Annual Report Overviews

Metro Nashville Area LSC Project Annual Report Overview

The Metropolitan-Nashville Area Local Systemic Change Project (MNA-LSC) began in June of 1996. The Project includes four school districts (Metro-Nashville Public Schools, and the Rutherford, Sumner and Williamson County Schools), in partnership with the Center for Research and Policy Center (RPC) on Basic Skills at Tennessee State University (TSU). These partners continue to implement their NSF Project systemic reform plan to improve the science instruction of all teachers (which total 3102 K-5 and 3352 K-6) in the four districts. The NSF-LSC funding provides for 100 hours of professional development for approximately 1,700 teachers. These four districts enroll approximately 64,000 students in grades K-5 and 135,028 students in grades K-12. The districts have implemented small classes K-3 since the project began, and the suburban districts have continued population growth.

There are 1651 active K-5 teachers in the project that teach science in Metro-Nashville in 103 project schools. There are 213 project teachers in the 7 project schools in the three suburban school districts. Thus, there are currently 1864 K-5 teachers in the LSC project schools. The three suburban districts have adopted the same standards-based curriculum as Metro Schools and are committed to district-wide reform, using local funds for professional development in partnership with Tennessee State University.

The plan and the goals of the Project are to convert from a didactic (text-focused) approach to a hands-on, inquiry-based approach. The new science curriculum includes nationally validated modular curriculum units including Science and Technology for Children (STC), INSIGHTS, and Full Option Science System (FOSS) units. The districts and TSU are collaborating to sustain reform by creating "site-based and cross-district" learning communities that include 'best practices' in teacher enhancement, materials management, assessment, community involvement and administrative support.

• Provided a total of 132 two-day module-training sessions (12 hours each) for 1,175 K-5 teachers (unduplicated count) from the 110 project schools in the four districts during project year 2000 (September 1, 1999-August 31, 2000). Of these 1,175 teachers, 512 attended two or more module sessions for a total of 1687 participants in the module sessions. This represents 20,244 module training hours taken by participants this year.
• Provided a total of 694 two-day module-training sessions (12 hours each), since project start in May 1996 for 3,642 K-5 teachers (unduplicated count of teachers who have received training on at least one module and have been active in the project sometime since it began. Of these 3,642 teachers, 2,535 are currently active K-5 teachers teaching science in the four districts 188 schools. Also, of these 3,642 teachers, 2,769 have attended two or more module training sessions (some teachers have taken between 5-20 modules) for a total of 10,458 participants in all module sessions offered. This represents 125,496 module training hours taken by teachers, since the beginning of the project

• Provided standards-based training for the 2000-2001 school year. There are 3,102 K-5 teachers that teach science in the four districts 188 total schools that have K-5 classrooms. Of the 3,102 total K-5 teachers, 2,535 have received training on the standards-based curriculum. Of these 3,102 total teachers, 1,864 are in the NSF-LSC 110 project schools. The project is funded to provide 100 hours of training for 1,711 teachers. Metro has 103 project schools and the other three counties have 7 replication schools in the project. The number of project schools with grades K-5 in Metro (due to rezoning) has increased from 90 to 103 schools (in 2000).
• Approximately 30% of the total teachers in the four districts since 1996 are no longer employed in any of the four project school districts in grades K-5. A very small percentage of the 30% of the total teachers moved to the upper grades. Additionally, among the 3,642 K-5, teachers that have been in the project some time since 1996, approximately 20-25% have change grade level each year. This has created the need for a massive amount of repeated module training.
• Theoretically, if there are 1,711 K-5 active teachers (that stayed the same since 1996) in the districts' LSC project schools and all of these took 4 modules (6,844 module trainings x 12 hours each), only 82,128 module training hours would be needed as part of the 171,100 total professional development hours (100 hours x 1,711 teachers) that the project is funded to provide.
• To actually achieve 100 hours of training for all project school teachers (if new teachers and teacher turnover occurred at the rate described above, then the 1,711 number of project teachers would be increased by one-third (570). Therefore, the project would have to provide training for an additional 570 teachers (for a total of 2,281 teachers). If each took 4 modules each (4 x 570 x 12 hours = 27,360 hours), this would increase the necessary module training hours to a total of 109,488 (82,128 + 27,360). Additionally, if the project provided the 1,711 teachers plus the 570 teachers (2,281 total teacher participations) 100 hours of training, the number of training hours required would be 228,100 or 25% (57,000) more hours than the project is funded to provide (171,000). The project has already delivered 125,496 hours of training just in module specific training on the standards-based curriculum.
• Maintained an active lead teacher group that includes 221 School Facilitators (SFs) and 34 Science Resource Teachers (SRTs) in 2000-2001. These lead teachers have taken extensive session training beyond module training, with approximately 922 collective hours taken by the lead teachers during the 2000 project year.
• Provided all of the necessary standards-based science curriculum units (kits/modules) and materials from the TSU Teacher Enhancement and Materials Management (TEMM) Center. The total science unit distribution in project year 2000 (school year 1999-2000) was 6,242 curriculum units and 718 additional refurbishments to teachers who taught multiple classes. Since project inception, 23,098 complete curriculum units and 2,592 additional refurbishment packs have been distributed. Some units require multiple boxes and 31,322 boxes of material have been distributed. In 2000, approximately 3,052 teachers will receive one or more curriculum units.
• Continued to benefit from TSU's administrative and financial support through the Center of Excellence including in-kind support of the PI's salary, the TEMM Center space and operation, Project offices and professional development space, district/Project level communication, research and evaluation, preservice links, and chairing groups for the districts to help sustain the reform.
• Involved many principals in deepening their understanding of the new science curriculum, inquiry teaching and how to evaluate this in the classroom, as well as how to promote change in science education. New principal training is provided each year, and 35 principals are registered for training to be held on November 2, 2000 and 28 attended new principal training in 1999-2000 year. Since the beginning of the project, 97 principals from LSC project schools (K-5) and 78 principals from the districts, in non-project schools (K-8) have attended LSC training. Of the 97 project school principals receiving professional development from the LSC, the principals have come from 84 schools. Thus, some of the new professional development attendees represent principal turnover. Also, some assistant principals have attended LSC training. In addition to professional development specifically designed for principals about 15% of the principals have participated in a module training session with their teachers, which is recommended by the project.
• Developed and continued 33 school-wide project implementation sites
• Completed templates for use in all LSC module training, through curriculum unit D.
• Completed a two day leadership institute on strategic planning for sustaining the reform with two more sessions planned for the winter and spring
• Initiated a project wide study group approach with study groups for TIRs, SFs and SRTs and these leaders supporting numerous peer teacher study groups in school sites

1. Findings: Lessons learned during school year 1999-2000

Some of the lessons mentioned below are new and some are being revisited for deeper understanding. However, the issues have become more complex (or larger in scale) as the project has completed more years of implementation, in relation to earlier lessons discussed.

• Maintaining the vision for reform continues to require professional development on standards and the drivers of reform. The lesson learned is that specific sessions are needed on the drivers of reform, especially for administrators. This requires personnel time dedicated to this area in large projects. Leadership in this area requires having individuals who understand all aspects of reform, the drivers, and the long-term strategies for implementation. The project has focused on strategic planning for sustaining reform this year and will continue to do this to address this lesson.
• Keeping up with the demand for module training for teachers completing three and four modules, for new teachers, and for those changing grade levels presents a continuing challenge. Over 700 teachers changed grade levels in 1998-99 and there were 503 teachers who changed grade level in 1999-2000. Appendix H includes tables that show the numbers of modules teachers have taken that are no longer applicable to their grade level. The challenge is to find new ways for districts to decrease grade changes and to structure professional development appropriately for teachers who change grade levels. The lesson learned is that in complex urban environments, NSF and projects will need to plan to train a percentage of teachers twice or in more cross grade ways due to grade level changes and district growth. Although, districts have to figure out how to handle this as an infrastructure component, during the course of a project, the LSC project has to address this issue to maintain a crucial mass of well-trained teachers in each school. A second lesson learned is planning for school site training helps some, but strategizing to prevent massive grade changing is crucial for professional development effectiveness in classrooms.
• Funding materials/modules for the new curriculum is a challenge for districts. In 1999-2000, Metro-Nashville had to slow down on purchasing new kits. The Project could not train teachers as rapidly as it had, since funds to purchase new kits were not sufficient to meet all district needs. Choices had to be made between training new teachers, training teachers who were ready for the C and D units, or training school-wide sites first, in terms of pacing the availability of training in Metro Schools. To some extent all of the districts are facing the need to scale-up materials availability to keep up with need and demand for teacher training. This is a difficult situation that has positive implications for the project in that more teachers want training faster than kits can be purchased. The lesson learned is the more local, state, and corporate support the better.
• Finding enough substitutes and releasing the number of teachers who want to participate in LSC professional development is an issue that the project is facing. The districts have provided many release days for teachers, but as the workforce grows and more teachers need repeat modules and have additional release days due to changing grade levels, the issue of delivering professional development becomes more difficult. The lesson learned is new and novel substitute plans and professional development delivery plans are needed each year, while maintaining the quality professional development design is essential.
• Continuing in-depth professional development for principals and school facilitators to develop their awareness about issues in sustaining the implementation for inquiry-based science. New facilitators and principals' enhancement require intensive training and repeating a great deal of what the Project has covered. The challenge is continuing to provide stimulating opportunities for all of the facilitators and principals. The lesson learned is that in-depth professional development delivery requires a front end and continuing plan to maintain leadership. It is not enough to train lots of leaders initially, because of the transition of these individuals. The role of the principal is extremely crucial and projects need a full time person (preferably an instructional leader with principal experience) to address this leadership training need.
• Moving to more school-based training for follow-up to module sessions. The TIRs have been visiting schools and providing technical assistance since the beginning of the Project, and more time is allocated for this in 2000-2001. However, other types of professional development are needed to allow teachers to work together on improving their own individual understanding of science content and inquiry-based teaching, while addressing the needs of their individual classrooms. The Project provided all school facilitators a chance to join a study group this project year and is continuing to conduct enhancement in study groups format as a part of the facilitators' release time during the 2000-2001 school year. This is in addition to teachers' release time for module training and other professional development. Additionally, each TIR has formed an in-school study group. Implementing study groups has been the topic for TIR professional development this year. The lesson learned is that the project needed to redirect a half or full-time position toward the coordination, leadership, and professional development/planning for study groups. Actually, a full-time position is needed on the study group professional development approach in a large project. The opportunity to use the study group strategy professional development is only limited by the amount of time available to facilitate the approach. Another related lesson learned is that when study groups are used as a district-wide professional development approach, coordination and special planning/professional development is necessary.
• Making available school facilitators to support teachers in schools during module implementation and offering school-based leadership. In general, it will continue to be difficult to meet the need for site-based school facilitators to have time away from their own classrooms to provide very much peer teacher support. The Project will look for creative ways to support the principals and school facilitators to help them sustain change through on-site support. The districts' strategic plan is to adopt the 5 days of SF-release time each year (provided to the NSF Project) for the school facilitators to continue to work with school faculty, especially new teachers after the project ends. The lesson learned is that the approach to this critical infrastructure component needs to be articulated in the district's commitment for in-kind support in LSC proposals to help sustain the reform. If in-kind/cost share is needed to acquire a project, some in-kind could be generated/pledged toward strategies to sustain the project.
• Influencing district context of professional development. Continuing to develop district strategic plans for intensive professional development on content and teaching/learning strategies is a challenge. Teachers (and administrators) are used to the workshop format in other disciplines and these lack long-term plans for follow-up. There are many topical and competing demands for teacher training. The lesson learned is that districts will need to embrace new structures such as continuation of the TIR positions and make strategic plans to offer continuous development and use of study groups. SF release time for peer coaching will have to expand. This is not a totally new lesson, but districts need to spend the last two years of the LSC project on preparing, implementing and evaluating a strategic plan for sustainability components.
• Curriculum unit management and use. The scale-up process continues to present challenges for the university and the districts. The university has quadrupled space for the Teacher Enhancement and Materials Management (TEMM) Center and has provided 5 new offices for the TIRs. The districts will need to make permanent TIR commitments this year to keep the TEMM Center staffed with professional development expertise after the Project ends. Continuing to scale-up districts' purchasing of kits, so that all teachers can be trained on four curriculum units is a priority. Module training will need to be tailored specifically for each district, as the number of teachers has dramatically changed over the last three years. Also, analysis of training data and needs by school must be used consistently for planning by principals, elementary directors, and the Project. However, more district leadership is needed. The lesson learned is that the school district budgeting process is not as flexible as needed to realign and identify sources for sustainability. This is a national problem. Elementary directors continue to have to be very creative to sustain any reform or curriculum.
• Content knowledge and authentic assessment. The Project continues to seek ways to increase the science content knowledge of a large number of teachers and to deepen their understanding of inquiry and assessment strategies to support learning. More early immersion experiences for teacher leaders are needed. Also, it takes at least 3-5 years for a TIR to reach professional development specialist leadership capacity, according to our LSC-TIRs. The lesson learned is that new ways to enhance teachers' content knowledge are always needed.
• Building infrastructure. Perhaps the most difficult challenge is collaborating with the districts to maintain a policy-level commitment to systemic reform and the drivers that promote reform and ensure continuous improvement. Each district is distinct in its leadership and needs for understanding, especially in the areas of leadership development and curriculum alignment. However, the lesson learned is that they share common pressures, such as financial and recruitment needs for high caliber teachers and administrators.
• Strategic planning, involving community and business groups, is needed to accomplish reform, and the Project can support this to some extent. The lesson learned is building parent and corporate support is an area that district administration/leadership will have to continue to focus on more specifically. The districts' commitment to staff and funding material through the consortium based TEMM Center, is crucial to the continuing infrastructure for reform catalyzed by the NSF project. The lesson learned is that more professional development on visionary leadership and strategic planning is needed at the administrative level within districts. This continues to be a challenge for districts/elementary directors, especially as they work with local school boards and grapple with the current trend for turnover in school leadership among Superintendents and among outstanding district elementary teachers and principals.
• Communication. The flow of communication from the district to the schools will continue to present a challenge as the districts grow and as the Project role diminishes. The role of the TIRs TEMM Center is crucial in terms of maintaining communication with teachers. The lesson learned is that an administrative communication mechanism needs to be better defined to promote sustainability. The project has excellent communication with schools, but new and better ways are needed to continue this.

C. Significant changes in district policies to support sustainability include: release time for teachers to receive professional development on the standards-based curriculum, release time (5 days during the school year) for teacher leaders (SFs and SRTs) to receive professional development and to participate in study groups. Having a strong cadre of lead teachers can help to sustain the reform, especially if the key professional development staff (Teachers-in-Residence) are continued. Plans are being made to sustain the professional development staffing and release time, as well as the funds for the standards-based materials. Another change is that interviews of new teachers now include information about standards-based science unit training and questions about standards-based teaching/learning. A third change is that State standardized test data is being used more to evaluate progress on student achievement in science and to improve instruction. Fourth, new assessment forms for the districts’ use are being considered.