Cedar Rapids, Mason City and North Polk School Districts will provide information about their use of data teams and professional learning communities in managing RTI. Lynnville-Sully Elementary will present their RTI program, which includes programs for advanced learners. East Sac School District will report on their continuing progress in the implementation of RTI.

The Curriculum Academy is a unique opportunity for those charged with curriculum leadership to network and learn from one another. The learning experience is appropriate for anyone with curriculum leadership responsibilities including teachers, department heads, principals, superintendents, curriculum directors and AEA support staff.

Opportunities are provided for participants to select break-out sessions based on their individual needs. In addition to representatives from the Iowa Department of Education, and school districts telling their RTI story, curriculum leaders from across the state of Iowa will lead sessions describing leadership skills necessary to ensure success of RTI.

Featured curriculum leaders include Dr. Troyce Fisher, Director of Cohesive Leadership Systems with School Administrators of Iowa, who will keynote the second day of the Academy with a presentation regarding leadership, change and RTI. Lou Howell, Executive Director of Iowa ASCD, will review Michael Fullen's work and its impact when "Choosing the Wrong Drivers." Susan Pecinovsky, Associate Superintendent for the Marshalltown Community School District, will lead a discussion on "Fierce Conversations" and the relationship to RTI. Mary Schmitt, Gifted Consultant with Heartland AEA, will describe programming for gifted learners in the RTI process. The impact of instructional coaches in RTI will be the focus of a presentation by Amy Russell from the Cedar Rapids School District.

Come learn first-hand information from the Iowa Department of Education regarding expectations for RTI, from the buildings and districts who are implementing RTI, and network with Iowa's curriculum leaders around RTI.

Registration information can be found on the  Iowa ASCD website. 

• Designing Learning Activities in a Standards-Based System
• Presenter:  ASCD
• Provider:  ASCD
• Date:  February 15, 2012 (2:00 P.M. CST)
• Register Free 

Please take five minutes to complete a 5-question survey to help Iowa ASCD provide the resources and supports you need for your work as a curriculum lead in your district. Please click here to complete the survey. 

Iowa ASCD is the source for developing instructional leadership. Serving more than 790 educators - teachers, principals, superintendents, directors of curriculum, technology specialists, college professors, AEA staff - Iowa ASCD strives to develop the collaborative capacity to impact the learning of each and every student in Iowa.