Roll-out and early implementation of CCPGS: appendix of the CCGPS supports inventory survey, 2013

2013
Roll-out and Early Implementation of CCGPS
Appendix of the CCGPS Supports Inventory Survey

Table of Contents
Section I: Satisfaction and Usage of State Resources ___________________________________________ 1 Mathematics Supports - Webinars ______________________________________________________________2 Mathematics Supports - Summer Academies _________________________________________________ 13 English Language Arts Supports - Webinars __________________________________________________ 20 English Language Arts Supports - Summer Academies _______________________________________ 28
Section II: Instructional Materials and Resources _____________________________________________ 34 Curriculum Exemplars _________________________________________________________________________ 35 Formative Assessments________________________________________________________________________ 45 Textbooks _____________________________________________________________________________________ 59 Supplemental Resources ______________________________________________________________________ 68 Digital Materials _______________________________________________________________________________ 82 Other Instructional Materials or Resources____________________________________________________ 92 Webinars _____________________________________________________________________________________ 109 Face-to-Face Training ________________________________________________________________________ 123 Online Courses or Tools ______________________________________________________________________ 144 Institutes and Conferences ___________________________________________________________________ 153 Job-Embedded Professional Learning ________________________________________________________ 170 Other Methods of Training ___________________________________________________________________ 187
Section IV: Teacher Understanding of CCGPS _______________________________________________ 194 Teacher Understanding of CCGPS ____________________________________________________________ 195 How respondents gauge teacher understanding of CCGPS __________________________________ 197
Section V: Areas of Promise and Improvement ______________________________________________ 215 Areas of Promise _____________________________________________________________________________ 216 Areas for Improvement _______________________________________________________________________ 232

Section I: Satisfaction and Usage of State Resources
1

Mathematics Supports - Webinars

Please select your level of agreement with the following statements.

Strongly Disagree Agree
disagree

Strongly Don't agree know

The overall presentation of the information in the GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) was engaging.

3.0% (8)

23.6% (63)

56.9% (152)

10.1% (27)

6.4% (17)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) were helpful and complete.

1.1% (3)

16.5% (44)

61.4% (164)

13.9% (37)

7.1% (19)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) informed and prepared teachers for implementation.

1.9% (5)

24.3% (65)

53.9% (144)

13.1% (35)

6.7% (18)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) met my expectations.

3.4% (9)

28.8% (77)

49.8% (133)

12.0% (32)

6.0% (16)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) were viewed by majority of teachers in my district(s).

2.2% (6)

10.5% (28)

40.1% (107)

37.5% (100)

9.7% (26)

Answered question 267

Skipped question 6

Comments organized by theme Positive feedback for GaDOE

CCGPS professional learning sessions were provided to help teachers become familiar with the new standards and expectations for implementation. Professional learning sessions were and continue to be provided via a blended approach. The GPB and webinars can be recorded and

2

archived for teachers to use as time allows. Face to face Professional Learning was provided to help clear up misunderstandings, reinforce the expectations for the CCGPS standards to be implemented at each grade level and to help train RESA staff and LEA staff to share throughout the districts. CCGPS resources were provided to help facilitate discussion and understanding of the new standards so that LEAs could adjust resources to meet the needs of their students.
The GaDOE CCGPS curriculum team provided a carefully constructed blueprint for CCGPS implementation during the September 2011 GPB statewide orientation video session, after offering face-to-face school/district level administrator training developed by the GaDOE team and delivered to administrators by RESA ELA and Mathematics specialists in sessions provided during the March - August, 2011, time period. The orientation session was followed by grade level webinars and face-to-face sessions during the fall of 2011- sessions which were focused on over-arching ELA and mathematics principles. Winter and spring 2012 were devoted to GPB video broadcasts with closed captioning at each grade level/course to provide overviews of content standards for both disciplines. A SEDL evaluation tool provided valuable information regarding the 2011-2012 work to inform decisions about subsequent professional learning. Unit-by-unit webinars began in May 2012, based on feedback from ELA and mathematics teachers who wanted to begin unit preparation during the summer months. During the 20112012 preparation year, face-to-face sessions were provided at more than 85 conferences and meetings. A number of factors were considered prior to deciding on video and webinar formats. This digital format ensured a consistent message to all educators impacted by the CCGPS implementation and offers a means to sustain professional learning for the future. However, engagement was somewhat minimized and therefore, wikis, list serves, and twitter accounts were established to ensure ongoing teacher engagement and exchange. The CCGPS team is dedicated to immediate email and telephone response as another means of educator input and feedback.
These were phenomenal and were very helpful to help teachers understand the curriculum outlined. If teachers took advantage of these, they were very pleased with the information provided (particularly at the elementary and middle school levels). There were some concerns about the lack of creativity and depth in the high school PL videos. Several high school teachers complained about how poor the high school math videos were.
The webinars enable teachers throughout the state to access the training and information for selected content. The unit by unit webinars provide an overview of the units that can lay the foundations for teachers to continue to collaborate to plan adequately to implement the units.
3

We have found the DOE resources and training opportunities to be very helpful. Our district is utilizing the frameworks and units as a basis for planning instruction aligned to CCGPS. We appreciate the frequent updates and refinement of resources and information.
The DOE has been very supportive.
The GaDOE frameworks and support materials have been incredibly helpful for our teachers and greatly appreciated.
Very informative and well planned.
At the time, I believe GA DOE did the very best job they could to get information out to every educator in the state. The curriculum specialists took very bold and courageous steps - hats off! The further we go in the process, the more we learn. The webinars were a good introduction, but there is no way they could adequately prepare us for implementation. It's a day by day journey, and a tough one at that! We need hands-on assistance now.
The efforts were extremely appreciated! Wonderful staff members...
These training activities were well thought out and organized to assist teachers in knowing how to implement CCGPS. The math webinars were particularly helpful in that modeling classroom strategies were shared.
The webinars were loaded with excellent pieces of information but they were not engaging. Educators were receiving training that did not model best instructional practices.
Some sessions were viewed more positively than others with many viewers feeling that the quality of webinars improved over time
These should have been surveyed separately. GPB were very engaging and were helpful. However, the webinars from GaDOE didn't really meet the needs of the teachers. They needed to be more specific by grade level. GPB exceeded expectations - not the same for the DOE webinars.
Many of the webinars and videos in the early stages were done very poorly. It took too long to get to the point and never addressed specific standards. (These thoughts were echoed by the majority of my staff). Some of the latest videos on GPB seem to be much better.
We had a hard time getting teachers to buy-in on the quality and necessity of watching future webinars when the first ones weren't very good--cutsie, giggly, etc. Teachers missed the
4

message through the lack of professionalism and quality. The ole saying--"first experience sets the stage", is a crucial component to monitor for buy-in.
Not including the Sept 2011 state-wide broadcast---it was shown within our district with all staff in attendance. This 1-hour session was not engaging and truly frustrated our administrators and teachers alike due to the content, presentation, and format.
As a large district, our teachers look to the district level for support and guidance. We encourage teachers to participate in the GADOE activities and many of them do. Webinars and support improved over time.
The webinars improved throughout the year.
The training was very poor in the beginning. The overall plan was managed well. Early attempts to communicate delivery issues were ignored especially in the area of ELA. Training got better but only after teachers and others lost trust. Math was always ahead of the game and responded appropriately. We needed different leadership guiding the CCGPS roll-out process.
I feel the timing of the broadcast were a problem for teachers. The last GPB activities were much better than the first. I am not sure that all staff members viewed these.
The GPB broadcasts were highly beneficial. Some webinars have been great, others have been lacking in content.
Math were very helpful. ELA did not prepare teachers.
The math webinars were very helpful. Turtle did a great job of explaining about the new standards.
Math webinars were more helpful and complete then L. Arts.
The webinars for mathematics were more effective than the ones developed for ELA. Webinars are excellent for time management, but they are not the most effective training method. It is difficult to maintain the focus of the viewers/listeners and to ensure that they are fully engaged in the training opportunity.
Math did a great job.
Some were better than others.
At some grade levels the training was more applicable and better presented than in others.
5

It is difficult to answer from a broad perspective. The quality and helpfulness of the webinars varied greatly by grade level.
I wish these questions had been separated for ELA and Math. The Math GPBs and Webinars were extremely helpful. However, the quality of ELA was poor and our district ended up researching things such as text complexity ourselves and redelivering to teachers on our own using bits and pieces of the webinars and GPBs.
The math webinars were more helpful than the elementary ELA; the webinars did NOT prepare us for CCGPS implementation; the most helpful info we have received has come from presenters such as Lissa Pijanowski and Lucy Calkins. The GDOE gathering in Macon for the entire state over the summer was also a bust ... we were looking for "nuts and bolts" not a pep rally.
GaDOE needs to use more engaging methods to provide information and support, as well as provide more in depth information around interpreting & implementing standards
Improvement needed in all areas of math support. More hands-on support needed.
The webinars served more as an introductory piece to the CCGPS. After viewing the webinars, teachers seemed to have a better understanding of basic information like the format of the standards, history, etc. However, there was little to no assistance on interpreting the standards or implementing them.
The webinars spent too much time explaining the history that gets us to the Common Core. The teachers wanted to know what they could do to prepare.
There are still a lot of unanswered questions about CCGPS.
The webinar provided great online CCGPS resources but I would like to see them go more into the framework tasks and how to effectively implement into the units.
While the overall unit frameworks were beneficial, teachers wanted more clarification on the depth of what was required to master specific standards. Sometimes the response to however how far you can go was not enough information.
I don't think you could say the training was "complete". It was a start. I also don't think you can say that the training "prepared" teachers. It was simply a beginning.
6

It is difficult to lump all of the webinars/ GPB trainings together because they varied in helpfulness and equipping teachers. Many districts mandated that teachers watch them and stamped them as being ready and able to implement new standards and suggested activities with fidelity. Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case. I think that some of the trainings differentiated suggested activities and how to meet the demands of the standards quite effectively; however, others felt ambiguous if I looked through the lens of new teacher, resistant teacher, or teacher who never even studied the standards. I think the webinars did an outstanding job of preparing people for what to expect and showing glimpses of changes, but more in-depth explanation for implementing and transitioning with fidelity is still needed.
The quality of the webinars was of poor quality. This type of training would never be enough for the depth and rigor of CCGPS.
Extremely boring and non-engaging. Teachers tuned out almost immediately when they discovered that the person was going to read a teleprompter to them.
Some presentations, while technically correct, were quite frankly, boring for the teachers.
Our teachers "viewed" the webinars, however, I don't think they provided them with enough engaging information to make the learning applicable to them---so now, teachers are in a state of panic.
Most teachers reported that the sessions were boring. I really believe that they were just too long. Shorter sessions would have been better.
They were often frustrating and some seemed superficial.
The webinars were not engaging and did not help teachers with strategies for implementation.
After seeing so many of these, however, we began to be bored.
Feedback from instructional support staff and teachers in this district revealed that the "sit and get" approach (and the absence of modeling and exemplars) was not effective. Providing Faceto-face opportunities to complement the webinars would have enhanced these learning experiences.
The Webinars were very vague and redundant. Only 10 to 15 minutes of the webinars were useful.
The training activities needed to have been broken up into smaller time segments more fitting to teacher planning times lengths. In addition, many of the segments did not flow with each
7

other where a teacher could see a progression in thought and understanding of the CCGPS. This was also apparent for the building level administrator's understanding.
The webinars were useful in allowing the teachers to get the information. It was difficult for the teachers to attend to the details in such a disengaged setting.
Our teachers want more hands-on, face-to-face training.
Most Webinars were scheduled during the school day at very inconvenient times, presentations were somewhat helpful but not complete and did not provide needed information and things kept changing especially in ELA.
Depending upon the grade level, they have not been usable for our folks especially K-2; 5th, 6th -12th.
Staff feels overwhelmed and underprepared
I think the timing of the CCGPS roll out as well as the need for more support in their implementation before the common assessments and accountability of teachers has been a huge issue for educators. Everyone is still unclear about what it is suppose to look like and concerned with being given enough time to practice what is expected before students are assessed. Math is still a huge concern in all systems and there doesn't seem to be enough answers or support available, especially in small districts where there isn't enough funding for a Math coach.
When we implemented to GPS it took several years. The Common Core roll-out was too quick.
In general the webinars have been helpful, but most of the teachers still feel unprepared and anxious about the implementation of CCGPS.
The comment that I heard repeatedly is that the teachers are "webinared out." However, I know that it was the most cost effective way to deliver the information.
The task of providing professional learning through online sources was effective; however, the task was daunting, really too much was provided too quickly. The majority of teachers in our area are overwhelmed.
Incomplete units or lack of information concerning the assessment components of the units left teachers unprepared to teach the more difficult content. Teachers' focus was on "how they were
8

going to assess" instead of how to teach to lead to assessments. Beginning with the end in mind was advocated, but not practiced with the units and training to the degree that was needed.
Because GaDOE uses webinars as its primary platform for delivery, it is unfortunate that those in the field (affected employees within LEAs) have become disengaged given the number of webinars and the mandates for manner of viewing at the local level. The GaDOE survey results, as shared at the last ELA Statewide Meeting for RESA liaisons, support this observation.
Training for district level personnel was needed prior to the launch of webinars and GPB activities to teachers. Face to face training opportunities for district staff and teachers is also needed.
As a large district, one of our concerns was to make sure that there was a systemic training platform for all teachers. We created a training that we used in concert with the GaDOE webinars and GPTV broadcasts. It would have helped in our planning if there was a curriculum outline provided to districts as a preview in order that we could plan the appropriate supplements for our teachers based upon our data and areas of interest.
It is unclear how many staff actually viewed the sessions
We continually shared information about availability; not sure how many seized the opportunity.
As my team from Metro RESA went to systems and schools to train, most of the teachers were not familiar with the webinars. Some were told to watch them but most had not. The teachers were mostly unaware that the CCGPS standards for the 6-12 content (social studies, science, and CTAE) were even there and to be implemented in the 2012-2013 school year.
I think by having the webinars at 8:00 a.m. many teachers were unable to participate. They have been overwhelmed and have not taken the time to watch the recordings, so I have sent them an overview of the information given for each webinar.
Most administrators allowed teachers to view the archived webinars at their own convenience. Not really sure how many have actually viewed all webinars.
Many teachers at the high school level did not watch all of the webinars, especially the CTAE, PE, and fine arts teachers. Also, PE, Art, Music, and other connections teachers did not watch all of the webinars. Since the high school has a large number of teachers, I couldn't state that the "majority" of teachers participated.
9

Many of our systems reported watching the webinars either in collaborative groups or independently and then discussed the content in collaborative groups. More than half but not all.
Support staff from the RESA or LEA was used to redeliver/support training
After watching the initial video (I think it was the GPB, but not sure), I felt it would be in our teachers best interest to get our training from our RESA consultants who watched the videos and then could redeliver in a way that was more engaging and could involve work with the standards. The later unit webinars were much more helpful and have been viewed by many of our teachers.
Our Math Specialist has been instrumental in helping our grade levels grasp each of the standards they are responsible for and for sifting through the tasks to make the units manageable.
What I watched of the math webinars was extremely boring and not very helpful. The best information we have gotten has been through our RESA.
In our system, these training materials were supplemented for our teachers with training by our content coordinators.
Technical difficulties impaired viewing
I have received feedback from the academic coaches in our system who is working directly with the teachers on implementation that the quality and engagement of the sessions have varied greatly. Also, several times there have been technical difficulties which prevented teachers from viewing the live sessions.
Due to technical difficulties with the launch of CCGPS, there were inconsistencies in the viewing of these webinars. It was also difficult to manage the tracking of when and what degree the webinars were viewed at the school level.
Other responses
I am new to the GaDOE this year and I have not had the opportunity to discuss feedback with teachers.
I have not viewed webinars or training for math on GPS.
10

Although I stated that webinars were helpful and prepared teachers, they were lacking in both areas. This is based on collective response from teachers, coaches, and leaders. There was much redundancy and wasted time.
There is too much time taken from the State of Georgia in training the teachers of our district. To prepare training for teachers across the State with the idea that they all have the same needs and are at the same level is challenging for you and does not adequately address our needs. It is very difficult to schedule and maintain expectations for teachers when the State takes the amount of time that it does.
Implementation has been a hard process without more curriculum support at my district. We are reworking all lesson plans and trying to synthesize lots of materials to meet the rigor and expectations of CCGPS.
I thought that the content of the webinars was good and that the information was vital for teachers. In our district, we found that it was challenging for teachers/administrators to prioritize the time needed to participate in the trainings. As a result, we took a district approach and provided funding for substitutes in order to ensure that our teachers could participate.
We have incorporated the CCGPS in our instructional delivery model, which is facilitative. Because we use a facilitator model to deliver instruction, teachers were not required to participate in the actual training activities; however, information from these activities was shared with our teachers.
The GDOE stated that they were the what (standards) and the districts were the how as far as rolling the CCGPS out. We developed our own plan for deployment.
I think we might benefit from training about how to participate in webinars. We have found that knowledge retention and engagement is highest when a group of teachers participate together rather than in isolation. Administrators who set aside common planning time for these group webinar activities have experienced the most success. Teachers who receive only an email and are left to their own devices to follow-through report the lowest satisfaction with the delivery method.
I am new to the district so I don't know how many teachers participated. It would nice if there were some way know how many of Cartersville City School teachers participated so far.
A state-wide teacher survey on the impact of the state webinars/training is highly recommended.
11

Due to most webinars being during the instructional day or at bus loading time, most teachers had to view the recorded sessions. I am glad the sessions were recorded. Please leave them posted for at least the next year for viewing.
12

Mathematics Supports - Summer Academies

Please select your level of agreement with the following statements.

Strongly disagree

Disagree Agree

Strongly agree

Don't know

The overall presentation of the information in the Summer Academies was engaging.

0.4% (1)

3.8% (10)

31.9% (84)

16.3% (43)

47.5% (125)

Summer Academies were helpful and complete.

0.0% (0)

5.7% (15)

30.0% (79)

16.3% (43)

47.9% (126)

Summer Academies informed and

prepared

teachers

for

implementation.

0.4% (1)

6.8% (18)

28.9% (76)

16.3% (43)

47.5% (125)

Summer Academies met my expectations.

0.8% (2)

6.8% (18)

27.8% (73)

15.2% (40)

49.4% (130)

Information from Summer Academies was successfully shared with the majority of teachers in my district(s)

0.8% (2)

11.4% (30)

30.4% (80)

16.3% (43)

41.1% (108)

GaDOE instructional materials were helpful and complete (as of October 2012).

0.8% (2)

12.9% (34)

59.3% (156)

17.1% (45)

9.9% (26)

GaDOE instructional materials met my expectations (as of October 2012).

1.1% (3)

15.2% (40)

57.0% (150)

17.1% (45)

9.5% (25)

GaDOE instructional materials are easy to access (as of October 2012).

0.4% (1)

6.5% (17)

62.4% (164)

21.7% (57)

9.1% (24)

Answered question 263

Skipped question 10

13

Comments organized by theme
Positive feedback for GaDOE
The Summer Academies provided face to face professional learning opportunities with more indepth information regarding the standards and helped to clear up misunderstandings.
District ELA and mathematics supervisors were informed of the 2012 Summer Academies via the monthly curriculum newsletter and webinar, the mathematics supervisor webinar, and ELA newsletter beginning in February 2012. Educators were made aware through list serve announcements. Participant evaluations suggested that this professional learning opportunity was quite successful in ensuring that teachers were prepared for the 2012-2013 initial CCGPS implementation year. Based on feedback regarding the GPS implementation efforts, the CCGPS team recognized early access of CCGPS grade level resources to be critical to a successful initial implementation year. In 2011-2012 there were only a few states preparing for implementation and no quality vendor resources available. For that reason, the GaDOE team secured the services of Master Georgia teachers to create unit frameworks at each grade level in both ELA and mathematics. The frameworks were vetted by state content advisory councils and RESA content specialists prior to being published at the CCGPS website on georgiastandards.org for a month long peer review from April to May 2012. The final documents were posted by May 2012. During the first year of implementation, no changes were made. Rather feedback has been filed to be shared with content precision review teams who will make revisions and augmentations to the frameworks in June 2012. Revised frameworks will be available by July 1, 2012, for use in Georgia's second year of implementation. It is prudent to report that the Common Core standards were new to all 46 participating states and publishers, so ongoing examination is required and revision a consequence. All CCGPS resources can be accessed at a single location: http://public.doe.k12.ga.us/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Curriculum-andInstruction/Pages/CCGPS.aspx.
Satisfied with SLA and/or instructional materials
The math curriculum documents are very strong and have been helpful in the implementation of Common Core.
I was not employed yet when the Summer Academies occurred. So far the materials I have seen have been useful, but teachers are looking for additional resources in math that follow a more logical flow.
14

My staff which attended the Summer Academies were very impressed and excited about the new curriculum. The felt very confident to tackle the new CCGPS Math Standards because their level of understanding; however, due to limited time, all of the information was not shared with all of the teachers in the district.
Math summer academy was much better than the ELA summer academy. Our system had to purchase numerous math manipulatives and literature to supplement the units which was very costly.
The Math Summer Academy concept was a great idea. It brought teachers together, regionally, which gave teachers an opportunity to network within and outside the school districts.
I did not personally attend the Summer Academies; however, the teachers that attended express they were very engaging and informative.
Teacher feedback was very positive. Teachers felt it was a good use of their time.
I feel this one on one/face to face method is very effective.
Our RESA did not host a Summer Academy. Overall, I have found the GaDOE materials to be easily accessible and helpful with excellent response time by GaDOE Specialists via email anytime that I have had a question or concern.
Some staff did not attend SLAs for a variety of reasons, which included participation in RESA workshops instead or the SLAs were cost prohibitive, inconveniently located, too short notice or filled up too quickly
Our school did not participate in the Summer Academies. Teachers spent time during our Summer Institute unpacking the standards and beginning to plan. Some teachers attended RESA CCGPS workshops which were much more relevant than the state's webinars.
Our teachers did not participate in the Summer Academies. We developed our own training with consultants.
Our RESA math team was excellent and provided and continues to provide excellent support.
We were unable to attend the summer academies because of expense and distance.
Academies in my area filled to fast.
15

Notification for summer training came late for teachers to plan to attend, especially when travel is expected.
Having these summer academies did not include enough teachers. In addition many teachers could not attend because they were working second jobs in the summer.
I appreciated the low cost of the Academies, and the feedback from our teachers was that the content was excellent. However, because of the relatively late notice we received, we did not have as many teachers able to participate as I had hoped.
Summer Academies filled up rapidly. We had many teachers that wanted to attend, but couldn't due to limited seats.
Due to lack of system funds to pay for travel, the majority of the teachers were not able to participate in the summer academies. Also, the high school had a large turn over in the math department for this school term. The math coach and those who did attend have discussed the summer academy information with those who did not attend.
There were not enough slots for some grades (in certain areas of the state) during the academies this past summer.
Grievances with instructional materials (units) ranged from the units being disorganized and not timely to inaccurate and lacking sufficient detail
Some of the ELA units are very disorganized. For example, the second grade units especially unit 3, is disjointed. We still do not know where to put the writing prompts.
I have heard teachers and RESA personnel say that there are errors in the math frameworks. Teachers have struggled with finding the time to work through the tasks AHEAD of time to find the errors and plan corrective frameworks. They are relying on the frameworks to be accurate and help them in instruction. They have been told to report errors on the wiki and check it, but they are SO stressed and pressed for time. They are in trainings and webinars constantly, they are just so very overwhelmed.
We felt like we couldn't wait until the summer to begin writing these units.
Many questions were left unanswered since we are dealing with standards. Many teachers were left feeling uneasy and lacking information they needed in order to instruct their students.
16

GA tried to do too much. I don't think any other state tried to write units for every grade level for every quarter. One exceptional exemplar unit for each grade level would have given teachers an idea of what to do and at a level that was rigorous. As it was, the ELA units were not well done.
We need to reach large scale groups of teachers...train the trainer models are not successful for this content. We received the materials very late, so teachers did not have adequate time to review them and prepare.
The math frameworks are not complete and have many content and descriptive mistakes.
The GaDOE Frameworks are very good, but have many gaps. For example, Kindergarten Frameworks do not include teaching the basics for reading and writing such as learning to write and recognize letters and words. Also, some inappropriate materials were included in one of the 6th grade frameworks.
The math units are incomplete. That frameworks were not bad. Way too many worksheets.
Teachers are very frustrated concerning the lack of resources for the units. Sources for manipulatives and foundational building skills lessons that should be included in the units.
Receipt of materials in October did not allow for effective teacher collaboration. District staff developed initial units.
It would be helpful for the unit webinars to include more specific content knowledge. Our elementary and middle grades teachers need to have a deeper understanding of the content of the standards. The pedagogical knowledge has been extremely helpful in elementary; less at middle school.
While I marked that IM were helpful, they were not complete. Teachers desired more exposure to alternative strategies to teach to a deeper level of understanding.
The quality of instructors varied greatly among the summer academies. I attended some of the sessions with my teachers and the presentation quality varied significantly among the classes. Some teachers benefitted from the summer academy while other teachers did not.
I did not personally attend the summer academies; however, some of the teachers in the system did attend them. They said that some of the sessions were beneficial and that some were not; it depended on the presenter.
17

We did receive negative feedback on the Summer Academies from the teachers in our District for certain grade levels.
Some staff expressed frustration with accessing materials
When the GaDoE changed the website and moved everything it was hard to locate the instructional materials. Better now.
Materials are easy to access if they remain consistent in placement. The Wikis help.
We had limited participation in the summer academies due to sessions being full and closed in our area. I did not participate in these activities and had little feedback from staff that did participate. Changes are continuing to be made to the Frameworks and this is problematic. In addition, we did not have adequate time in advance of school beginning to order needed resources and prepare for CCGPS implementation. It has been very confusing trying to determine the correct location to access resources--the resources have been available on DOE, GeorgiaStandards.org, the wiki, etc. We need a comprehensive ONE-STOP Shop for CCGPS resources, including ELA & MATH.
I feel like I have to click to several different places to access materials. I think these materials should come up automatically for anyone who searches "CCGPS math" on the DOE website.
New website is deep and resources are hard to find.
The GDOE curriculum guides especially in math were frustrating ... they kept changing. We needed to provide our teachers with a pacing guide for the upcoming year before they left for the summer in May 2012. We did ... using the April guide. Then ... we find out later that on Learning Village (not www.georgiastandards.org ... which had been touted as the official CCGPS site, there was a May guide. The mark continued to move, which was problematic and frustrating. Also having information posted on so many places is horrific ... how in this world can we be expected to visit the various sites, watch the endless webinars, meet with teachers, and carry out all of our other duties at the same time? It is overwhelming and truly unmanageable. The GDOE needs to pick one site and post everything there, all the while understanding that there is NO way for us to carve out time to view webinars on a regular basis. I also am in charge of the testing program, K-12. Imagine trying to view all of the testing webinars in addition to the CCGPS ones, monthly curriculum updates, CCRPI, etc. Trying to herd cats describes our charge!
18

Staff is overwhelmed
In general all the information and resources provided have been helpful, but most of the teachers still feel that they are not prepared to implement CCGPS successfully. Many of the standards are vague which leaves room for interpretation. This concerns the teachers because they are fearful that they are not covering the standards as intended. They are also very concerned about the upcoming assessments. They are very concerned that their assessments don't/won't match the state's assessments.
Great info with multiple resources. Teachers often say they are "too many" resources with insufficient time to decide what to use.
DOE frameworks are just a sampling of tasks and teaching ideas. We are spending hours going through them and also any other resources that we have or can find that is aligned to CCGPS. It is very difficult to teach and design curriculum at the same time.
Other responses
The summer academies did not do what they advertised they would do. According to most of our math teachers, it was mostly a review of what they had already learned - a lot of "this is what CCGPS is." The kindergarten session was an exception; that presenter did not follow "the script and PowerPoint" from what I was told and the teacher came away with loads of helpful information. A first grade teacher said her presenter left the script the last half of the last day and she learned a lot from discussions with other teachers.
Saying that anything we've done so far is complete is just not accurate. Helpful, yes - but complete, no. We have attacked such a large task that success will only come over time with the repetition of instruction. There's just too much information to digest at once. As far as the trainings meeting my expectations, I learn more each day - thus, my expectations now are totally different than they were when we began this journey. We need more hands-on training and support. As far as information being redelivered - I did my best to redeliver the information in a very limited time frame with teachers - not a thorough job. The sample unit frameworks are extremely helpful, and considering time and manpower, they were likely the best Ga could produce. While they have been a great starting point, they are not complete, not consistent, and do not have continuity throughout the grades. We need help with assessments and with the integration of the transition standards in the units.
19

English Language Arts Supports - Webinars

Please select your level of agreement with the following statements.

Strongly disagree

Disagree Agree

Strongly agree

Don't know

The overall presentation of the information in the GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) was engaging.

5.8% (15)

30.8% (80)

46.2% (120)

6.2% (16)

11.2% (29)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) were helpful and complete.

3.5% (9)

22.3% (58)

54.6% (142)

8.8% (23)

10.8% (28)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) informed and prepared teachers for implementation.

4.2% (11)

28.1% (73)

47.3% (123)

8.8% (23)

11.5% (30)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) met my expectations.

5.8% (15)

28.5% (74)

46.9% (122)

7.7% (20)

11.2% (29)

GaDOE training activities (webinars and Georgia Public Broadcasting) were viewed by majority of teachers in my district(s).

3.1% (8)

8.1% (21)

46.5% (121)

28.8% (75)

13.5% (35)

Answered question 260

Skipped question 13

Comments organized by theme Positive feedback for GaDOE
The GPB sessions will be available for review and discussion by teams of teachers or individual teachers at a time most convenient for teachers' schedules. New teachers can easily preview the

20

sessions and will have the opportunity to hear the same professional learning sessions from the same sources as teachers who viewed the sessions in 2012. The GPB sessions are available for all stakeholders at their convenience.
The GaDOE CCGPS curriculum team provided a carefully constructed blueprint for CCGPS implementation during the September 2011 GPB statewide orientation video session, after offering face-to-face school/district level administrator training developed by the GaDOE team and delivered to administrators by RESA ELA and Mathematics specialists in sessions provided during the March - August, 2011, time period. The orientation session was followed by grade level webinars and face-to-face sessions during the fall of 2011- sessions which were focused on over-arching ELA and mathematics principles. Winter and spring 2012 were devoted to GPB video broadcasts with closed captioning at each grade level/course to provide overviews of content standards for both disciplines. A SEDL evaluation tool provided valuable information regarding the 2011-2012 work to inform decisions about subsequent professional learning. Unit-by-unit webinars began in May 2012, based on feedback from ELA and mathematics teachers who wanted to begin unit preparation during the summer months. During the 20112012 preparation year, face-to-face sessions were provided at more than 85 conferences and meetings. A number of factors were considered prior to deciding on video and webinar formats. This digital format ensured a consistent message to all educators impacted by the CCGPS implementation and offers a means to sustain professional learning for the future. However, engagement was somewhat minimized and therefore, wikis, list serves, and twitter accounts were established to ensure ongoing teacher engagement and exchange. The CCGPS team is dedicated to immediate email and telephone response as another means of educator input and feedback.
GPB were better after the changes at the beginning.
For me the training activities for CCGPS-ELA were very engaging and helpful. For a few of the teacher that were more ingrained with the traditional style of educating (QCC days and before), more detailed training was needed.
Again, it is extremely difficult to meet the needs of teachers with such a large-scale change. Some of the more recent material has been much more helpful (for example, the recent series of 30 minute videos on PBS where the presenter modeled strategies for literacy).
The GPB sessions were much better than the original webinars. Also, having examples of tasks was helpful.
21

Quality varied by subject, grade, instructor
The K-8 math webinars are very strong and helpful to teachers. The high school math webinars were weak.
The ELA webinars were not as useful as the math webinars; however, the ELA webinars did get better after the first 2or 3 were completed. It was very beneficial when they starting showing actual examples using the smart board.
I have received feedback from the academic coaches in our system who is working directly with the teachers on implementation that the quality and engagement of the sessions have varied greatly. Also, several times there have been technical difficulties which prevented teachers from viewing the live sessions. (Aren't these the same questions as #5?)
ELA webinars were not as helpful as the mathematics webinars.
Some were better than others.
Some grade levels were more informative than others
There are some fabulous webinars & GPB sessions among the collection. Even though I have repeatedly recommended Cynde Snider's GPB series, teachers (nor academic coaches) are utilizing them. We need to cull the no-good attempts -- the audience is tough and is hesitant to return after a weak performance.
There were a lot of issues early on in the process.
Feedback from instructional support staff and teachers in this district revealed that the "sit and get" approach (and the absence of modeling and exemplars) was not effective. Teacher participation in webinars declined over the course of the fall semester because teachers did not find value in all webinars. Providing Face-to-face opportunities to complement the webinars would have enhanced these learning experiences.
Teachers are encouraged to watch. Poorly delivered webinars at the start of the project had teachers disinterested in watching future webinars. They did improve over time and we continuously share the resources and dates for training.
We scheduled all teachers to view these sessions and they were bad. The more recent sessions are much better but the water was already tainted.
22

Some administrators did not require the webinars because they did not feel that it was a good use of time due to the lack of quality.
Word spread quickly that the webinars were not helpful or a good use of time.
We started viewing the ELA webinars with all teachers, but due to the poor quality and redundant information, we now watch with a core group and redeliver only the portion that have value. It hasn't helped that we have had 3 different people working with ELA. We need consistency and someone that truly understands K-5. What happened to Dr. Mills?
Staff needs more engaging training formats and more in-depth guidance and support
The material presented was good but there was no plan to ensure collaborative discussion of the new teaching strategies. In the very beginning the emphasis was on stressing how the CCGPS was not that different from GPS and the shifts in teaching strategies and teacher paradigm were ignored.
No offense to the DOE, but there is no way to roll out the CCGPS via TV. This should have been handled through RESAs with hands-on training.
Teachers wanted to see specific lessons and the units. We spent a lot of time on the philosophy behind the Common Core.
Although GaDOE has repeatedly reminded systems and schools that use of the ELA units is optional, teachers and system leaders thought the units would provide teachers with exemplary instructional strategies challenging texts. Teachers in my area have been sorely disappointed with the units provided. Many of the ELA webinars were heavily grounded in the sample units. I am seeing daily that teachers needed more guidance with the CCGPS to develop a deep understanding of the expectations for integration and connectivity, as opposed to the sample units.
At the beginning, the webinars consisted of two hours of talking. They didn't grab my attention; however, I did understand the urgency of the presentations. The information was helpful, but webinars alone did not suffice. Our district conducted further training with teachers on CCGPS.
District level personnel needed training prior to the launch of the webinars and activities. Face to face training for both district level and teachers is needed.
Teachers were somewhat prepared, but not to the degree they could have been had the training materials been more complete with assessment information or examples.
23

I know it is difficult to make this topic exciting and delightful! I was part of GPS rollout; I prefer face-to-face training. Yet, I understand budget issues.
The teacher feedback from the webinars were not favorable. I did not attend them but have been asked to complete this survey. Technology issues in Crisp County made the webinars difficult according to the teachers. The content is so important and the training should have been more comprehensive.
Too much information was repeated from the initial GPB broadcast. While some valuable information was shared, teachers were frequently not engaged. Also, the focus on specific texts as units were presented rather than more focus on the standards slowed down our progress in being prepared.
Our teachers felt like the webinars were scattered, and they left the sessions with more questions than answers.
Though the responses were mostly "disagree" I appreciate the effort made by the DOE. The main reason the trainings were not helpful was because the teachers were more interested in the "how to or application" and less of the pedagogy behind the change. Though the pedagogy is important, the teachers needed more with regard to the structure of the lessons particularly ELA, lesson planning outline, and specific close read strategies, etc.
Teachers did not find these webinars to be engaging.
The webinars-while they provided useful information-were incredibly dry and failed to capture the attention of our teachers like one would expect. Consider truly making these interactive by building in formative assessment questions throughout the presentation and asking teachers to provide feedback throughout the webinar.
Most of the webinars were too lengthy to be engaging and contained too much information in the form of a lecture. The last set of webinars were shorter based on viewer feedback but the lack of participant involvement due to the one-way nature of the presentations is not engaging for most viewers.
Webinars were too long.
I feel that this type of broadcasting allowed for interruptions at the school level/teacher distractions. With the above possible I don't know how effective they were for staff members.
Our teachers and principals were very disappointed by the webinars.
24

The webinars were perceived as dull by the majority of our teachers.
The webinars were broadcast at a time of day when teachers could not be pulled from their students therefore we viewed the recordings. I was in charge of the K-5 ... they were BORING! Trying to keep up teacher morale as yet another change in made in curriculum and assessment and being dependent upon the GDOE webinars for guidance ... it was quite a challenge. We were disappointed in K-5.
Some staff found units/frameworks inadequate, misleading, and disjointed The webinars left our teachers with the misunderstanding that they would no longer teach science and social studies separately, but only through ELA. Our RESA consultants helped clear this up for teachers. They also helped the primary level teachers to realize that they still teach phonics and that they do not have to use words from the chapter book for their spelling lists, but that they would teach spelling patterns as they always have. Going strictly by the frameworks, it is unclear that teachers should continue with that.
The units for each grade level should have been written by a team of teachers for the entire year so they would have been cohesive and built on each other and covered all of the standards in a logical sequence. Unfortunately, random people wrote each unit at the grade levels so there is no unity or sequence to the units. I wish we would not build airplanes as we are flying them. I would rather move slower and have all the pieces in place and provide quality training up front instead of as we go. Teachers are very frustrated at this time.
Resources on the web are poor examples of what teachers need to be doing.
Teachers feel overwhelmed and unprepared There are still a lot of unanswered questions.
ELA teachers did not feel as prepared for implementation as the math teachers did.
Our teachers "viewed" the webinars; however, I don't think they provided them with enough engaging information to make the learning applicable to them---so now, teachers are in a state of panic.
25

Other responses We were well in to the school year and some materials were either on back order or not ordered at all because a few units were not complete over the summer. Teachers have been very anxious trying to pull things together while trying to teach.
See Math comments.
Same comments as the Math section
Same comments as math
The webinars and GPB prepared our systems and teachers for the change from CPS to CC. Teachers knew their instruction would have to shift; however, is very difficult to prepare for changes while teachers are still focused on teaching GPS.
The teachers were not aware of the CCGPS implementation for the content areas 6-12 and how they would impact them.
I am the math specialist so I didn't watch any of the ELA webinars or presentations.
Because of the lack of days/time funded for PL, we often find ourselves viewing the recorded sessions rather than the live session which would allow for interaction.
See comments in first box
The initial message that we were going to "be okay" in the transition was misguided and misleading. It took until Dr. Gerald Boyd came on board to get the message on track and moving forward. We lost a lot of credibility in this misstep.
My focus is on Math.
My area of concentration is math. I do not feel I am able to rate fairly.
I cannot speak for the teachers in our service area nor do I know the level of involvement in the webinar and GPB access since it varied significantly within the 16 districts that we serve.
I work with math and have a colleague who is working with ELA
Most teachers have had to view the recorded versions.
A state-wide teacher survey is highly recommended.
26

Often technical difficulties prevented teachers from participating We review the webinars in our district with teams of teachers and then provide job-embedded follow-up professional development. Teacher participation declined over time due to negative reactions to earlier sessions
27

English Language Arts Supports - Summer Academies

Please select your level of agreement with the following statements.

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don't know

The overall presentation of the information in the Summer Academies was engaging.

0.4% (1)

3.9% (10)

27.0% (70)

9.3% (24)

59.5% (154)

Summer Academies were helpful and complete.

0.4% (1)

4.2% (11)

26.3% (68)

10.4% (27)

58.7% (152)

Summer Academies informed and prepared teachers for implementation.

0.8% (2)

5.8% (15)

24.3% (63)

9.7% (25)

59.5% (154)

Summer Academies met my expectations.

0.4% (1)

5.8% (15)

26.6% (69)

8.9% (23)

58.3% (151)

Information from Summer Academies was successfully shared with the majority of teachers in my district(s)

1.2% (3)

7.7% (20)

27.0% (70)

10.4% (27)

53.7% (139)

GaDOE instructional materials were helpful and complete (as of October 2012).

2.3% (6)

16.2% (42)

50.2% (130)

12.0% (31)

19.3% (50)

GaDOE instructional materials met my expectations (as of October 2012).

3.1% (8)

17.4% (45)

48.6% (126)

12.7% (33)

18.1% (47)

GaDOE instructional materials are easy to access (as of October 2012).

0.4% (1)

8.9% (23)

54.8% (142)

18.1% (47)

17.8% (46)

Answered question 259

Skipped question 14

28

Comments organized by theme Positive feedback for GaDOE LEAs can utilize the example resources to develop additional units of study based on the needs of their student population. District ELA and mathematics supervisors were informed of the 2012 Summer Academies via the monthly curriculum newsletter and webinar, the mathematics supervisor webinar, and ELA newsletter beginning in February 2012. Educators were made aware through list serve announcements. Participant evaluations suggested that this professional learning opportunity was quite successful in ensuring that teachers were prepared for the 2012-2013 initial CCGPS implementation year. Based on feedback regarding the GPS implementation efforts, the CCGPS team recognized early access of CCGPS grade level resources to be critical to a successful initial implementation year. In 2011-2012 there were only a few states preparing for implementation and no quality vendor resources available. For that reason, the GaDOE team secured the services of master Georgia teachers to create unit frameworks at each grade level in both ELA and mathematics. The frameworks were vetted by state content advisory councils and RESA content specialists prior to being published at the CCGPS website on georgiastandards.org for a month long peer review from April to May 2012. The final documents were posted by May 2012. During the first year of implementation, no changes were made. Rather feedback has been filed to be shared with content precision review teams who will make revisions and augmentations to the frameworks in June 2012. Revised frameworks will be available by July 1, 2012, for use in Georgia's second year of implementation. It is prudent to report that the Common Core standards were new to all 46 participating states and publishers, so ongoing examination is required and revision a consequence. All CCGPS resources can be accessed at a single location: http://public.doe.k12.ga.us/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Curriculum-andInstruction/Pages/CCGPS.aspx. Our Summer Academies turned in to Fall Academies, and our teachers, instructional coaches and curriculum directors were very pleased. Susan Jacobs and Gerald Boyd did an excellent job. The task of providing the units for our teachers was a tremendous undertaking; however, Media Specialist should have been partners with this undertaking from the very beginning. So much more supportive than the GPS implementation!
29

Some staff did not attend SLAs because they attended RESA workshops instead or the SLAs were cost prohibitive, inconveniently located, too short notice or filled up too quickly
Our teachers did not participate in the Summer Academies. We developed our own training with consultants.
We did not attend the ELA Summer Academies; our RESA did that training for us.
Our ELA Instructional Specialist has been instrumental in working with individual grade levels in sifting through the units and deciding on appropriate literature for each one. She has helped them bring cohesion to the units so they build upon previous ones. It has been a challenge. Our system has purchased numerous books to supplement the units in the classrooms which has been very costly.
We were unable to attend the summer academies because of expense and distance.
Our district was unable to participate on the date provided due to short notice.
Need more engaging methods to provide information and support, as well as more in depth information
It would have been more beneficial for teachers (especially elementary teachers) if the math and ELA unit formats were the same. Also, if the organization of the presentations and the rollout were the same, it would have been much easier for teachers. Teachers felt the math was clearer and easier to follow. Teachers felt more prepared for implementation.
Summer Academies, with live, face to face presentations and interaction & networking are always very valuable, more than staring at a computer at a webinar, even though it is convenient.
The webinars-while they provided useful information-were incredibly dry and failed to capture the attention of our teachers like one would expect. Consider truly making these interactive by building in formative assessment questions throughout the presentation and asking teachers to provide feedback throughout the webinar.
The frameworks for ELA simply include a list of activities rather than the curriculum unit format.
IM were helpful, but not complete. Further training was needed for the assessment components.
30

Same comment as with the math materials. One thing that I think is a problem--early on, everyone acted as if the shift to the CCGPS wouldn't be a big deal. I think that was a mistake. These instructional shifts are huge--and I think that local districts and teachers would have been better prepared to make them had they not be led to believe that we would be "fine". I also think that local districts should have been given more information about the intent of the CCSS-they aren't prescriptive and local districts have much leeway in choosing materials, etc. I think some were waiting for the state to tell them what to do--which was more of an issue in ELA than in math. Local districts should have been more informed about the need to create their own units instead of waiting for the DOE.
Some staff found instructional support materials (units/frameworks) to be inadequate, misleading, disjointed, and not timely The frameworks are substandard at best. Many of the sample tasks are incomplete, leaving teachers with the responsibility to create rubrics, materials, etc. This was not what I expected at all.
Materials lack consistency - some are well written some are poorly written.
Again, the examples are very poor.
The attempts at integration of ELA with other content such as social studies was a worthwhile effort. However, the curriculum matching was not always correct. For example, the ELA units did attempt to pull in social studies; however, the social studies content was not part of that grade level curriculum.
Many of the units were posted late...many of the links in the units we could not use. Some of the units were written to use with books that most schools don't have, some of which were even out of print.
Materials were posted well after the start of the school year.
ELA teachers have struggled to implement the ELA frameworks and are very frustrated with ELA implementation.
31

Other responses
See Math comments.
What resources (including personnel) were available to the New York City School System to be able to produce the elaborate examples of units with annotated student work, the implementation expectations per year, and the video clips of classroom implementation?
I work with math, specifically.
Our RESA did not have a summer activity.
Again, unfortunately, I was asked to complete this survey and I do not have direct knowledge because I did not attend the summer academy. However, the feedback that I got (I found out I had to fill this out on Wednesday due to the Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent being unavailable. It may be more helpful to have this filled out by someone else but for now, I can only give data based on the teachers and academic coaches that I talked to.
Again, I did not attend the summer academies. I'm not aware of any of the teachers attending the language arts academies.
Same comments as math
(Aren't these the same questions as #6? I don't get it.)
Unfortunately, I had a conflict with Teacher Keys training and was unable to attend the Summer Academy.
Our RESA staff had already covered a lot of the information with curriculum directors and our teachers so our teachers thought the information during the summer was not anything NEW. Wonderful news to us!!!!
Our office is comprised of "49ers." Thus, we were out of the office for most of the summer.
Very frustrating roll out
Summer Academies: I attended one in June and another in September. While they both covered Close Reading, they were very different in format and content. The latter was much better due to more group participation, but the activity never really was completed. The additional video clips added to engage the audience were inappropriate. Comparing teaching to an extreme sport does not appeal to elementary teachers. And, the one about the cowboys--
32

please! Materials and resources on the website are helpful and easier to find now. However, the units are not very user-friendly and the sheer volume of documents are very over-whelming to teachers, curriculum specialists, and administrators. Most are feeling bombarded instead of supported by the resources.
I am the math specialist.
See note about Summer Academies from previous question. I don't think the two teachers found it very helpful.
Summer academies & instructional resources - I am not sure to which resources and academies are referred.
See comment in previous box related to summer academies
I cannot confirm that I knew about these ELA Summer Academies and N GA RESA was not on the training list.
Face to face/one on one is very effective
My focus is on Math.
Summer was not an ideal time for this training as teachers were working a second job.
Extended reads included in the units should have had an appropriate alternative with supporting materials in order for teachers not to have to spend valuable planning time searching for replacements due to financial constraints for the novel listed in the units.
Did not attend the summer academies.
Did not know out summer academies
We received negative feedback from the ELA summer academies. One group of elementary ELA teachers were told by a presenter at the academy not to worry about the units and frameworks. That strongly undermines the implementation at the school level. The ELA units included books that are out of print and very expensive to purchase in poor economic times.
We did not have any k-5 teachers that attended the ELA academies.
See comments when these same questions were asked on a previous page.
A state-wide teacher survey is highly recommended
33

Section II: Instructional Materials and Resources
34

Curriculum Exemplars

Have you offered this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

94.6%

243

No

5.4%

14

Answered question

257

Skipped question

16

How can educators access this instructional material or support? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE website

83.4%

201

District website

40.7%

98

RESA website

40.2%

97

Online data sharing tool (e.g., Dropbox)

55.6%

134

Other (please specify)

19.1%

46

Answered question

241

Skipped question

32

Comments organized by theme
Staff distributed physical copies and/or provided the instructional material or support via technical assistance.

We supplied all our teachers with copies of maps, guides, and frameworks for year.

Each system has access to a variety of websites and unit assessment questions. The information is not posted on website.

35

We gave out hard copies....created a binder for each teacher and support staff. Our districts request materials specifically for their needs. We provide them. All participants have received training manuals with annotated PPTs and discs with all handouts, articles, activities, other resources. Training materials for teachers Printed copies from the internet are available and links to material are emailed to teachers. We provided paper copies of the units, and they are on our school server. Dodge had all of the standards printed and bound and all of the frameworks by grade level printed for all of our teachers. CCGPS Notebook Hard copy Individual work with districts Staff members are creating them. Vertical planning release days From our coordinators or the sample standards-based classrooms at RESA/district level Direct service to schools and systems Our literacy coaches are working with the teachers in the schools---teacher by teacher. Have shared with curriculum directors, coaches, and some teacher, but not sure how it is being shared with the majority of other teachers Via math coaches (email and paper) I am actually writing units for them. On-site visits by RESA consultants Workshops with various schools in our region
36

Teachers can access the instructional material or support online. Intranet Internet They have access online and/or have access to the units prepared by the teachers. District Website Various websites shared through the curriculum frameworks provided by the GaDOE and the national Common Core website. Task Stream Local "G" drives Our website directs directly to the GaDOE website. Our 8 systems have established Grade Level system partners for unit preparation establishing their own wiki spaces for sharing materials. District instructional portal which is a part of the SIS Other LEA website Other state websites (North Carolina) School Network It's Learning and Livebinder Through our network share drive Wikispaces Wikis, Task Stream, we supply hard copies in our CCGPS Institutes as well. Other state DOE websites have things available for viewing - teachers have been given a list of these sites eDragon Moodle OAS
37

Vendor, consultant, and/or partner provided i nstructional material or support. EL Commons - Expeditionary Learning website (for CCGPS sample units and lessons) Pearson Math and ELA consulting support complete with curriculum materials Lissa Pijaniwski Charter Schools Association

Other responses Our teachers are concerned that they do not have the texts that they need to teach the units.

Do you have a method for tracking who has accessed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

23.2%

56

No

76.8%

185

Answered question

241

Skipped question

32

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings
Attendance sheets from school-wide meetings where the material has been accessed and viewed.

We provided additional training in our system where teachers signed in and accessed multiple instructional resources.

Sign on sheets, viewed/developed with Instructional Coaches and administrators present

We keep records of attendance in our PL sessions.

38

We have rosters showing names of 1,800 teachers who participated in summer 2012 PL focused on K-12 CCGPS in all content areas. We are unable to account for teachers who have accessed these resources outside of our formal PL opportunities. Sign-in sheets at RESA training Collaborative meetings (sign-in sheets) Assistant Principals required sign-in documentation.
Access is tracked online Google Analytics provides a reporting of the GaDOE CCGPS site usage, including page views and location sites. Wikispaces provides a usage including member and page view numbers. Requests to join our Edmodo Drop Box Internet Online statistics report provided by the intranet The system tells how many teachers have accessed the site. Yes, we electronically track who accesses our password protected site for district curriculum resources. Our district has created several resources for teachers and has placed them on Safari for our district teachers to access. We have also included links to the GaDOE and Georgia Standards pages. Usage within Safari can be tracked. Our First Class email system records a history of who opened a resource. We have a CCGPS Google Site for ELA that tracks the number who access The site which provides both the GaDOE units and NWGa RESA units. We have the ability to count the number of hits. Via a computer tracker We can track the number of page views by our teachers on our curriculum portal.
39

Sort of... We have sign-in sheets from Learning Village trainings, CCGPS Institute Training, Task Stream Communication logs, etc. We have no actual numbers. Teachers must access curriculum resources through curriculum management system (SchoolNet/IDMS). We are able to obtain login and usage reports as needed. We use Edmodo to access all district and RESA instructional materials. Its Learning access is given to participation on trainings. Livebinder [has] public access.
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Through professional learning communities. Administrators actively participate in the PLCs and provide feedback to teachers. Academic Coaches track this material. Our district is so small that our teachers have common planning, and I am able to see them using these planning resources to plan instruction. Documented in their lesson plans The technology director and school curriculum coordinators can track who accesses this instructional material. Work sessions with the teachers from our systems. System personnel at each level have access to all available information. We have a record of who we gave the hard copies too...we also hold prof. dev. where the binders/materials are used as a part of the training. At the district level, we conduct system wide classroom focus walks. We also share analyzed student work at our district meetings as we relate the work back to the standards. Monitored by Instructional Coaches Professional Development and lesson plans review Through our technology division
40

It is not an across-the-board tracking method. However, I work directly in the schools multiple times per week, and I have found consistent evidence that teachers are using these resources. Principals monitored this through embedded Professional Learning opportunities. Instructional Coaches at each school worked through each unit with teachers during PL. We have to rely on what our administrators and teachers report to us. We know that teachers have the resources in hand because we personally provided them. Math coaches meet a minimum of twice per month with all teachers who teach mathematics in grades K - 8). Materials and information is shared through face-to-face meetings. Every Math and Language Arts/Reading teacher was provided a copy by our district. We hold grade group meetings to distribute paper copies of units Units are copied and given to each teacher. Instructional coaches made sure each teacher had a log -in and that they had access. Administrators and CO staff view lessons and conduct walk-throughs to verify the instructional materials are being utilized. We meet monthly with grade levels for discussion and updates. Teacher monitoring of scheduled trainings and resources and teacher monitoring and review of teacher developed units of instruction aligned to CCGPS frameworks. All staff members were given notebooks that contained instructional materials and resources. K-5 ... we are not using the ELA units; however we are using the math units. The administrators monitor the implementation of the math units in the individual classrooms. Only through unit/lesson planning checks
Other responses Report generator The school improvement specialists in the various buildings made their teachers notebooks with all of the sample units and other materials from the DOE to utilize. Teachers also worked on
41

units of their own for the 1st half of the year and have shared these with teachers that teach like grade and content. We do on PD360 which has common core standards professional learning. We printed copies of many of the materials for our teachers. We used the units as a resource and guide. Our coaches wrote the units for our county.

Who developed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE

80.5%

194

Your district

56.4%

136

Your district's RESA

36.9%

89

Another Georgia LEA or RESA

13.3%

32

Another state or an LEA from outside of

16.2%

39

Georgia

Other (please specify)

12.4%

30

Answered question

241

Skipped question

32

Comments organized by theme Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or other partner
Resources from vendors such as textbook companies, etc.

Pearson Lissa Georgia Charter Schools Association

42

District and hired Consultant. Used research from writers and experts of CCSS document Consultants for our district Dr. Tim McNamarra Expeditionary Learning
Instructional material or resource was developed by staff at the school, district and/or RESA level NWGa RESA Me Academic coaches and teachers Teachers Teacher developed The district is using the state units and making modifications. Teachers will be able to submit sample units for the 3rd and 4th marking period. Teachers developed the GaDOE units' materials with collaboration from teachers in our 8 systems. TEAMS of teachers across grade levels and schools RESA Consultants working individually with district teacher work groups. Teachers working together to develop units Teachers that teach the content; they used what the state had provided and added to it. Academic coaches are supporting teachers by creating resources. Grade levels are revising units as needed.
43

Instructional material or resource was developed by other states or national websites commoncore.org Several online links, as well as Illustrative Mathematics, LearnZillion, PARCC, etc. Through various national Common Core websites Achieve the core, learnzillion.com We have used a lot of CC materials from State DOEs in TN, NC and NY. Also other sites like Teaching Channel and the PARCC website have been helpful. Other responses A collection of great finds - teacher work, student work, and original to our RESA Since we are not using a tracking device yet, I do not have a response to this question. IPA's Instructional Leadership Team
44

Formative Assessments

Have you offered this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

80.4%

205

No

19.6%

50

Answered question

255

Skipped question

18

How can educators access this instructional material or support? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE website

48.8%

100

District website

32.7%

67

RESA website

17.1%

35

Online data sharing tool (e.g., Dropbox)

39.5%

81

Other (please specify)

37.6%

77

Answered question

205

Skipped question

68

Comments organized by theme
Staff distributed physical copies and/or provided the instructional material or support via technical assistance.

GRASPS, Locally Developed Benchmarks

Locally developed benchmarks

45

Grade Specific Notebooks Academic coaches create local benchmark assessments School District developed benchmark assessments are administered quarterly; we use Data Director for disaggregation of data They are created within the system by teams of teachers and curriculum specialists and shared monthly. Self-made From each other Curriculum Coordinator shares information with teachers and administrators. District meetings District collaborative meetings Hard copies District trainings We use OAS and locally-developed assessments. Standards-based report cards for grade K-5 District developed benchmarks Commercial Products, OAS, and Vertical Release Days to create Hard copies on individual schools Instructional coaches provide tests. Results are accessed through a web-based reporting engine. All unit assessment grades 1-9 have been written. Emails, print copies
46

Classworks and district benchmarks We created binders/hard copies for teachers. We provide the latest information from PARCC as well as SBAC and other state's prototypes. Workshops we give and online. Training manual and disc with multiple resources for all participants We develop and administer district benchmarks to our schools 3 times per year We are utilizing the TKES Model of formative assessments Distributed by the district District literacy coaches are sharing information with teachers as they go into classrooms Assessments/benchmarks are created by instructional coaches & teachers In the schools District personnel Copies given in hard format and e-mailed to teachers School District hard copies District created; data available for analysis Workshops in schools in our region
Teachers can access the instructional material or support online or via a locally shared drive Internal assessment system OAS and Data Director Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Grades K-8 and Online Assessment System (OAS)
47

Assessment websites PARCC website, Performance Matters (an online data management system) OAS A+ software, Study Island, Georgia OAS Our assessments are available on Edmodo. OAS We use OAS and locally-developed assessments. OAS Commercial Products, OAS, and Vertical Release Days to create MAP website Specific website of assessment Georgia Online Assessment System, Study Island PARCC Online wikispaces, Data Director OAS OAS and USATestPrep and Data Director AND Skills Tutor Use of OAS and DATA Director interim assessments
Vendor, consultant, and/or partner provided instructional material or support. Thinkgate District developed benchmark assessments are administered quarterly; we use Data Director for disaggregation of data PARCC website, Performance Matters (an online data management system) NWEA We use Classworks for a lot of our formative assessments. Thinkgate
48

Teachers are provided information on the Math Shell FALs School Net vendor product we purchased (Pearson) Task Stream Commercial Products, OAS, and Vertical Release Days to create MDC FAL's District utilizes a system called Data Director to create, house, and analyze formative assessment data Vendor Pearson Consulting; Karen Bailey Consulting Lissa Data Director Northwest Educational Assessments (NWEA) and Georgia Charter Schools Association Georgia Online Assessment System, Study Island (leading academic software provider of standards-based assessment, instruction, and test preparation e-learning programs) We are using Thinkgate for benchmarks and software such as Study Island for additional interim assessments. Thinkgate OAS and USATestPrep (online tool, custom-designed tools for students to for test prep) and Data Director AND Skills Tutor (online instructional & K-12 learning solutions) Data Director
Other responses Don't know We are currently developing them. If you are referring to SLO's they have been a real issue in our district.
49

Do you have a method for tracking who has accessed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

44.9%

92

No

55.1%

113

Answered question

205

Skipped question

68

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings Attendance Sheets Assessment Results We have sign-in sheets from the training where we distributed the material. We use the materials in grade level meetings and professional development. We have our print shop print the assessments. They are delivered to the schools and signed for to prove they have been received. Login to check Collaborative meetings (sign-in sheets) We keep records of presentations and number of attendees from the districts we serve. Sign-in sheets

Access is tracked online
The GaDOE Assessment Division had provided educators and continues to build formative assessment options in the state's Online Assessment System (OAS) item bank. District usage is reported.
9-week interims, all teachers, documented in Learning Management System
Data Director Usage Report

50

Housed in an Edmodo folder
We use our data tool to determine who has administered assessments.
Internet
Online statistics report provided by intranet
The district's student achievement management system, Schoolnet, is used to generate district benchmark data by school and teacher. The district can determine who has administered benchmarks and school common assessments. However, the district does not have a way to track use of OAS.
Data Director
View history
Some of the assessments are completed on-line and can be tracked accordingly.
We have a benchmark system where we use locally developed benchmark tests (which are being revised to align with CCGPS) for grades 1-8 to monitor progress on the standards and to predict success on CRCT. (High school benchmarks for EOCTs are in the works.) The benchmark data is then loaded into Performance Matters for teacher to access and use the benchmark data. Usage reports are available in the program.
We use My Big Campus.
We use different software programs that track this information.
OAS data usage
We have access to seeing each teacher's usage. System requires designated grade level common benchmark assessments (Elementary 2 times a year, MS 3 times a year, HS 1 time semester--on block).
Web reports, classroom observations, follow-up trainings on Assessment, and PLC meetings
Classworks generates reports and reports are created from our paper/pencil district level benchmarks as well.
The Data Director solution provides a means for tracking tests and student data.
51

Teachers' access is tracked. Instructional Coaches can pull usage reports. We track benchmark data so it's easy to know who is using which assessments. Tracked through Safari data. Through our technology division Thinkgate Our teachers utilize a web based assessment tool to administer benchmarks and conduct results analysis. Using the TKES Electronic Platform for this tracking of use Performance Plus records scores The district data tool (Performance Plus) tracks usage. Our benchmarking system tracks users Number that access website plus we have individual requests from districts and respond as requested by providing all requested instructional material or resources. Administrative rights to the online website. Data Director is our benchmarking system. We also use it to create common assessments for each unit. Online reports OAS Via tracker Benchmark reports (AIMSweb, DIBELSnet, Academy of Reading and Math) Scores are shown in our data platform OAS questions have been used to update our benchmarks. When the benchmarks are given, we receive scores from each teacher.
52

Benchmarks are aligned to standards and administered online through SchoolNet/IDMS. Data Director
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Principals track use of benchmarks and data. Benchmark testing is scheduled and monitored by instructional coaches. Teachers are responsible for data analysis by content, and monitored through administration. As administrator, I can log in to see who has accessed data. Academic coaches disaggregate data and share with teachers. Academic coaches The district utilizes Scantron Achievement Series. Administrators pull reports from Classworks to view usage and success. We are able to monitor administration and scoring of district-wide benchmark assessments. District collaborative meetings As part of the MDC training I will go into classes and observe the use of the lessons. School curriculum coordinators track who has accessed these materials. The elementary standards-based report cards are currently implemented system-wide. School-level academic coaches monitor these materials All teachers have access... Administrative visits At the school level, we collect data. Use of Edusoft, face-to-face meetings to review data and staff tracking.
53

We scan results and disaggregate the data. Professional development and lesson plans review As teachers input data, we can tell who has given the assessments. Our Learning Support Specialists can monitor data and accessibility as necessary but at least bimonthly. While I do not have a formal tracking method, I work directly in schools and have seen teachers using these resources on a consistent basis. Principals monitor through software. Teachers are required to pull their student data regarding benchmarks from Thinkgate and the administration meets with them by grade level and subject for a review of the data. Benchmark data is tracked at system level. We meet weekly and share. Follow up on use of common assessments to match CCGPS units written by our teachers Teachers have a schedule for benchmarks (k-8) and unit benchmarks (9-12). We do district benchmarks and review them with all staff members. We also use other informal inventories to drive instruction Monitoring of assessment programs reports and monitoring of teacher data analysis Yes, data meeting are conducted with each school following assessment. Collection of data
Other results Our MAP assessment is given three times a year - beginning, middle, and end of year. We have school.net and are entering our curriculum into the program. We complete assessments through OAS, Acuity and Thinkgate
54

NWEA reports Reports Shared implementation Douglas County administers Common District Assessments at the end of each unit. Same answer as # 11 This is a no....but I want to write a comment...we DO NOT NEED ANYTHING ELSE TO TRACK Data drills All ELA must participate
55

Who developed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE

46.8%

96

Your district

69.3%

142

Your district's RESA

22.4%

46

Another Georgia LEA or RESA

8.8%

18

Another state or an LEA from outside of Georgia

9.8%

20

Other (please specify)

22.4%

46

Answered question

205

Skipped question

68

Comments organized by theme
Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or other partner
Consultant- Karen Bailey

NWEA

Using Thinkgate

NWEA and GaDOE for OAS

Wireless Generation, Thinkgate, USA Test Prep, Triumph Learning, Ren. Learning, Study Island

CTB-McGraw Hill (Math assessments)

NWEA

Private industry

Classworks

56

Part of the partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation Software company Consultants provided by the district Triumph Learning, PARCC, OAS Classworks curriculum specialists Vendor Pearson OAS NWEA and Georgia Charter Schools Association Shell Writers and experts of CCSS document Vendor /staff Vendor Thinkgate and other software Formative Assessments for Learning Data Director Online resources purchased by our district and OAS Used Data Director for some of the benchmarks Combination of Data Director test bank matched standards and district developed assessment A company Private publishers In collaboration/partnership with Pearson
57

Instructional material or resource was developed by staff at the school, district and/or RESA level Both RESA and teachers within the RESA Each district on their own Academic coaches are supporting teachers by creating these resources. Teachers Elem--District pulled questions from School Net, MS and HS teacher made from multiple sources, including School Net Academic coaches via purchased software Our district is modifying information from the State NWGa RESA Our teachers Instructional material or resource was developed by other states or national websites We are going on to PARCC sites to pull samples which help to understand how students may have to respond to common core questions. Internet sites PARCC Other responses Outside Vendor, RESA District Race to the Top
58

Textbooks

Have you offered this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

29.8%

76

No

70.2%

179

Answered question

255

Skipped question

18

How can educators access this instructional material or support? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE website

32.9%

26

District website

16.5%

13

RESA website

15.2%

12

Online data sharing tool (e.g., Dropbox)

19.0%

15

Other (please specify)

64.6%

51

Answered question

79

Skipped question

194

Comments organized by theme
Staff distributed physical copies and/or provided the instructional material or support via technical assistance.

District and school level office

Professional learning

59

Hard copies School bookrooms/classrooms Books were purchased for individual teachers. Classroom sets of textbooks We have provided some copies of the ELA extended texts to schools. We have purchased hard copies of materials for teachers. Housed at schools Grades 3, 4, 5 received new CCGPS aligned textbooks for Social Studies High School Coordinate Algebra textbook and teacher resources Supplemental math workbooks for teachers and students in Coordinate Algebra only Individual schools/bookrooms Hard copies of materials were distributed to teachers in grades 6 - 9. We have not found a comparable product for K-5. Hard copies provided to classrooms and the publisher website These are available at schools who chose to purchase textbooks. Our decision making is sitebased. All full aligned textbooks were purchased and required to be used in the classroom.
Teachers can access the instructional material or support online or via a locally shared drive Intranet, Internet, texts Textbook websites and online textbook resources for teachers and students Web-based Via internet
60

Online Curriculum eDragon Moodle
Textbooks will be purchased according to local textbook adoption policies RESA Book Evaluation Opportunity Textbook review Our RESA is hosting a textbook look-see in Math. Preparing for an instructional fair after Christmas We follow textbook adoption cycle. I offered a textbook adoption session where teachers reviewed CCGPS standards and evaluated textbooks using state textbook adoption resources. Textbook fair at Okefenokee RESA Provided opportunity for textbook review at RESA Textbooks were ordered by local district with textbook funds.
Other responses LEAs can use textbook resources from a vendor of their choice to use as a supplement to other available resources form the GaDOE and RESAs. System are piloting a math textbook for use with CCGPS; utilizing other web-based programs as well Our district purchased the ELA books that aligned to the DOE ELA units. Most are not Student textbooks Textbooks and novels Textbook company
61

Commercial resources I have no knowledge of this. We are using a variety of resources to support CCGPS. Not textbooks, but supplemental instruction materials. We are currently reviewing Math K-12 textbook samples. N/A Coach workbooks We are trying to be creative...we did not get any additional resources from the State to purchase resources for all of these new units. There were no new textbook adoptions during my tenure of two months; most resources are not fully aligned. Textbook presentations, conferences and consultants For our mathematics program, the district has purchased additional professional development and instructional support from the textbook vendor. Textbooks purchased this year
62

Do you have a method for tracking who has accessed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

38.0%

30

No

62.0%

49

Answered question

79

Skipped question

194

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings
Sign Out Sheets

Materials are checked out to teachers.

System personnel attending signed in.

Access is tracked online
We have the capability to print usage reports.
Hallconnect
For mathematics, the district utilizes Carnegie mathematics in grades 6-12. As a part of the math program, we are provided with weekly electronic status reports of student and teacher usage, as well as student progress.

Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance
Textbook inventory
Tracking is done by the principal
We assign textbooks.

63

Textbook adoption committee Academic coaches and Curriculum Director Assigned to particular individuals Textbooks were distributed to teachers. Grade level meetings Collaborative planning records Media specialists Academic Coach Representatives from each system attended. Also used textbook guidelines from DOE. Curriculum director approves what is ordered. Documented lesson plans. Media Center Lesson Plans and Curriculum Maps as well as Instructional Observations The hard copies are in the classrooms. Evidence of their use is found in lesson plans and classroom visits. Teacher committee and redelivery
Other resources Student issued textbooks Unit and Lesson Plan Audits An alignment has been posted in Safari for different courses. Collaboratives Required We have planned a workshop of vendors for the spring.
64

Who developed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE

38.0%

30

Your district

27.8%

22

Your district's RESA

16.5%

13

Another Georgia LEA or RESA

7.6%

6

Another state or an LEA from outside of

5.1%

4

Georgia

Other (please specify)

55.7%

44

Answered question

79

Skipped question

194

Comments organized by theme
Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or partner
Purchased resources

Publishers; GADOE recommendations

Publishers

College Board

Textbook companies

Textbook resources

Vendor

Publishing company

Textbook companies

65

Text companies Textbook company Textbook company Glencoe Novels and texts produced by publishers Textbook companies and other online agents Different companies have created these materials. Textbook company Textbook company Prentice Hall Commercial Resources Purchased from a company Carnegie Textbook companies Publisher Textbook Publishers Publishing companies Triumph (I think) Various textbook vendors Different companies, etc State-approved textbook list Textbook company
66

Carnegie Textbook company - school based decision on purchase Publisher Pearson Either textbook companies, technology software tools or in-house. Most text do not fully align. Ordered what was in GaDOE units Textbook consultants Instructional material or resource was developed by staff at the school, d istrict and/or RESA level Academic coaches will support teachers by creating these Other responses Textbooks and leveled readers Aligned textbooks I have no knowledge of this. See comment above. N/A
67

Supplemental Resources

Have you offered this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

71.3%

181

No

28.7%

73

Answered question

254

Skipped question

19

How can educators access this instructional material or support? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE website

44.7%

80

District website

26.8%

48

RESA website

17.9%

32

Online data sharing tool (e.g., Dropbox)

33.0%

59

Other (please specify)

50.3%

90

Answered question

179

Skipped question

94

Comments organized by theme
Staff distributed physical copies, encouraged teachers and other instructional staff to share resources, and/or provided the instructional material or support via technical assistance.
Trade books/resources in classrooms and media center
At school sites

68

Utilized in system-wide trainings Math workbooks were delivered to high schools for Coordinate Algebra. We bought them. We are a recipient of the Striving Reader Grant and purchased reading texts across the system with varying Lexiles. Hard copy We have made "extended text" purchases. Distributed to schools Teacher share The district purchased supplemental reading materials for schools. School instructional coaches Extended and short texts were purchased for individual teachers, K-12. Purchased materials Schools purchased supplemental materials. Hard copies Sharing among schools Reading materials were purchased for individual schools. We have purchased hard copies of these materials for teachers. Curriculum meetings Housed at schools Purchased fiction and nonfiction literature to supplement the units K-12 purchase of 2-4 novels per grade to support Frameworks on GaDOE website
69

Elem-schools purchased books in Frameworks lessons, MS-E-readers Pass items among teachers/share PLC meetings and Vertical Planning Days Purchased class sets Emails, print copies Directly at the schools Hard copies of materials We encourage the schools in our districts to share their resources. Purchased novels provided for reading and ELA. Although the entire book may not align well, the excerpts we use are a fit. Books were purchased for key personnel Supplemental resources are purchased and distributed to teachers; also some resources are available via internet. Manual/training disc Individual schools/bookrooms Resources shared with districts Purchase of novel sets On site Purchase book, trainings Class sets of extended texts to use with the DOE units were provided to each teacher Forwarded emails to various contact lists Schools have purchased extended texts that the state sample units were based upon.
70

Hard copies were given to math coaches and the teachers use them on a check-out basis. We have only found products for grades K-5. Resources acquired through networking Purchased books for classrooms In their buildings Available at the school level Housed at individual schools Materials already available within our district or purchased for CCGPS implementation We have provided all materials that teachers request for primary and supplementary reading. Weekly meetings and conferences Materials given to teachers Teachers were made aware of primary source documents and any CC reading lists. Purchased Novels Classroom sets of materials located in classroom. We purchased most of the texts suggested in the ELA unit. We purchased all texts listed in DOE frameworks for Reading and Math in K-5 using RT3 funds. Book rooms Supplemental texts, trade books Supplemental readings were compiled by the district's Media Specialists per grade level and purchases were made as needed Purchased books and conferences LEA purchased materials Additional Software and supplemental books have been purchased.
71

Teachers were made aware of primary source documents and any CC reading lists. Supplemental readings have been ordered with Title funds Novels purchased etc. Purchased books, MyOn readers We have purchased the supplemental material selected by our curriculum teams
Teachers can access the instructional material or support online or via a locally shared drive Online and through consultant Teacher generated, teacher searches Intra-district resource (shared media drive) Task Stream Individual schools' "G" drive Web links Direct service, email Supplemental resources are on our Google Site. Through shared network drive, also schools are purchasing texts for ELA Teachers' access to internet Districts rewriting ELA units Participating in instructional materials fair Staff members are planning and deciding on items to use. We are modifying as needed since we do not have all of the text the unit mentions.
72

Other responses Vendor products are used to support implementation along with LEA, GaDOE, and RESA developed resources Various publishers - Heinemann, Scholastic COACH Workbooks Supplemental resources from other states Educational materials from vendors Several sources are available to our teachers Decisions around acquiring the instructional materials or resource are still being made GaDOE Webinars Various websites and supplemental books

Do you have a method for tracking who has accessed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

36.9%

66

No

63.1%

113

Answered question

179

Skipped question

94

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings
Check out procedures

Media center check out

73

Media Center Through library checkout, evaluation of instructional units, and online data These were ordered by the school improvement specialist in each building. They have a record of who received the books. We are still adding to this collection. We do not have math texts that are aligned the CCGPS. However, we do have some supplemental resources in some grades and contents that are aligned to the CCGPS. Examples of these would be workbooks from Triumph Learning and companies like them. These are given to the appropriate classrooms. Each school issues extended texts to specific teachers/classrooms. Inventories All teachers received the books. Sign-in sheet These materials are checked out to teachers. Inventoried at school level - teachers check these materials out through the media center. We can track the distribution of supplemental resources purchased but not internet resources. Check out system at each school Sing-in sheets from a regional meeting addressing the resource Distributed by grade level Purchase Requests, Lesson Plans, Media Center database, Instructional Observations We record the number of attendees at our workshops. Monitored at the school site # of users are tracked Through our media centers' Destiny Program Items are barcoded and checked out through media center. In-school tracking forms
74

Access is tracked online Online statistics report provided by intranet Schoolnet Report generator My Big Campus We electronically track who accesses the district curriculum resources. Partially, with our technology division Computer tracker Online tracking
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Principal Classroom walk-through observations Our reading teachers are using them for instruction. We see them referenced in lesson plans and used during observations. Use of resource in collaboratively designed lessons Academic Coaches Team meeting minutes, leadership team meetings, faculty meetings Teachers Lesson Plans reflect the supplemental materials being utilized Lesson plans, book inventory, classroom observations ELA teachers are using these resources in classroom. Documented in their lesson plans Lesson Plans
75

Lesson plans PLC meetings, Unit and Lesson Plan Audits Academic Coach Administrative staff documentation Literacy coaches monitor instruction. Book studies; discussions; prof lrng Documented lesson plans Through unit plans, lesson plans, and the check-out system. Grade group meetings and instructional coaches We know which grade levels and which teachers are using specific materials from lesson plans. Classroom observations Our professional learning model is job-embedded and we have training for each grade level once each semester. All teachers were given copies that related to their grade-level standards/units. Lesson plans include description of materials used. Lesson plans and common assessments Lesson Plans, data collection on common assessments that required these texts, etc. Instructional coaches meet each week to plan instruction with the teachers and then goes in the classroom to observe lessons and offer feedback to the teacher.
76

Access is tracked through financial documentation of purchases. Invoices and POs/ Media Logs Purchase orders School Purchase Orders and master schedules Purchase orders Other responses We try to all use the same material. These materials have been provided for all teachers. NWEA and GCSA All teachers have the required readings for ELA Required use
77

Who developed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE

50.8%

91

Your district

49.2%

88

Your district's RESA

22.9%

41

Another Georgia LEA or RESA

12.3%

22

Another state or an LEA from outside of Georgia

10.6%

19

Other (please specify)

37.4%

67

Answered question

179

Skipped question

94

Comments organized by theme
Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or partner
CCSS writers and writers associated with CCSS approved sites are frequently noted in GaDOE webinars and videos and their articles and/or publications provided to participants.

Authors & Publishers

Private publishers

Publishers

Published Resource

Vendor

Textbook publishers; internet resources; digital content

What we currently are using was purchased from companies.

78

Vendor Various publishers Publishing company Online third party agents Novels aligned to CCGPS Teacher collaborative groups Different companies have developed these resources. Authors Purchased Used resources from SVMI, Illustrative Mathematics, etc. Supplemental Readings through Galileo, Lexiles in Action, Purchased Non-fiction reading material (Time for Kids, Science Weekly, etc.) Published books Published print material Published hard copies of materials Authors: for example, Lucy Calkins, presented at GACIS and has written a book about the Common Core. Noted authors NWEA Expeditionary Learning Schools IRA, Teachers College Reading & Writing Project, Common Core Curriculum Maps Commercial vendors Purchased from Renaissance Learning, Achieve 3000, Follett, Barnes and Noble Published book
79

Company Other states implementing CCGPS Book publishers and Follette Extended Reading Texts Commercially developed Publisher Publishers Textbook authors and presentations at conferences
Instructional material or resource was developed by staff at the school, district and/or RESA level Grade levels revising units as needed Academic coaches will support teachers by creating these resources Teachers Curriculum teams at the district and school level. Teachers We have held many sessions on close reading and how to implement them in the classroom. Our district has edited the units from the state. Me Teachers
Other responses Leveled readers Purchased supplemental resources
80

A variety of sources Online resources Various internet sources We purchased novels etc. They were selected through the GaDOE units. We used recommended extended texts listed on the GaDOE website. Thinkfinity.org Other school systems Purchased Frameworks online at GaDOE Found resources from attending workshops and reading Varied resources Internet resources developed by various persons PARCC consortia; SHELL assessment group CC Website Some are NWGa RESA-created and some are from other states' websites (such as New York) Various sources - school based decision making We have purchased materials or teachers have located them on their own or pulled from materials that they have access to. Commoncore.org
81

Digital Materials

Have you offered this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

60.3%

152

No

39.7%

100

Answered question

252

Skipped question

21

How can educators access this instructional material or support? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE website

47.4%

72

District website

30.9%

47

RESA website

19.7%

30

Online data sharing tool (e.g., Dropbox)

39.5%

60

Other (please specify)

32.2%

49

Answered question

152

Skipped question

121

Comments organized by theme
Teachers can access the instructional material or support online or via a locally shared drive

Georgia's Learning Village Teacher Portal

GeorgiaStandards.Org

82

OAS Online Intranet Drop Box Internet Internet Via internet e2020; digital content to which the district has subscribed; SLDS Teacher Resource Link Web We are utilizing digital lessons from a variety of sites such as UnitedStreaming, BrainPop, etc. Edmodo Various websites Internet sites Online software TaskStream Apps for Ipads Publisher website Direct website for Teaching Channel, LearnZillion, Annenberg Learning, Engage NY Vague question. Yes, teacher review lessons available digitally (electronically). Web School network Livebinder and Its learning
83

Online portal Free Apps and online programs such as LearnZillion Online Curriculum Virtual School Resources Task Stream Company website Available at all websites as cited
Vendor, consultant, and/or partner provided instructional material or support. Carnegie Cognitive Tutor software and Mathia software Vendors Vendor We have purchase some digital materials and teachers have access online to materials. Publisher developed Web based and site based software Independent vendors
Staff distributed physical copies and/or provided the instructional material or support via technical assistance. Somewhat through e-book purchase housed in media center Our Tech department goes out to schools regularly and is currently offering a cyber-bullying class online. On-site professional development School level
84

Other responses Other systems All teachers in the Okefenokee RESA have access. I have no knowledge of this. We are using whatever we can to make this work Digital - if you mean software, please see previous answers. Smartboard lessons Our in-house developed materials

Do you have a method for tracking who has accessed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

32.9%

50

No

67.1%

102

Answered question

152

Skipped question

121

Comments organized by theme

Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings

Check out

Teacher documentation of use and sign-in

Usage reports as well as progress reports

85

Access is tracked online Google Analytics provides a reporting of the GaDOE CCGPS site usage, including page views and location sites. The Learning Village teacher portal engages a reporting tool for recording participant usage. Teacher editions for mathematics unit frameworks at grades 6-12, along with digital lessons and activities purchased via the Dana Center to support the teaching of CCGPS Advanced Mathematical Decision Making and lessons and activities purchased from North Carolina State University to support the teaching of CCGPS Mathematics of Industry and Government, are posted in the Learning Village portal. Google Analytics Internet Online statistics report Reports from digital data base Report generator Tracking reports as part of the management tool; feedback from DOE about SLDS Usage report My Big Campus PD360m Professional Learning web site We are able to track which students and teachers access the sites. Software tracks teacher use Some of the software can be tracked Classworks provides digital lessons/activities and tracks usage and progress We electronically track who accesses our district's password protected curriculum resources. Internal tracking Safari tracking Built into the resource
86

Some of our digital resources track student and teacher usage. Its Learning Access is given to participants in training and Livebinder public access Computer tracking Data is collected through Classworks and E2020. We have the ability to count the number of hits on the websites. We have the capability of printing usage reports. Through our LMS system of Blackboard Accessible through IDMS/SchoolNet and therefore usage reports may be obtained. Required; online tracking available
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Embedded in the content Classroom walkthrough observations Curriculum Director and Academic Coach Documented in the units and lesson plans. Done by administration Our instructional Coaches work closely with our teachers to support the incorporation of these tools. Professional Development and lesson plans review Instructional Coaches monitor lesson plans and do classroom observations. We have offered workshops and institutes and keep records of the number of attendees Monitored at school sites These resources are available to all teachers.
87

We know if teachers check out digital materials from the media center and we monitor lesson plans. Included in grade/subject level lesson plans Professional Learning opportunities for all teachers in Reading, ELA and Mathematics Lesson Plans, Data collection, Log-ins on Task Stream Other responses Tracking of usage is a part of the Carnegie program See # 11--but still does not accurately reflect number of site visitors Digital - if you mean software, please see previous answers. Access that information through the vendor's program Collaboratives
88

Who developed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE

53.9%

82

Your district

42.1%

64

Your district's RESA

21.1%

32

Another Georgia LEA or RESA

14.5%

22

Another state or an LEA from outside of Georgia

16.4%

25

Other (please specify)

32.9%

50

Answered question

152

Skipped question

121

Comments organized by theme
Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or partner
Charles A. Dana Center, University of Texas at Austin; North Carolina State University

Various online resources are utilized

PARCC website, LearnZillion, teaching channel, Mimeo, Promethean

Private companies

Teacher searches of internet

Vendor

Pearson

Publisher

Vendor

89

Compass learning Online third party vendors Variety of websites and e-books Other systems PD360 Consultants Different companies developed these resources. Software company Purchased content Classworks App developers Carnegie The cyber-bullying materials come from a vendor. Partners Vendor Expeditionary Learning Schools Teaching Channel, LearnZillion, Annenberg Dan Meyer Vendor Various digital product vendors Vendor Private vendor Online such as Shell, Learnzillion, NCTM, Illuminations
90

Acquired through our Instructional Technologists (ETC) Carnegie Classworks and E2020 Commercially developed Some are purchased or located on web resources. Pearson Publisher Company External vendors Resources available through vendors and textbook publishers Independent vendors
Instructional material or resource was developed by staff at the school, district and/or RESA level Curriculum teams and individual teachers Our teachers use available smart board lessons and have created many additional lessons.
Other responses Purchased We have used many resources from various states and agencies for instructional purposes. I have no knowledge of this. See comment above Digital - if you mean software, please see previous answers. These materials are primarily accessed via the internet - Ex. Teachers Pay Teachers
91

Other Instructional Materials or Resources

Have you offered this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

40.1%

101

No

59.9%

151

Answered question

252

Skipped question

21

Comments organized by theme Curriculum exemplars, resource lists, textbooks and/or formative assessments Math/ELA Units and Math/ELA Benchmarks

Lesson videos, sample materials, etc.

Pacing Guide from an outside vendor

Time and money. We have offered release time during the day to work the units. Teachers have also been offered stipends to work after hours to develop assessments that correspond to the CCGPS.

We have a small group of teachers who have revised the units with the support of instructional leaders. Supplemental materials they developed are housed on our system database. They have developed resources to assist with writing, vocabulary development, comprehension, some basic formative assessments (very minimal), etc.

We have allowed teachers to have planning days to gather resources, plan and refine lessons as well as compile assessment materials.

When writing each unit of study, additional resources were added to enhance the units and extend the lessons.

We are in the process of unpacking and prioritizing standards as well as developing a timeline for revising the state units to better meet our needs.

92

Administrators have been provided a copy of "Rigorous Curriculum Design" as a resource to use in working with teachers on CCGPS implementation - the administrative team in our system have used the book to develop a map and timeline for curricular and instructional work aligned to CCGPS. Trade books were selected by the math RESA consultant several years ago and purchased by our district to incorporate reading and math skills. I am creating a resource paper to add things as I find them and send them out to my teachers. Materials that were already available in addition to all the materials on GaDOE website and many other online resources. Created helpful resource document for teachers to have independent study Teacher-built Common Core learning targets (which could be categorized as formative assessment) District-wide collaboration made available to develop new lesson plans and benchmark assessments. Benchmark assessments items with more rigor (DOK 3 and 4) were developed. Book sets for increasing text complexity and amount of nonfiction texts available Since most resources are not fully aligned, teachers, academic coaches and the nwresa specialists have supported the gathering of necessary resources. Also our TRC (teacher resource center) provides common core resources they developed to support CCGPS lessons. Introduction to Formative Assessment Lessons (FALs)
Supplemental Resources Supplemental Workbooks BBY Math resources Supplemental items Each school received a budgeted amount for the purpose of purchasing resources specific to effective CCGPS implementation.
93

Many of the teachers in the system have been offered technology resources for delivery purposes of instruction. Striving Reader funds were used to purchase some of these materials. FDRESA has offered some training to some of our teachers on Close Reading. Manipulatives, printed resources, consumable materials, equipment, and supplemental materials have been provided through MSP and TAH funding and programming. Math manipulatives, leveled readers, etc aligned to CCGPS We have also allowed teachers to request other instructional materials they believe would be beneficial and would support the units. The school district has purchased the supplemental literature books for ELA and Mathematics for every classroom teacher in grades K-5. Purchased resources for example assessment questions, Differentiated Best of Math Exemplars CCGPS supplemental resources are available. Exemplars, Singapore Math, NCTM Resources, NumberTalk,etc... We have purchased supplemental materials for the implementation of the CCGPS as well as materials and resources listed in the new frameworks. Teachers have been provided various supplemental resources upon request including technology and other teaching aids. Flip Charts of CCGPS, literary selections for students We provided novels and informational booklets for extended texts in ELA. Math manipulatives, MANY professional learning opportunities in addition to those offered by the DOE
Digital resources and/or online tools and resources We have purchase some aligned curriculum software. Various and sundry, from magazine articles to online postings, blogs, etc.
94

Suggested links for free CCGPS video lessons and other digital resources that have not been developed by LEAs or other RESAs
We have gotten rid of a technology software resource and purchased another that is more closely aligned with CCGPS but more particularly aligned with the higher level of thinking required by CC.
E-readers and subscriptions to reading materials
Close Reading Strategies support from the Common Core Institute's Close Reading Conference, analysis of prototypes from Parcconline.org, Discussion of performance tasks from Corestandards.org, Discussion of student work samples from Corestandards.org
Websites from other states implementing CCGPS through their state website
Websites
Sharing of many online educational resources/programs
Online e-book
Technical assistance from RESAs and/or consultants We have consistently used our RESA for help with CCGPS implementation and have monthly scheduled visits with Math and Literacy consultants from RESA. Our district is participating in the Math District Collaboration (MDC) and the Literacy District Collaboration (LDC). We have also purchased needed resources for K-12 to help with the implementation.
RESA personnel
CCGPS notebooks, framework notebooks, training from RESA
We currently do not have systems involved in a LDC cohort; however, our RESA will be able to offer the resource/training beginning March 2013.
At this time we have only provided the coach series math books for teachers, as well as free resources that we are able to obtain. Our board was not ready to purchase new curricular materials while the kinks of common core are being worked out.
We have conducted workshops and presentations in our RESA district schools.
95

CCGPS Content Literacy Collaborative at NEGA RESA
Consultant who shared CCGPS, sample units from another county, resources from peers, online resources, resource books purchased to supplement CCGPS topics
We have hired content area consultants to help us.
Professional learning and professional learning communities
ELA Consortium for Assistant Principals for Instruction and Academic Coaches
AR reading and math, training with consultants and RESA consultants
PL opportunities are provided during planning time.
The preparation for the roll out of CCGPS began last year in our district. We were trained on Saturdays utilizing the Train the Trainer model. Administration at the district and school level was trained as an overview and teachers more in depth training.
We have provided teachers with common core aligned technology programs and training through Lexia, Reading Plus, Symphony and Ascend Math.
Summer 2012, teachers participated in CCGPS Summit wherein they received training from MRESA on CCGPS implementation. Subsequently, the district developed and facilitated Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment alignment training fall 2012 to K-12 teachers to unpack current CCGPS units, determine the DOK levels, and align instruction and assessment accordingly. The district has scheduled additional training to unpack standards by unit and completed the aforementioned work. In addition, teachers will participate in training in early spring to develop CCGPS-aligned items for the district's assessment bank. Summer 2013, teachers will participate in another CCGPS summit.
Yes, we have trained asst. principals, principals, district administrators, and teams of teachers on where to find "PARCC-like" resources. Our local board of education has been given an update on what our system is doing to implement CCGPS and how we are preparing for PARCC.
Number talks training
We hired a group to provide additional training for our system
District training developed in conjunction with RESA for professional development: CCELA, CCmath, CC Literacy (informational texts)
96

We have Unit Precision Review work sessions for each grade level. This is an eight county collaboration for the teachers to dig into each of the units and divide and conquer.
We have established "Lab Classrooms" for teachers and administrators to see CCGPS practice in action. We have a number of designated teachers/classrooms across the district to model classroom practice and strategies.
We will deliver to our districts anything that they ask us to do. Last year we had a series of sessions to introduce the CCGPS to ELA, Math, and Content teachers. This year, we continue those offerings and have added an observation and feedback component. We have added a Content Specialist.
Webinars that relate to CC and PD360 vignettes that depict materials or implementation
Professional development training via the WIDA standards
We have developed training materials on literacy strategies for content area teachers; close reading for K-8, and support for understanding/using the state ELA units K-8
Teacher workshops on understanding the standards and effective instructional practices to meet the standards
Karen Hess trained our teachers to develop performance assessments during our summer Depth of Knowledge (DOK) professional learning guided resource development workshops
Number Talks books for all K-5 math teachers
Training materials and professional development
Additional Professional Learning on integrating technology use for creating more student-driven performance based lessons and activities. PL and new resources for improving literacy standards.
Collab development of 5 step protocol, vertical alignment of standards on specific topics, modeling
Collaboration among teachers, vertical meetings, etc. to share ideas, plans, units, lesson plans
Math Endorsement and CCGPS professional learning
Teachers and administrators have access to PD360 for PL to support instruction.
97

Combination of supports Instructional calendars, exemplar lesson plans, staff development resources Supplemental digital and non-digital resources Point, school ext. Teacher created materials, other states, and the web Go Math, webinars from other states that have rolled out CCSS, and materials that are located or purchased as needed Websites and resources and/or materials from other states A variety of resource books and websites. We provided professional learning, informational texts, sample units, etc.
Other responses Differentiated instruction and Literacy in the content areas Pertinent to teaching strategies/skills A Through Staff planning Our district has offered a myriad of supports for teachers. I am not in charge of curriculum materials, however, so I am hesitant to comment. Pilot project for DOE online resources - CCGPS We are customer-driven based on individual and district requests so we respond based on needs that can be communicated to RESA consultants individually via phone/email or are expressed through job-alike meetings such as our routine TLC Meetings (Curriculum Directors). N/A The GaDOE CCGPS curriculum team recognizes that much of our work must be aimed at RESA, district, and school leadership, leaders who are dedicated to providing the professional learning appropriate to educators in their region and/or district. With that in mind, the CCGPS team has developed and managed RESA specialist and district supervisor wikis to ensure that required
98

documents can be found in a central location. The team reports on upcoming events and additional resources via the monthly curriculum director newsletter and webinar, with announcements, newsletters, and reminders distributed through the appropriate list serves, and during the monthly ELA/Mathematics Supervisor CCGPS Implementation webinars. In the past few months, guest speakers have focused on CCGPS available assessment resources, successful strategies for teaching English Learners in CCGPS classrooms, and evidenced-based CCGPS instructional practices that empower all students for success. RESA specialists have recently been trained in the use of a CCGPS quality review rubric to evaluate the alignment of teacher and district developed resources to CCGPS. The specialists will be able to facilitate training for all interested district and school leaders and educators. In May, district curriculum supervisors will be able to participate in Literacy or Mathematics Design Collaborative training which will subsequently be offered to educators across our state by RESA specialists. The training will provide educators with an additional instructional tool to be used in CCGPS classrooms.

How can educators access this instructional material or support? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE website

21.0%

21

District website

24.0%

24

RESA website

16.0%

16

Online data sharing tool (e.g., Dropbox)

30.0%

30

Other (please specify)

52.0%

52

Answered question

100

Skipped question

173

Comments organized by theme
Educators can access the instructional material or support online or via a locally shared drive
RESA & Curriculum Director wikis

Online

99

Drop Box GaDOE Wiki, Edmodo Various sites Software corestandards.org; parcconline.org They have been given links to sites for practice items and model content frameworks which provide further clarification of common core and PARCC. Direct services, email Websites Shared through email to districts and/or participants Write to Learn - implementing this across curriculum and grade levels School network A variety of websites Shell MAP site
Staff distributed physical copies and/or provided the instructional material or support via technical assistance E-mail Monthly visits with RESA consultants and materials checked out through media center. District Training Principals The workshop on Close Reading was done with many of the teachers in one of the buildings; the plan is to deliver this information to another one of the buildings next semester. District Academic Coaches
100

Face to face trainings as well as online trainings and resources During job-embedded professional development Gates Foundation Visiting designated classrooms for observation and dialogue regarding model practices. Teacher release time to attend trainings/workshops Contact consultant Contact with ELA RESA Consultant Email, classroom visits PLCs In person Published Workbooks Resources purchased to supplement CCGPS topics, online resources Hard copy Resources have been provided directly to participating teachers and schools Classroom and book room At schools These books are being shipped directly to classroom teachers. Purchased materials provided to teachers Provided directly to teachers as needed Purchased Checkout from school media center Copy of book provided to administrators
101

Other responses Through use of the number talks website and book Some are hard copies & some are shared via our intranet. MARS program, SHELL Via academic coaches and/or "G" drive I have no knowledge of this. N/A Outside vendor The Teacher Resource Center N/A N/A

Do you have a method for tracking who has accessed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

42%

42

No

58%

58

Answered question

100

Skipped question

173

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings

Wiki membership rosters; attendance rosters

Sign-in sheets; check out logs, POs and materials distribution.

102

Resources checked out through media center We have sign-in sheets of participants that attended the training. Individual checkout Sign-in sheets and documentation Sign-in sheets Workshop attendees sign-in sheet. Records of attendance in our sessions Sign-in sheets We have records of the number of attendees Registration Sign-in sheets, minutes, and agenda's from PLCs
Access is tracked online Module creator must be requested Invitations and acceptances to Drop Box Schoolnet Report generator Reports Lab classrooms track visitors. Software tracking We can determine how many hits we have on our website but are not yet able to determine which teachers have accessed the units and performance assessments. Website (as noted earlier) We have the ability to count the number of hits. Our own system tech people Calendar, Emails
103

Usage reports in the PD360 platform
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Assigned Classroom walkthrough observations Unit and lesson plan Audits Administration Curriculum director Lesson plans Lesson Plans, Instructional Observations, PLCs, and eventually we will have improvement in writing scores. Classroom monitoring and data reviews. Collaboratives We have the units for each subject and grade level. Monthly leadership meetings are conducted - the contents of the book are referenced during these meetings.
Other responses Materials are either checked out or tracked digitally. Sign-in sheets; principals ensure everyone attends; Destiny N/A N/A
104

Who developed this instructional material or resource?

Response Percent Response Count

GaDOE

20.0%

20

Your district

44.0%

44

Your district's RESA

26.0%

26

Another Georgia LEA or RESA

10.0%

10

Another state or an LEA from outside of Georgia

12.0%

12

Other (please specify)

46.0%

46

Answered question

100

Skipped question

173

Comments organized by theme
Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or partner
Achieve; Mathematics Design Collaborative; Literacy Design Collaborative

Publishing Companies

Consultants and Renaissance Learning

Distributors of educational resources

This information was developed by other people

e.g. The Teaching Channel, etc...

A software company

Achieve

Outside Consultant

105

Vendor GOSA and PARCC developed links to sites which support the transition to common core and PARCC. Publishers Publishers and resource providers Different companies developed some of the resources we have purchased. Leveled and Children's Book Publishers Company we contracted with to provide additional training Commercial Consultants Partners Vendor Educational resources from vendors Vendors Outside vendor Purchased Vendor Write to Learn Various developers Vendor School Improvement Network (PD360) Shell Centre
106

LDC - Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Instructional material or resource was developed by staff at the school, district, and/or RESA level Principals University collaborative Teachers Dr. Karen Hess and our Hall County teachers and Teaching and Learning central office staff NWGa RESA Teachers Teachers have worked on multiple planning days as grade level and subject level teams. We have also participated with RESA to refine units. Book lists were created by teachers with help from GaDOE suggested titles. District coaches Other responses See above Via internet I have no knowledge of this. N/A N/A
107

Section III: District Support for Educators
108

Webinars
Did you offer this method of training?
Yes No

Response Percent Response Count

66.7%

166

33.3%

83

Answered question

249

Skipped question

24

109

Who were the participants in this training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

ALL teachers in ALL subjects

40.1%

67

ALL teachers in core content subjects

34.1%

57

ALL math and ELA teachers

43.7%

73

Select group of teachers across ALL subjects

13.8%

23

Select group of teachers in core content subjects

9.6%

16

Select group of math and ELA teachers

15.0%

25

Instructional support staff (e.g., instructional

49.7%

83

coaches)

Administrators

51.5%

86

Other (please specify)

10.2%

17

Answered question

167

Skipped question

106

Comments organized by theme Specific staff Paraprofessionals Paraprofessionals Curriculum Directors Science, Social Studies and CTAE teachers (for literacy standards) Instructional coaches SS, Science and CTAE teachers who will be teaching Literacy Standards

110

Teacher Leaders Literacy for science, social studies, and technical subjects Teachers of social studies, history, science, technical subjects Various staff Varied Train the trainer in some systems Sometimes the training was by the "Train the Trainer" method Those teachers who chose to watch the video-taped sessions on the CCGPS. Varied based upon the subject of the professional learning Other responses We did not utilize webinars We would like to have trained all teachers however in a district of our size this is a massive task, we used train the trainers and had teachers and coaches redeliver and we know that this is not the best way to train. Did not use webinars. We provided face to face training.
111

Was this method of training required?

Response Percent Response Count

Not Required

19.8%

33

Required for ALL participants

72.5%

121

Required for SOME participants (please specify)

7.8%

13

Answered question

167

Skipped question

106

Comments organized by theme For teachers of certain subjects Required for math teachers and administrators

ALL ELA and Math

Math, ELA, Social Studies, Science, and teachers of technical subjects

When conducting specific training for subject area teachers

ELA and Math

112

Other responses It depends on the system/school. Trainers for each school and grade Paraprofessionals were not required to attend. Sixteen people participated and redelivered to faculty and staff. Highly recommended but not required Those systems that did not use the "Train the Trainer" method A specific number of staff members from each site were required to attend Selected by schools

Do you have a mechanism for tracking participation?

Response Percent Response Count

No

22.2%

37

Yes (please describe)

77.8%

130

Answered question

167

Skipped question

106

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings

Sign-In sheets

Attendance rosters

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

113

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Webinar sign-in sheets, professional learning logs Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in and forms that were completed by each school that trained. Sign-in sheets, PDExpress Sign-in sheets/Agendas Survey data collection and collection of sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Our RESA documentation of trainings through agendas and sign-ins and calendar entries. Instructional coaches had teachers sign-in and used the webinar as part of their professional learning. Sign-in sheets were tracked and contact hours awarded for their participation. Sign-in sheets
114

Sign-in Sheets We use sign-in sheets for each time webinars are viewed and when training is done within a group setting. We also purchased PD360 which offers tracking for PL that is individualized to support aspects of common core. Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sheets Sign-in Sheets Sign-in for participants On-site sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet documentation Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Registration Sign-in rosters Yes, sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets
115

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets PLC sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Each system has sign-in sheets. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Check Log-ins and teachers have to complete professional learning logs. Sign-in rosters Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets A sign-in sheet and required make up sessions if necessary Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sheets Attendance sheets Sign-in sheets Signed attendance sheets
116

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Signing into virtual Teaching and Learning Session Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sign-in sheets that were submitted to the district Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-In forms We have sign-in sheets from all training sessions. Sign-in sheets and PD Express software Sign-in sheets and rosters Sign-in sheets were kept by school level administration and verification attendance sheets were given to all participants. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets for participants.
117

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in and documentation of response to trainings Sign-in sheets at the school level Sign-in sheets and group mandatory participation in each school Sign-In Sheets Sign-in sheets as well as our online professional learning system Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Registration and sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets for each session. Sign-in sheets; questions documentations
Access is tracked online Google Analytics We use a web-based tracking system for professional development. Teacher log-in to webinar Logs PD360 Rosters and online registration LEA Professional Learning Tracking Tool; HRESA Professional Learning Tracking Tool Electronic registration system Online registrations
118

Online Professional Learning Registration Program (PLCAT), Sign-in sheets, minutes, and agendas from sessions Campus sign-in and PD participation entered into PD Planner.
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Via surveys Logs, plans, goal sheets Observing Teach backs to teams We are aware of which teachers attended the trainings. Participants on recordings Academic Coaches document School-level administrators via observations, lesson plans, etc. Observations and surveys The professional learning coordinator at each school tracks participation Only live participation. We cannot track those that view the recorded sessions. Survey and follow up activity Principals Principals required teachers to track their training and submit a Portfolio at the end of the year with the materials and resources they'd acquired during their training. Principals checked Portfolios and returned them to the teachers so they could use these resources for implementing CCGPS this year. We have data indicating number of attendees Principals handle tracking participation at the school level
119

Can see who was on the webinar. Received PLU credit for attending all of the webinars.

Other response Access database

What was the purpose of this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

Provide information about CCGPS

91.6%

153

Explain curriculum changes from GPS to CCGPS

87.4%

146

Explain assessment changes from GPS to CCGPS

75.4%

126

Explain implications for other subjects

56.3%

94

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc.

76.6%

128

to deliver new standards

Provide differentiated training based on

49.7%

83

educator need

Other (please specify)

1.8%

3

Answered question

167

Skipped question

106

Comments

We did not use webinars.

Make up sessions for teachers who missed the lectures.

Any updates from GADOE

120

Who delivered this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

State content area specialists

49.1%

82

RESA content area specialists

47.9%

80

District content area specialists

49.1%

82

School-based instructional coaches

42.5%

71

Teachers

25.1%

42

External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

26.3%

44

Other (please specify)

6.6%

11

Answered question

167

Skipped question

106

Comments organized by theme
Instructional material or resource was developed by a vendor, consultant and/or partner

Consultant

Outside Consultant

EMO

We are spending a lot of money bringing trainers to our district. We are using the professional development services from Pearson Learning.

Pearson content specialists

121

Other responses We did not use webinars. GADOE Webinars GaDOE webinars/broadcasts Principal and Assistant Principals Principals
122

Face-to-Face Training
Did you offer this method of training?
Yes No

Response Percent Response Count

91.1%

226

8.9%

22

Answered question

248

Skipped question

25

123

Who were the participants in this training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

ALL teachers in ALL subjects

32.7%

74

ALL teachers in core content subjects

31.0%

70

ALL math and ELA teachers

38.9%

88

Select group of teachers across ALL subjects

23.9%

54

Select group of teachers in core content subjects

22.1%

50

Select group of math and ELA teachers

29.6%

67

Instructional support staff (e.g., instructional

48.7%

110

coaches)

Administrators

50.0%

113

Other (please specify)

11.9%

27

Answered question

226

Skipped question

47

Comments organized by theme Specific staff

Literacy in science, social studies, and technical subjects

RESA ELA and mathematics specialists, district curriculum directors, ELA and mathematics supervisors. GaDOE colleagues in other divisions who impact teaching and learning, media specialists, school counselors, RT3 & SIG leadership team, parent organizations, higher education, ESOL teachers

All ELA Teachers

Math teachers who registered or who were in schools where we presented professional learning

124

Paraprofessionals 6-12 Science, Social Studies, and CTAE Social Studies teachers were included in the "Literacy" training. Paraprofessionals Math teachers For the Science, Social Studies, and technical subjects, the district utilized a train the trainer model. Each school sent a representative to receive the training and redelivered. As a part of the redelivery, the selected content area trainer provided sign-in and evaluation documentation. CTAE Teachers The CCGPS subject teachers, science and social studies and CTAE received specific training. Math teachers Science, social studies, CTAE teachers 6-12 K-5 math Teachers and Academic Coaches that registered for training in CCGPS and assisted individual systems with training of CCGPS ESOL and SPED teachers - Administrators had a brief recap of teacher training. Special education and EL teachers Select math and ELA teachers
Other responses Other core content subject-area teachers will receive this training in the spring. Several opportunities have been given so all groups above have been included in one or more training sessions. Train the trainer Sometimes the training was by the "Train the Trainer" method
125

I am more knowledgeable about elementary in our district. We included everyone in the training. Although administrators were encouraged to attend, very few came.
Each district worked differently. All of the above apply.
This varies by school, grade, and subject
NWGa offered a CCGPS Summer Conference for ELA and Math Teachers as well as Administrators
Literacy standards training for teachers

Was this method of training required?

Response Percent Response Count

Not Required

16.8%

38

Required for ALL participants

63.3%

143

Required for SOME participants (please specify)

19.9%

45

Answered question

226

Skipped question

47

Comments organized by theme Required for teacher leaders, trainers, administrators and instructional staff for certain subjects
Those identified to redeliver

Administrators

Math and ELA teachers and administrators required

Trainers for each school

We have used a combination of delivery mechanisms. Some support and training provided at local schools and some at district-designated locations. ELA and Math teachers have

126

participated in required training. Science, Social Studies, and CTAE teachers have participated in other support and training. School grade or content level representatives Sixteen participants attended and redelivered. Two sessions were for all certified employees in face to face training with consultant. The expectation was for every school to send teacher leaders to the various training sessions. Selected group of teachers from each area were trained. They redelivered the training at their school. Required for all ELA and math and some content, Special Ed and EL, and art, music, PE All ELA and Math, Istr support and admin Grade level representative Required for all ELA and Math teachers Administrators and academic teachers For core content teachers ELA and math and some core content teachers Professional Learning Coach, Instructional Specialist, Curriculum director and select teachers Content Area Teachers
Not required Voluntary Paraprofessionals have the option of attending. Some training dates were mandatory and some were voluntary.
127

Other responses It depends on the system/school. Teachers on PDP Budget constraints permitted the district to fund a number of teachers per grade level or course per school. Schools had the option to fund/send additional teachers. When PL was provided in schools, it was required for some teachers. Often middle schools would also ask for Connections teachers to be trained, but not always. Everyone was supposed to view webinars but only certain groups were invited to some of the "face to face" sessions due to space and time. Others had done the original GaDOE webinars School Systems selected who attended Only some participants were selected for initial training and redelivery was for all. Some were by train the trainer. Some were by the "Train the Trainer" method Requirements in each district were different. Required for all who attended Some training sessions were required; some were not. This varies by school, grade, and subject. In some sessions, participants were required to attend. Some sessions were optional. Varied by school and content needs Training by MGResa not required (support) and system level training required Select teachers A specific number from each site
128

Face-to-face were district driven with NWGa RESA responding to all requests Selected by schools Selected teachers We did not require some teachers in special areas to attend all trainings. For example; Reading Recovery teachers did not need to attend the math trainings.

Do you have a mechanism for tracking participation?

Response Percent Response Count

No

5.8%

13

Yes (please describe)

94.2%

213

Answered question

226

Skipped question

47

Comments organized by theme Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meeting
Attendance sign-in sheets

Rosters

Registrations through the RESA website

Sign-In Sheets

Attendance Sheets

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

129

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and registration by director of professional development. Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets; Survey Monkey monitoring for implementation Sign-in Sheets Sign-in sheets, professional development logs Sign-in sheets Teacher sign-in, in some cases stipends were issued. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and forms to complete when redelivered. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and RESA certification sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Agendas and sign-in sheets
130

Survey data collection and sign-in sheets Professional learning sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Attendance Sign-in sheets Professional Learning maintains attendance records and training surveys. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets, Eduphoria Sign-in sheets Calendar entries, RESA documentation such as agendas and sign-ins Instructional Coaches (ICs) track attendance with agendas, sign-in sheets, and follow up. Collaborative teams meet weekly in all of our schools. Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets at school level and records of academic coaches. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheets
131

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets were used for all training classes. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets are collected for district-level training. For training held at local schools, sign-in sheets were not always collected. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in logs and computer entry Sign-in sheets, implementation Sign-in sheets The use of sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets A sign-in sheet Registration
132

Sign-in sheet Registration Sign-in sheets Sign-in forms Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets PD Express and Sign-In Sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Track log-in sheets and completion of professional learning logs Sign-in rosters District level sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Evaluations from the sessions
133

Principals created lists of participants for us...because our resource teachers (PE, art, music, special education, EL, counselors, etc.) selected a grade level in which to associate...then in turn, at the district level, we created sign-in sheets based on who was expected to attend. Teacher sign-in and evaluations Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets All educators are required to sign-in at all trainings. Sign-in sheets Sign-In Sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet at the training and a follow up activity Sign-in sheets Attendance sheets Sign-in sheets and rosters. Registration data and sign-in sheets Records of attendance in sessions School sign-in sheets
134

I have rosters that participants sign. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Written documentation on Professional Learning logs and session sign-in sheets Sign-in Sheets Sign-in sheets Agendas and sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets We collected sign-in sheets from each session. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Meeting sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets RESA sign-in sheets, participation certificates Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets MGRESA and system sign-in sheets Participation
135

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets We used evaluations for every session as well as sign-in sheets/registrations and GaDOE reporting instruments as required for grant funding of common core. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets for PLU purposes Sign-in logs Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and electronic PLU system Sign-in sheets - also required assignments that were emailed or presented to groups Sign-in sheets that were submitted to the district Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Online registrations Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets. Sign-in sheets Sign-In forms We have sign-in sheets and PLU awards for participation.
136

Sign-in sheets and PD Express software Sign-in sheets and roster Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets For the Pearson trainings we have sign-in sheets to document participation. Sign-in sheets Sign-ins Attendance Sign-in documentation of response to participation Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-In Sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and PLU credits from RESA Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets; BOE staff also attended and noted who was/was not present. Registration and sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in logs
137

Access is tracked online For the RESA wide trainings, participants register through our website. School-based training participation is not tracked through our website but the numbers are recorded in our database. Participants register through RESA website. Sign-in sheets and through our on-line PL program PD Express and PD 360 for individualized PL. Web-based tracking system We track participation in the Common Core training sessions through our professional learning system, PDExpress Online registration The registration process on our RESA website kept track for the teachers and administrators who participated as well as the schools and systems they represented. Participants in professional development register through PDX system Training was tracked on Capitol Impact and Sign-in Sheets Online registration and survey data Electronic registration system Computerized professional learning leave request and sign-in sheets. Electronic evaluation Online registration system, Sign-in sheets Campus reports as entered in PD Planner.
138

Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Meetings were at RESA where attendance was recorded. Principal Observing RESA We know which teachers participated. Coordinator who led the seminar tracked who the participants were. School-level administrators Online registration, surveys, and observations Track through our professional learning office. Data of those attending the trainings is available Professional learning documentation Other responses Access database Not sure Same as previous question See previous answers Maybe in sign-in sheets Via surveys at the end of each session
139

What was the purpose of this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

Provide information about CCGPS

93.8%

212

Explain curriculum changes from GPS to CCGPS

90.3%

204

Explain assessment changes from GPS to CCGPS

83.2%

188

Explain implications for other subjects

63.7%

144

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc.

82.3%

186

to deliver new standards

Provide differentiated training based on

61.5%

139

educator need

Other (please specify)

5.3%

12

Answered question

226

Skipped question

47

Comments organized by theme Preparation for transition to CCGPS

Implementation goals for administrators and coaches

Provide administrators strategies on how to support their schools through this transition.

We designed an experience to make the Common Core roll out more authentic for our teachers....we wanted to connect it to the College and Career Readiness Standards...to create an alignment across our district...and to create consistency in delivery and message...

Creation of curriculum exemplars and/or assessments Designing formative assessments aligned to CCGPS. Develop enhancements to DOE units (curriculum maps, common assessments, etc) and redeliver to schools.
140

Vertical articulation and unit creation Develop common curriculum maps and units Creation of instructional units and assessments for use in the classroom Unpack and prioritize standards; revise units; revise and develop common assessments Other comments CLOSE Reading and DOK review. Adjust instruction based on data and student needs Provide training for new evaluation system for leaders in light of CCGPS
141

Who delivered this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

State content area specialists

24.8%

56

RESA content area specialists

63.7%

144

District content area specialists

54.0%

122

School-based instructional coaches

50.0%

113

Teachers

28.3%

64

External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

33.6%

76

Other (please specify)

6.2%

14

Answered question

226

Skipped question

47

Comments organized by theme External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

Consultant

Consultant

ELA and MATH specialists recommended by the DOE

Common Core Institute

Pearson

Pearson

142

School and/or district staff Principals and Assistant Principals Principals We reorganized our central office to create a position called CCGPS Implementation Specialist. Administrators Principals RESA The RESA trainings were not good. RESA Technology Specialists Other comment Me
143

Online Courses or Tools
Did you offer this method of training?
Yes No

Response Percent Response Count

24.6%

61

75.4%

187

Answered question

248

Skipped question

25

144

Who were the participants in this training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

ALL teachers in ALL subjects

39.3%

24

ALL teachers in core content subjects

21.3%

13

ALL math and ELA teachers

32.8%

20

Select group of teachers across ALL subjects

23.0%

14

Select group of teachers in core content subjects

18.0%

11

Select group of math and ELA teachers

14.8%

9

Instructional support staff (e.g., instructional

37.7%

23

coaches)

Administrators

34.4%

21

Other (please specify)

13.1%

8

Answered question

61

Comments

Skipped question

212

Assessment team

Math teachers

I am responding for elementary grades in our district.

We offer such courses as Gifted Endorsement on line. We also offer a cyber-bullying class.

All employees with a district email address

Science, Social Studies, and CTAE

GaDOE and GPB presentations to applicable people

145

N/A

Was this method of training required?

Response Percent Response Count

Not Required

49.2%

30

Required for ALL participants

34.4%

21

Required for SOME participants (please specify)

16.4%

10

Answered question

61

Skipped question

212

Comments organized by theme Specific staff Those that had not participated in other opportunities

Same sixteen participants as other two questions

If on a PDP

Open to all teachers but required as linked to evaluation.

Not required
Not all were required or some was not applicable We used digital devices throughout the training....those who had it shared with others...it was not required and not needed to be effective.

Other responses It depends on the system/school. Based on content or specialty The cyber bullying class may be required in some school.
146

This varies by school, grade, and subject.

Do you have a mechanism for tracking participation?

Response Percent Response Count

No

34.4%

21

Yes (please describe)

65.6%

40

Answered question

61

Skipped question

212

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings
Attendance rosters

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in

Sign-in

Sign-in Sheets

Sign-in Sheets

Sign-in Sheets

Sign-in Sheets

Sign-in, completion logs

Sign-in

Sign-in sheet

Attendance sheets

147

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and online sign-in Sign-in logs Sign-in sheets, verification data Sign-in Sign-in sheets
Access is tracked online Online course registration Membership in the Edmodo classroom Schoolnet PD 360 tracks PL and provides follow-up after videos are viewed. Usage reports Administrative Reports generated from usage of the software Registration PD360 usage reports Login documentation PD 360/Common Core 360 PD 360 reports Software tracks participation Computer activity logs Tracking built into online system - PD in Focus through ASCD. PD 360
148

PLC meeting minutes, PD360 User Report Software tracks usage Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance ICs keep agendas, sign-in sheets, and minutes. Lesson plans are monitored for implementation of tools into instruction. Internal tracking Follow-up activity Other response I don't teach these classes, so I don't know how the participants are tracked. However, due to the online nature, I certain that they are. Teacher surveys
149

What was the purpose of this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

Provide information about CCGPS

77.0%

47

Explain curriculum changes from GPS to CCGPS

63.9%

39

Explain assessment changes from GPS to CCGPS

59.0%

36

Explain implications for other subjects

45.9%

28

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc.

72.1%

44

to deliver new standards

Provide differentiated training based on

63.9%

39

educator need

Other (please specify)

13.1%

8

Answered question

61

Skipped question

212

Comments

Collaboration among systems

Paradigm shift in literacy in the contents

Train on how to use school net for curriculum, data, and assessment.

N/A

Provide Training on Unit Development

Depending on topic

NA

K-5 math endorsement

150

Who delivered this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

State content area specialists

32.8%

20

RESA content area specialists

41.0%

25

District content area specialists

34.4%

21

School-based instructional coaches

27.9%

17

Teachers

18.0%

11

External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

32.8%

20

Other (please specify)

16.4%

10

Answered question

61

Skipped question

212

Comments organized by theme External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

PD360 software

PD360

Pearson

PD in Focus through ASCD.

PD360 Online Professional Learning Program

PD 360 and Common Core 360

151

Other responses Its team Online video resources are available to all teachers for their own personal growth or can be assigned by administrators as needed Administrators N/A
152

Institutes and Conferences
Did you offer this method of training?
Yes No

Response Percent Response Count

75.4%

187

24.6%

61

Answered question

248

Skipped question

25

153

Who were the participants in this training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

ALL teachers in ALL subjects

10.7%

20

ALL teachers in core content subjects

7.0%

13

ALL math and ELA teachers

15.0%

28

Select group of teachers across ALL subjects

26.2%

49

Select group of teachers in core content subjects

25.1%

47

Select group of math and ELA teachers

35.3%

66

Instructional support staff (e.g., instructional

45.5%

85

coaches)

Administrators

46.5%

87

Other (please specify)

11.2%

21

Answered question

187

Skipped question

86

Comments organized by theme Specific staff Lunch & Learns for administration; Summer Leadership Conference Paraprofessionals District Curriculum Directors As requested by teachers related to their content areas Media specialists, paraprofessionals Voluntary Math and ELA GADOE/GCTM summer institutes

154

Math teachers CTAE teachers participated as well District personnel K-5 math Select teachers of mathematics Math teachers over the summer worked with NWRESA groups and other teachers to design and build lessons. Select group of Mathematics teachers involved in MSP summer institute Varies Many opportunities have been given to teachers, instructional coaches, and/or administrators for the transition to common core regardless of their content area. Participants depended on the nature of the conference. Some teachers - varied depending on level and school District decision
Other responses We had two days to train trainers last year. We are hoping we can do more soon. We will have a session on December 11th taught by a PARCC Math Assessment Specialist - not a conference but a long session Noted in previous question (Common Core Conference) N/A
155

Was this method of training required?

Response Percent Response Count

Not Required

46.0%

86

Required for ALL participants

33.7%

63

Required for SOME participants (please specify)

20.3%

38

Answered question

187

Skipped question

86

Comments organized by theme Attendees of specific conferences Only conference attendees were required to attend

State conferences and Internal Professional Learning Seminars

Specific administrators, instructional staff, and/or staff charged with redelivering training Select ELA, math, administrators, and instructional coaches Trainers Required for whoever fit the discipline Select Math and ELA teachers from schools/ redelivered Academic Coaches, Key lead content teachers, in a Train the trainers for redelivery Those selected to participate and those that agreed to participate Selected math teachers from each grade level Each school was required to send selected grade/content area teachers. Lead teachers and instructional coaches

156

Core group required. They redelivered. Those who are required to redeliver the material Those that related to topic Required for instructional specialists Those registered---math and ELA rep from each school at each grade level LSS and some teachers Core teams of content area teachers Instructional staff, admin. If PDP Required of some teachers in academic areas Admin. A select group of instructional leaders were trained for redelivery. Teachers who participated were asked if they would like to attend; administrator attendance was mandated. Representatives from each grade level and/or content area as applicable Representatives were selected to attend trainings and then redeliver
Participation was at the discretion of the school or district At principal discretion As indicated by the principal School system selection District decision Schools were expected to send a specific number of teachers
157

Other responses ELA, Math and Science, Social studies literacy standards Not applicable for all Student Learning Objectives Math and ELA All sessions are open to a wide range of participants; local districts sometimes offer choice rather than require attendance Varied by school and content area Striving Readers Grant schools

Do you have a mechanism for tracking participation?

Response Percent Response Count

No

12.3%

23

Yes (please describe)

87.7%

164

Answered question

187

Skipped question

86

Comments organized by theme Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings
Summer Academies - sign-in sheets

Sign-In Sheets

Conference registration

Sign-in sheet

Sign-in sheets; certificates of attendance

158

Registrations Sign-in Sign-in sheet Notes and sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheet Sign-in and forms on delivery at individual schools. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and agendas Professional learning sign-in sheet Sign-in sheet and registration forms Professional Learning and Curriculum & Instruction maintain attendance records. Certificate of completion Leave forms Sign-in sheet We will have sign-ins once the session is over. Sign-in sheet Sign-in Sign-in sheets Professional leave documentation
159

Professional learning expenditure and Title IIA records Sign-in sheets RESA sign-in sheets Conference documents and registration materials Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Turning in of agenda and registration receipt Sign-in from RESA/ POs from conferences Conference/prof. lrng evaluations Certificates awarded for attendance Through the use of sign-in sheets and surveys Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheet Registration Registration Sign-in sheet Required professional leave forms Training documentation Professional learning requests and reimbursement documentation
160

Sign-in sheet Registration through professional learning Sign-in sheets and agendas Sign-in sheets Leave forms Professional Development Activity Request Form Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and professional learning logs Sign-in rosters Conference registration request and attendance Sign-in sheets; conference registrations Sign-in& evaluation Registration and sign-in sheets Event evaluations Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Professional learning leave log Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Records of attendance Sign-in sheets
161

Registration and agenda documentation Attendance sheets For some of the sessions, we have access to sign-in sheets or certificates awarding credit. Professional Learning Logs, In-service leave forms Sign-in sheets Capitol Impact; Sign-in Sheets Sign-in sheets We collected sign-in sheets and evaluations from each session. Sign-in sheets Staff attendance records Sign-in sheets Professional leave forms PLU activity forms Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheet for most Sign-in sheet Registrations Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheet Professional Leave forms
162

Registration, travel requests, travel reimbursement - redelivery to schools Sign-in sheets that were submitted to the district Registration Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and verification of attendance through GADOE Professional Learning requests Registration and sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets, projects developed, PLU awards Sign-in sheets Request forms and permission forms Sign-in sheets Prior approval/completion sheets NWRESA sign-in and registration logs Conference Registration Sign-ins Sign-in Registration Sign-In Sheets Sign-in sheets Online registration, sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and PLU credits issued by RESA Sign-in
163

PD Planner participation data Registration and sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets and professional leave forms Sign-in sheets Leave requests Online registration and sign-in sheets at conference site
Access is tracked online Online registration Survey Monkey that asked about monitoring and implementation at school level PD Express PD Express Documented evidence of attendance is tracked in PD Express, our Professional Learning management tool. Also, district conversations were held with participants to debrief and discuss next steps. Implementation of new content was monitored. On-line PL programs--PD 360 or Pd Express Online Registration - Sign-in sheets Online registration Web-based tracking system Doc E-fill Participation is tracked through our professional learning system, PD Express. Online registration The registration process on the RESA website kept track of the teachers and administrators who registered as well as the schools and systems they represent.
164

Online registration and survey data Electronic registration Online registration and sign-in sheets at conference site Online registration PD Express
Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Principal Registration by director of professional development Professional learning requests, redelivery minutes, professional learning logs Professional Learning Logs and agendas Observing Professional Learning Coordinator PL department records School-level administrators Redelivery during PL sessions Our office keeps a record of who attends. I attended Teachers were assigned to participate in the conferences. Professional development plans Professional learning department Professional learning forms
165

We track conference participants Principals monitored attendance and redelivery Check in with district person at conference Professional leaning report BOE staff were in attendance and noted participants in attendance. Other responses Access database Participation Data of those attending is available Participant surveys Electronic Survey
166

What was the purpose of this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

Provide information about CCGPS

85.6%

160

Explain curriculum changes from GPS to CCGPS

80.7%

151

Explain assessment changes from GPS to CCGPS

69.0%

129

Explain implications for other subjects

55.6%

104

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc.

79.1%

148

to deliver new standards

Provide differentiated training based on educator need

58.3%

109

Other (please specify)

7.5%

14

Answered question

187

Skipped question

86

Comments organized by theme Creation of curriculum exemplars and/or assessments

Formative assessment

Unit Development and aligning assessments

Creating common summative assessments

Unit writing

Unit assessment questions

Also assisting with writing CCGPS units and supporting instruction

Build math lessons for middle schools level instructors/students.

Creation of common assessments and documents needed to support DOE frameworks

167

Other responses Redelivery All of the training was for ELA and Math Training for AMDM course N/A Varies by topic N/A
168

Who delivered this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

State content area specialists

48.1%

90

RESA content area specialists

63.6%

119

District content area specialists

28.3%

53

School-based instructional coaches

24.1%

45

Teachers

19.3%

36

External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

49.7%

93

Other (please specify)

3.7%

7

Answered question

187

Skipped question

86

Comments

Technology Specialists

GCTM and DOE

GADOE specialists, national speakers

Pearson

Hire a consultant

N/A

Higher Ed faculty

169

Job-Embedded Professional Learning

Did you offer this method of training?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

82.7%

205

No

17.3%

43

Answered question

248

Skipped question

25

170

Who were the participants in this training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

ALL teachers in ALL subjects

36.4%

75

ALL teachers in core content subjects

22.8%

47

ALL math and ELA teachers

23.8%

49

Select group of teachers across ALL subjects

17.5%

36

Select group of teachers in core content

18.0%

37

subjects

Select group of math and ELA teachers

18.4%

38

Instructional support staff (e.g., instructional

26.7%

55

coaches)

Administrators

25.2%

52

Other (please specify)

5.3%

11

Answered question

206

Comments organized by theme Math teachers

Skipped question

67

Select group of math teachers

Math teachers

Math teachers

K-5 math teachers

Other specified staff Trainers for each building

171

Paraprofessionals SS, Sci, and CTAE - teachers who will be teacher literacy standards

Other responses Individual schools planned and delivered training to meet the needs of their teachers. School offered during planning Responding for elementary in our district This varies by school, grade, and subject

Was this method of training required?

Response Percent Response Count

Not Required

18.0%

37

Required for ALL participants

69.9%

144

Required for SOME participants (please specify)

12.1%

25

Answered question

206

Skipped question

67

Comments organized by theme
Specific administrators, instructional staff, and/or staff charged with redelivering training

Those assigned

School trainers

Administrators were required to attend; select groups of teachers representing each core subject from schools attended

Required for teachers new to the system

172

Teachers in need of improvement Some teachers and support personnel All ELA and Math teachers If PDP
Participation was at the discretion of the school or district LEA set requirements It depends on the system/school. Required if determined by principal or instructional coach Dependent of district requirements School leaders determined who was required to attend. School system selection Districts decided who would attend. School-level administrators determined
Other responses Content Paraprofessionals were not required to attend HS is a priority school This was school-based professional development. School-based professional learning communities and principal designated school specific training are offered. Varies -- depends on topic Required at the schools that participated
173

We could not require for all

Do you have a mechanism for tracking participation?

Response Percent Response Count

No

15.5%

32

Yes (please describe)

84.5%

174

Answered question

206

Skipped question

67

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings
Rosters

Sign-In Sheets

Meeting minutes and attendance rosters

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets, participation by admin

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets.

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

174

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Teacher sign-in Sign-in sheet Hours are logged and sent to HR. RESA participants are documented through RESA. Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets, PD Express Sign-in sheets Professional learning Sign-in sheets Attendance sheets Sign-in sheets School administrators maintain attendance records for school PLCs. Sign-in sheets and minutes Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets These trainings normally take place during planning periods, so documentation varies but could include sign-in sheets, agendas, and meeting minutes Sign-in sheets Agendas and meeting minutes Sign-in sheets
175

Sign-in sheets and collaborative planning records Sign-in sheets reported to professional learning coordinator from assistant principal Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets/observation checklist Sign-in Sheets Sign-in Sign-in sheets Records of attendance Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Registration Sign-in rosters Sing-in sheets and agendas of meetings Agendas and Sign-in sheets School sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet Sign-in sheets PLC Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets
176

Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheet, agenda, and make up sessions if necessary. Team members and collaboration logs, etc. This year we have kept track of these in school sessions by asking for a copy of the Sign-in sheet. This is true for all the previous times this question has been asked. Sign-in sheets, visitation logs Sign-in sheets, PD Express Sign-in Sign-in Sign-in sheets Sign-In Sheets Sign-in sheets Attendance rosters and follow up activities Sign-in sheets Attendance Sheets Sig-in sheets Records of attendance School Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Meeting agendas and attendance records
177

Sign-in sheets or certificates awarding credits in some instances. Professional learning logs, Sign-in sheets, Instructional Coach documentation, principal documentation Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets, PD360 summary reports Sign-in sheets Staff attendance records Meeting sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in Sheets Participant lists and survey data Sometimes school had Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in logs
178

Sign-in sheets Sign-ins and agendas Sign-in sheets that were submitted to the district Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-In Sign-in sheets and rosters Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Teachers had to sign off. Sign-in sheets Sign-in, documents Attendance Sign-in sheets PLC minute and sign-in sheets Grade level minutes Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets
179

Sign-in sheet Coaching logs Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign-in logs Sign-in sheets Sign-in sheets Sign in Sign-ins Access is tracked online LEA and online registration On-line program for PL Online registration Web-based tracking system Online registration We use file maker pro to record this training eWalk software Computerized professional learning leave request and sign-in sheets. Emails, Calendars, PLC minutes, PD360 User Reports
180

Access is tracked by staff through observations, classroom visits, professional learning sessions or other forms of monitoring and/or technical assistance Plans, observations, evaluations Teachers set goals, look at sample student work, conduct peer observations and conferences Walk through observations, formal observations, team minutes, professional learning logs Informal observations documentation completed on software program. Observing Records of academic coaches Walk-through and teacher observation Academic Coaches maintain logs Professional learning through designated times at schools. School based, each school has a record of participants School-level administrators and academic coaches Administrative classroom visits. Observation checklist Instructional Coach training logs & evaluations Administrators document the participants. Excel spreadsheet of those teachers that tried differentiated lessons Workshop evaluations The RESA staff kept track of the various teacher and administrator participants in all the participating schools. Focus walks Walk-throughs, observations We have schedules where teachers observed best practices from other classrooms.
181

Mostly this level of training was focused on assessments due to the Striving Readers Literacy Grant and the need for all students to be assessed in literacy in some form or other. Professional learning school reports
Combination of mechanisms Sign-in sheets, agendas, minutes, performance, instructional observation, and student achievement data Sign-in sheets and observation records
Other responses Surveys Numbers are recorded Administrative notes Professional learning All math and ELA teachers Individual schools kept track of their teacher training. Not sure Access database Capital Impact See information regarding portfolios as previously described Data of those attending is available X Schedules
182

What was the purpose of this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

Provide information about CCGPS

67.5%

139

Explain curriculum changes from GPS to CCGPS

63.6%

131

Explain assessment changes from GPS to CCGPS

56.8%

117

Explain implications for other subjects

47.1%

97

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc.

80.1%

165

to deliver new standards

Provide differentiated training based on educator need

57.3%

118

Other (please specify)

7.3%

15

Answered question

206

Skipped question

67

Comments organized by theme Creation of curriculum exemplars and/or assessments

Planning Units and studying key changes in grade specific standards

Assist in assessment writing and lesson planning

Gather Formative assessment for needs for future and continuing professional development for CCGPS implementation

Assessment building and understanding of use to support instruction/instructional shifts

Grade level/department planning/release time to develop and revise curriculum maps and instructional units

183

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc. to deliver new standards Project Based Learning Planning for deeper instruction Planning and preparation for CCGPS implementation Anything that falls under things the teachers need to know Planning CCGPS curriculum, instruction, and assessment Other responses Academic coaches Collaborative planning Varies by topic Provided to some individual schools within the RESA district Provide co-planning time for team teachers to meet the needs of SWD Each school had a focus or need
184

Who delivered this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

State content area specialists

9.7%

20

RESA content area specialists

45.1%

93

District content area specialists

42.2%

87

School-based instructional coaches

57.8%

119

Teachers

35.4%

73

External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

19.9%

41

Other (please specify)

10.2%

21

Answered question

206

Skipped question

67

Comments organized by theme School and/or district staff

Administrators

Administrators

Assistant principals for instruction

School generated--Admin, teachers, etc

Administrators

Administrators

Principal and Assistant Principals

Principals and Assistant Principals

Principals

185

Curriculum Director School-level administrators External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.) Consultant Consultants Pearson PD360 Online Professional Learning Program RESA staff RESA Focus School support requires an emphasis on CCGPS RESA did a lot of the specific face-to-face training; DoE did some face-to-face and hosted webinars Mgresa math specialist with school or system based academic coaches if available Other Responses Various instructors in system and outside consultants Me Varies based on topic
186

Other Methods of Training

Did you offer this method of training?

Response Percent Response Count

Yes

5.6%

14

No

94.4%

234

Answered question

248

Skipped question

25

Comments
In many of my face to face trainings of the Longitudinal Data System (LDS) I discuss with teachers and administrators how vetted, digital resources are aligned to CCGPS through TRL.

Round table discussions

We have been training our K-8 teachers in the Write from the Beginning and Beyond training. This training is by the Thinking Maps, Inc. We sent two folks to be trained to become trainers, and they are redelivering the information. I think it correlates very well to the writing and reading expectations in the CCGPS.

We offer system-wide PLC's with representatives from all content areas coming together for all schools to discuss CCGPS units, changes to be made, and what to expect with tasks yet to come.

Monthly subject area meetings were conducted by the system school improvement specialists. CCGPS were covered at each of these meetings, including discussions about the common core rollout, troubleshooting, and sharing of ideas.

We are available to any teacher or system any time. We often respond to individual requests such as help in unit writing, setting up writing workshops, or help with math problems.

Book study....

We are developing plans with an outside consultant to come in for the next year and a half.

We are hosting mini 1/2 day conferences i.e. Dr. Tim McNamara

187

Content specialists are offering onsite school specific support based on needs of school As the Curriculum Director, I participated in the DOE webinar sessions. Because we use a facilitator model for instruction, curriculum is assessed and distributed to the schools. Teachers do not create lesson plans or have to deliver traditional instruction. I assessed our curriculum to make sure the content is aligned to the CCGPS. To keep my teachers informed about the transition to CCGPS, I emailed the schools informational notes taken from each webinar presented by the DOE. Teachers in ELA and Math were required to read these notes and sign off for each corresponding training date. Some schools chose to use Title II funds to provide additional training time during the school day to build lessons, evaluate lesson outcomes, and work with assessment changes/needs. We have taken the opportunity to send participants to state or national conferences related to the implementation of CCGPS such as GACIS, NCTM conference, etc. School-based, as well as system wide grade level, content specific trainings
188

Who were the participants in this training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

ALL teachers in ALL subjects

28.6%

4

ALL teachers in core content subjects

0.0%

0

ALL math and ELA teachers

14.3%

2

Select group of teachers across ALL subjects

28.6%

4

Select group of teachers in core content

21.4%

3

subjects

Select group of math and ELA teachers

0.0%

0

Instructional support staff (e.g., instructional

21.4%

3

coaches)

Administrators

21.4%

3

Other (please specify)

28.6%

4

Answered question

14

Skipped question

259

Comments
At the primary and elementary levels, all teachers are being trained. At the 6-8 level, teachers are being trained in Write from the Beginning and Beyond in the areas that are appropriate to the grade and content they teach.

We tailor this kind of training to district and teacher needs.

Interested parties

The target audience depends upon the focus of the training.

189

Was this method of training required?

Response Percent Response Count

Not Required

35.7%

5

Required for ALL participants

57.1%

8

Required for SOME participants (please specify)

7.1%

1

Answered question

14

Comments Depended on the districts needs

Skipped question

259

Do you have a mechanism for tracking participation?

Response Percent Response Count

No

21.4%

3

Yes (please describe)

78.6%

11

Answered question

14

Skipped question

259

Comments organized by theme
Access is tracked by attendance sheets, sign-in sheets, and/or some other document that tracks participation in physical meetings

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

Sign-In Sheets

190

Professional learning time logs. Sign off documentation for each training date. Sign-in sheet Access is tracked online GaDOE Portal Dashboard Online registration, PL redelivery and documentation Other responses Same as above Registered through RESA
191

What was the purpose of this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

Provide information about CCGPS

50.0%

7

Explain curriculum changes from GPS to CCGPS

50.0%

7

Explain assessment changes from GPS to CCGPS

57.1%

8

Explain implications for other subjects

35.7%

5

Provide modeling, instructional strategies, etc.

50.0%

7

to deliver new standards

Provide differentiated training based on

42.9%

6

educator need

Other (please specify)

28.6%

4

Answered question

14

Skipped question

259

Comments

Longitudinal Data System (LDS)

Exchange information and ideas

Provide modeling and instructional strategies for writing/reading expectations in CCGPS

Build on professional learning community activities to support shifts in curriculum

192

Who delivered this method of training? Select all that apply.

Response Percent Response Count

State content area specialists

14.3%

2

RESA content area specialists

28.6%

4

District content area specialists

28.6%

4

School-based instructional coaches

14.3%

2

Teachers

14.3%

2

External experts (consultants, vendors, etc.)

50.0%

7

Other (please specify)

35.7%

5

Answered question

14

Skipped question

259

Comments

LDS Marketing Team

Principals

Pearson

Curriculum Director and Site Administrators

National presenters and speakers

193

Section IV: Teacher Understanding of CCGPS
194

Teacher Understanding of CCGPS

Please select your level of agreement with the following statements.

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Disagree Agree
Agree

Don't Know

Teachers in my district(s) have a clear understanding of how the standards are being implemented by content areas and grade span.

0.4% (1)

17.7% (44)

70.6% (175)

9.7% (24)

1.6% (4)

Teachers in my district(s) have a clear understanding of the new curriculum framework that outlines the scope and sequence for teaching new standards.

1.6% (4)

14.9% (37)

69.8% (173)

11.3% (28)

2.4% (6)

Teachers in my district(s) have a clear understanding of the implications that implementing ELA CCGPS Literacy Standards have on other subjects, like science, social studies, and technical subjects.

1.6% (4)

26.2% (65)

55.2% (137)

10.1% (25)

6.9% (17)

Teachers in my district(s) know where to find or how to access instructional materials and resources that are aligned to CCGPS.

0.8% (2)

6.0% (15)

70.6% (175)

19.8% (49)

2.8% (7)

Teachers in my district(s) have a clear understanding that assessments are changing based on CCGPS.

2.0% (5)

13.7% (34)

64.1% (159)

19.4% (48)

0.8% (2)

TABLE CONTINUES ON NEXT PAGE

195

Strongly Disagree Agree
Disagree

Strongly Agree

Don't Know

Overall, teachers in my district(s) feel 5.2%

confident about implementing CCGPS.

(13)

40.7% (101)

46.0% 4.0% (114) (10)

4.0% (10)

Overall, teachers in my district(s) are fully engaged and committed to implementing CCGPS.

1.6% (4)

14.1% (35)

64.1% 16.9% (159) (42)

3.2% (8)

Answered question 248

Skipped question 25

196

How respondents gauge teacher understanding of CCGPS
Comments organized by theme
Observations, evaluations and other evidence of teacher practice Team meetings; survey; observation of instruction in the classroom When they are implementing a more standards-based curriculum that incorporates more critical thinking and problem solving Performance Based by their classroom teaching Redelivery Redeliver of CCGPS based on lesson plans and instruction. Questions asked; review of units and observation of instruction. Monitoring of instruction By their work and enthusiasm at trainings, by their implementation in the classrooms and by results on teacher and state generated assessments Can teachers talk the talk? Does classroom practice reflect understanding of CCGPS? Through lesson plans and through teacher observation The teachers are committed to trying their best to implement the CCGPS. They find it difficult for the students to grasp, and they do get frustrated that some of the resources provided by the state are misaligned at some points. Teacher understanding is gauged at grade level meetings with principals and area instructional specialist, as well as by the principal reviewing lesson plans. The principals and area instructional specialist also conduct classroom observations in order to provide support, not as a "got you measure." Frequent progress monitoring and continued professional development Observations and lesson plans following the frameworks. I participate in unit planning. I watch them teach. GAPPS visits and teacher observations
197

Classroom observations provide information regarding teacher understanding of the implementation of the Common Core curriculum. Administrators meet with teachers on a regular basis and observe in classrooms. During Walk-through's, I look for the standards being explained and examined. I make sure that the teachers have the CCGPS for the current unit posted. I also make sure that the teachers view the frameworks to determine the depth at which the standards should be covered. Through content meetings, observations, and walkthroughs Classroom observation Review of units and lessons as well as observation data. Monitor progress on implementation during focus walks with administrators Teacher monitoring Teachers are revising GADOE units and revising local units to adhere to new CCGPS Through the use of their backward designs and lesson planning Lesson plan and assessments must identify standards Through collaborative meetings and thorough vetting of units, we have determined that the majority of ELA teachers and some of the Math teachers do not have a clear understanding of CCGPS. Teachers are collaborating to get a better understanding of the CCGPS. The collaboration is the key component to enhance their understanding which in turn helps them create more effective daily lesson plans. By a change in classroom practice and assessment Monthly curriculum audits Evaluation by coaches Evaluation
198

Walkthroughs, team meetings, assessments, etc.
We gauge teacher understanding of the CCGPS by formative assessment during professional learning opportunities as well as in direct observations during planning/implementation cycles in their classrooms.
Feedback from teachers (and other school staff)
Usage reports and participant evaluation are the primary means for gauging CCGPS understanding at the state level. However, because districts are not required to use our resources the analysis of statewide teacher understanding is limited to those educators who are taking advantage of the GaDOE resources and professional learning opportunities. The team does garner some anecdotal information from emails and wiki participation, but our primary means of assessing teacher understanding continues to be evaluative tools. The tools include: SEDL online evaluation of 2011-2012 webinars and video broadcasts, survey monkey questionnaires, participant professional development effectiveness surveys, and session evaluations.
Based on continue feedback we know that teachers are fully implementing the CCGPS and school leaders, along with District curriculum leaders, are working diligently to continue to provide clarity on the questions that arise.
Lesson Plans and Survey
From teacher feedback and confidence level received from teachers and principal perception from observation.
Face-to-face communication and feedback from principals
Communication is key
Through conversations, emails, follow-up redelivery from training
Conversations with teachers and building level administrators
Conversations among teachers and teacher leaders at trainings
Discussions at grade level and faculty meetings. Academic coaches working with teachers, administrative walk-throughs
Personal conversations, questions from teachers
199

Faculty meetings, PL opportunities, grade level meetings, conversations
Discussion with teachers, surveys
Teacher talk, principal interaction and personal opinion
The information was gathered from the Superintendent going out talking to teachers and the feedback from the school site leadership.
Feedback and walkthroughs
Face to face meetings with teacher groups, facilitator of training sessions gathers feedback from teachers, discussions with school administrators on the classroom instructional practices viewed from their in-classroom observations and walkthroughs
Conversations with other RESA consultants, system curriculum leaders and administrators, school visits
Perception data collected from classroom observations and teacher surveys, along with discussions held at administrative meetings and district collaboratives and other teacher meetings.
Based upon feedback in conversations the teachers are feeling overwhelmed and concerned about how students will be assessed.
Personal communication, administrative reports
Team Meetings
Our schools are having design time to look at the new units that have been written and have discussions about what is working, not working or needs changing. We are currently having weekly meetings that involve professional development on common core. We are also sending out a mid-year survey to get feedback.
PL evaluations, surveys, and conversations
Anecdotal feedback from instructional coaches and school administrators
PL, feedback, etc.
PLCs and discussion groups
200

Surveys, feedback and data from collaborative planning
Working with teachers in our schools and in collaboration for developing common assessments aligned to CCGPS.
Feedback from school level academic coaches and administration
School-level surveys, instructional meeting feedback
I gauge teacher understanding of the CCGPS based on my conversations with teachers throughout our school district.
Participation responses/Surveys
Surveys from professional learning sessions
From comments and concerns which the teachers have shared with the district level staff and other administrators. Many of my teachers are very unsure of themselves and are constantly asking for guided assistance and reassuring that they are doing the right thing and interpreting the standards correctly.
Meetings and discussions with teachers and administrators
Feedback from instructional coaches, CCGPS content-area development teams, pulse checks
Through conversations with teachers and administrators regarding CCGPS
Teacher survey information and course evaluations
Verbal feedback and feedback from administrators - mostly concern with assessment issues
The Elementary Education Department facilitates grade level meetings with teachers in grades K-2. Their comments during the meetings as well as their evaluation feedback are clear indicators that much work is still required to develop a thorough understanding of the common core standards and the new PARCC Assessments.
Collaborative meetings
I conduct a survey using survey monkey to identify areas where teachers need assistance with CCGPS.
Input from Principals
201

System curriculum and instruction surveys and professional development feedback Informal conversations, and the amount and types of questions that teachers have PLC discussions, unit audits each quarter, lesson plan audits (all with feedback) Administrator survey was conducted which included teacher perception of CCGPS. In addition, we gauge through teacher training opportunities and discussions. Through grade band sessions Through weekly or bi-weekly content area meetings where new information about CCGPS is given and issues that have arisen in the classroom are discussed. Through dialogue during district professional learning, feedback from teachers and administrators, and classroom walkthroughs/observations I ask teachers and literacy coaches on a regular basis. We surveyed our staff. The district has utilized surveys and focus groups to ascertain the teachers' understanding of the CCGPS, as well as the areas where teachers and administrators are struggling with the implementation. Through reflection and feedback forms, administrator feedback and dialogue We have conducted surveys and focus groups to gauge teachers' understanding of CCGPS. Numerous meetings and conversations Input and feedback from teachers Meetings and conversations with the teachers and administrators Based on feedback we have received Exit tickets, teacher comments Through PD session feedback forms and through our day-to-day work with teachers and administrators in the field Teacher Academy comments/responses
202

Conversations with administrators, coaches, and teachers. Feedback from district offices. I feel there is still a gap in teachers' understanding of the standards and how instruction needs to change based on the new standards. There is much work to be done.
Using survey responses and discussion
I talk with teacher groups and have delivered some PD on CCGPS. I also speak with principals often.
As I conduct workshops for my district schools I use a ticket out the door to question those attending on the subject matter presented. This is shared with the administration of the school as well as our RESA office.
In conversations at trainings, teachers feel overwhelmed and stressed. Lack of time to prepare, furlough days, no workdays to collaborate with all same grade level teachers. Multiple resources with no time to determine what is best.
Through conversations at district trainings and through meetings with math coaches
Curriculum meetings with individual school principals and their leadership teams; meetings with district instructional coaches, who work in schools with teachers to implement CCGPS
Verbal feedback; workshop evaluations; requests; questions
Feedback from teachers and administrators
Feedback conversation. Teachers are very frustrated with the pace of implementation.
We have team meetings, vertical system level meetings, teacher content level planning days to discuss the level of implementation and to gauge any issues that need to be addressed. Teachers are learning and refining as they teach each lesson and unit. However, until we get through the entire year's curriculum and assessment; we will not know the level of implementation that we have satisfied.
Question and Answer sessions, system level surveys, Vertical Team meetings, etc.
Small focus groups for grade/subject level meetings have revealed that teachers know everything above, but the frustration level of being overwhelmed is very high. Especially in grades K-5 where teachers are teaching and implementing both ELA and Math.
Grade level department collaborative group meetings, Walk-throughs and observations
203

Through conversations with teachers at Department Head Meetings and when I visit with them in their classrooms.
Surveys
Surveys, grade level and content area meetings, individual conferences between teacher and principal
Conversation
Feedback from school level administration, school level visits, interviews with content specialist
Survey and perception
Electronic surveys and perception data
Feedback from weekly teacher meetings, principals' meetings, Academic coach meetings, classroom walk-throughs, etc.
Ongoing meetings with teachers and administrators to discuss progress toward goals and activities outlined in the system developed CCGPS timeline and plan for implementation.
Feedback from administrators at school level, conversations with teachers and Instructional lead teachers
Meetings with groups of teachers in their schools; comments I hear them make; overall feeling during some sessions I have conducted
Evaluation forms and discussion
Observation/evidence of teacher practice and feedback
From the teachers I have worked with and conferences with. I cannot comment about the school and teachers I have not visited yet.
I have many conversations with teachers about how CCGPS is being implemented. Although they have been through the trainings and were given time to work on units last spring, they were frustrated with the units being incomplete at the end of last year. They have had to work through the units as they are teaching them, which keeps them only one step ahead of their students. They don't feel prepared, which makes them frustrated and which frustrates their students.
204

By observing lesson plans and observing the teachers implementing the lessons. Observations, interviews, plans Reviewing teachers' lesson plans; discussions with teachers, coaches, and administrators We conduct classroom observations and talk with teachers frequently. Conversations and observations Conversations with curriculum leaders, assistant principals, and teachers. Discussions, units, benchmark assessments By conversations during collaborative planning and training, observations of lessons, lesson plans, unit writing Teachers provide feedback to academic coaches via survey and face to face. Needs assessment surveys will also be used to assess understanding. Walk-through and observations by administrators are used to determine the level of understanding. Discussions, observations In a small district we are fortunate to be able to gauge teacher understanding of CCGPS on professional conversations and focus walks in classrooms. Observations and discussions with teachers Through face to face observations and discussions with the teachers Conversation, focus walks by school administrators Informal conversations and classroom observations Discussions and walk-throughs Feedback from teachers during professional learning meetings at the district and school levels. Also from administrators' observation of implementation of CCGPS in the classrooms. Observations; teacher and school-level feedback Participation in classroom walk-throughs and ongoing discussions with school-level instructional staff
205

Observations and conversations with teachers PLC discussions, Principal's meetings with teachers, Instructional Observations, Administrative Evaluations Responses gathered during and after training events; classroom observations; quality of planned activities Surveys, instructional coach observations, professional learning communities: collaboration and planning Classroom observations and district perception surveys Conversations with teachers, chat room discussions, classroom observations, lesson plans Professional Learning Community minutes, lesson plans, walkthroughs, formal evaluations, communication with teachers Survey feedback, evidence of student learning via interim assessments, feedback provided to instructional support staff By listening to teacher comments during trainings, asking teachers to provide feedback on surveys, observing data team meetings' decisions, etc. Observations and individual meetings where their understanding is discussed Personal conversations with teachers, instructional coaches and administrators and classroom observations Teacher comments, responses in training, classroom observations Collaborative meetings, emails, observations
206

Feedback and student achievement data One-on-one conversations, student formative and summative assessment data Discussion and as evidenced by student achievement outcomes Comments during training and benchmark results
Observation/evidence of teacher practice and student achievement data Instruction, lesson plans and student achievement Classroom observation and pre, post and benchmark assessments Rigorous lesson and unit plans and Student achievement PLC's, walk throughs, and student work samples Through walkthroughs, formal and informal conversations, instructional environment, student work
Ongoing professional development, training and other forms of technical assistance Formative assessment activities in trainings; review of unit planning-high school level; consultation with principals and academic coaches Workshops, webinars, question and answer sessions at faculty meetings and professional learning team meetings Onsite support, training and monitoring Professional Learning Community participation Attendance and participation in professional learning, both in schools and at RESA Content specific school improvement specialists work on a regular basis with teachers and are able to asses understanding. The Curriculum Department conducts visits to every school and meets with every building leadership team. Ongoing and frequent curriculum meetings across all district schools; school walk-throughs
207

From working with teachers at trainings and workshops
Other combinations of methods to gauge teacher understanding Classroom observations, collaborative planning meetings, assessment results, general feedback Conversations with teachers, the training they have received, their lesson plans, their questions Meetings with school administrators, needs assessment data, professional learning evaluations, classroom observations, and small group trainings in the schools Through input, discussion, and implementation Classroom observation; lesson plans/activities; student engagement and projects; students ability to articulate what they are learning and why; focus group conversations; individual conversations; study groups Comments, questions, emails, classroom walk-throughs, student work Through work sessions, teacher observations, staff meetings feedback and other evaluations as needed By observing in classrooms, teacher questions and answers in professional learning sessions Through classroom observations, professional learning sessions, administrator and teacher conversations, online course evaluations and discussions Through a systemic continuous improvement process; classroom walkthroughs; district performance reviews that include focus group conversations with all teachers and support staff; administrative monitoring of teaching and learning, collection of benchmark data; pre/post-test data, data teams, collaborative professional learning We monitor implementation with varied methods, classroom visits, district leadership team agenda item, school leadership team agenda item, board meeting presentation, and other means focused on student work.
208

Surveys, walkthroughs, benchmark assessments
Meeting with teachers in professional learning and observing in their classrooms
Walk throughs, faculty meetings, and teacher videos
Walk throughs, observations, conversations, common assessment scores
Concerns related to CCGPS
They do not understand the rigor and depth of knowledge that needs to be part of the instructional strategies used to teach CCGPS
Teachers have an understanding, but it is not yet clear. They want everything spelled out and handed to them; and the ELA frameworks does not do that for them. They think that just because they do not have the exact text used in the frameworks they can't be effective when implementing the CCGPS.
Most teachers self report that they are concerned about the CCGPS and what it will mean for assessment. However, our district has not done a very good job of preparing teachers. Academic coaches are working in this area. We have very little money in the district and teachers are so stressed because of fur-low and no teacher in service days. Our community is extremely poor and children come to school unprepared for the rigor of CCGPS. We want to do a good job. However, it is difficult with VERY VERY limited technology, travel suspensions, and our location.
Teachers are committed and understand the importance of the implementation and assessment of the CCGPS. I feel they are still not totaling confident in their delivery, but will become more so as they continue this process and become immersed in it.
Teachers feel that the standards are vague and are unsure as to the depth in which some standards should be taught. They has also been great misunderstanding about the use of the frameworks as a curriculum instead of tasks that should be incorporated into your lessons.
I believe that the teachers in this system have been working diligently to understand and implement the CCGPS. The challenge has been in understanding how to teach mathematics conceptually and how to integrate the reading/English Language Arts. We are still in the process of fine tuning and/or developing units for the remainder of the year. Teachers are very unsure about how the students are going to respond on assessments with the new shifts. I think they will be making adjustments to instructions they teach the units, give assessments, and analyze student work and data.
209

Teachers have been trained and have access to some resources going into this curriculum transition. However, many are requesting more assessment resources and some have asked for greater clarity about exactly what students need to do to be successful in a Common Core GPS testing environment. In mathematics, teachers are having to adjust to content being moved to different grade levels. The initial message of Common Core was that it was not a big change for Georgia teachers and that was misleading and later was retracted. Though we may be in a better place than some nearby states, the change is notable for individual teachers.
Teachers have an understanding of CCGPS, but the instructional practices continue to be difficult for many to change. Either over whelmed by all subject areas, planning or changing practices/instruction a huge challenge.
It frightens me that they think the CCGPS is the same as the GPS. I don't really think 100% of our teachers have a "clear understanding" of how the CCGPS is to develop critical thinking, evaluating, analysis, explaining their thoughts and answers, and writing.
Teachers in my district understand the CCGPS, but I'm not sure that they fully understand how the assessments are changing. The lack of resources or maybe I should say, the necessity to search for resources has really caused a tremendous amount of stress for our teachers. As with anything new, the teachers are concerned that the resources they choose are meeting the requirements to help our students be successful on the new assessments.
Other responses
We realized after this school year began that our teachers were not prepared to fully implement CCGPS. We assigned a central office staff person to focus exclusively on implementation, and she has designed four workshops (November, January, February, and March) for ELA and math teachers at all grade levels to work together on common maps and units. We are using those face-to-face meetings to gauge teacher understanding.
Teachers have been provided the support from an administrative level to implement the CCGPS. It is a work in progress and there is visible evidence of improvement in instruction on a daily basis. Students are beginning to display a deeper understanding of the expectations and with their buy-in, teachers will continue to progress toward successful implementation of the Common Core.
This is gauged through our Unit Precision work sessions.
CRCT &EOCT
210

I spend a lot of time addressing misconceptions: School Improvement Specialists and school administrators requiring and monitoring that teachers implement the DOE units verbatim & in sequence -- for all students is the most scary. A yikes was yesterday in teacher follow-up conferences at a small K - 12 school, 2 of 8 K - 5 teachers were looking for Reading standard thirteen (Reading for Information, RI 3). On the other hand, the really good teachers are close to tears because they want to get it right and keep running into confusion.
They are still rather unsure, but are working to ensure they have a clear understanding of the standards and assessments.
I am pleased with our current level of understanding and implementation. Will continue to work to better understanding of assessments.
A
Although the teachers have a pretty good understanding of CCGPS, most still feel unprepared. They are very stressed.
Their understanding is coming along "slowly but surely". They are having difficulty with the 8 standards for mathematical practice and what it looks like in the classroom----assessment is scary for them.
I feel that MOST teachers understand the CCGPS while others are trying to fit CCGPS into their traditional teaching models. They see it as a curriculum change and not a change in instruction.
Teachers are nervous, but confident at the same time.
I believe our teachers are transitioning to CCGPS as well as can be expected. Change, particularly one at this magnitude, causes stress and concern; however, given all the factors, our teachers seem to be working through initial implementation issues. They are working hard to understand the content of the standards and provide students with learning opportunities aligned to the standards. We continue to field questions about the level of rigor that will be required on CCGPS-aligned assessments that will be implemented over the coming years.
Teachers have varying degrees of understanding, but they all have a good understanding at this point. It is a constant focus in the district.
This was a fast roll-out as compared to the GPS roll-out that spanned several years. I cannot say if the teachers have a clear understanding until they have actually taught the standards for a year.
211

I know my teachers are frustrated and stressed more this year than in the past. The teachers understand the CCGPS and the change in assessments but the units are not well written nor sequential, so there is a lot of prep time involved in preparing for each new unit.
Our teachers are coming along but still have a lot more to learn.
Content coordinators have been working all year to help teachers set goals and have clear understandings so that we will be fully implementing the CCGPS and be ready for the national testing to accompany. I would not say our teachers are confident, but they are getting there.
Teachers are currently feeling overwhelmed as they implement a new curriculum, assessments, and teacher evaluation--we are working to provide support and resources for teachers but they continue to struggle with implementation during this first year.
Teachers struggle with the rigor component of teaching the CCGPS. While they have a "sense" of the end in mind, they are not confident that what they are doing is enough.
There would have to be a survey.
They understand CCGPS but too much has been given to them at one time especially elementary teachers with Reading, ELA, and Math. Very difficult to juggle all of this at one time.
Though I put agree, I worry whether our teachers understand the rigor of the coming changes and assessments. Not all teachers -- nor administrators -- have embraced the changes with the passion that is needed. Many districts have had RESA sessions and required the webinars. However, I don't feel we're ready.
Teachers are surveyed during district level meetings. I have entered "Agree" on the response to the questions above, but I would prefer a choice of "Somewhat Agree". I do feel that OVERALL, I would agree to these statements. But I am quite sure there are some teachers in our district that may say they do not have a clear understanding.
Teachers still have concerns about assessments and implementation of curriculum. We have spent a great deal of time working with teachers at school levels on the new curriculum but sometimes we all feel like we need more guidance. We just are not sure if everyone has the understanding of expectations, quality assessments, etc.
In some cases there are teachers who are not aware of the specific standards for their grade levels due to their working so hard to plan lessons from the unit frameworks. Some content area teachers have not been required to use the literacy standards in their instruction. Overall, more
212

time needs to be devoted to examining standards and interpreting how they are to be used for planning and assessing student learning. We may have put the cart before the horse by focusing so much on the units rather than investing more time and effort to help teachers understand the standards before having to implement them fully.
N/A
Teachers are overwhelmed and just trying to get through the first year of implementation.
Our system has committed extensive resources to communication of CCGPS curriculum and impending assessments. PL devoted to these topics has resulted in highest participation rates over any PL offered in past years.
Teachers are at the beginning knowledge level. They are building their understanding of the standards as they teach them and working on incorporating the instructional strategies required by CCGPS. They need to time to learn and to process to become more proficient with the standards.
Uncertainty comes with anything new! Teachers are committed to doing their best. They will become more comfortable as time passes.
I believe there are pockets of success that indicate teachers are confident about implementing CCGPS. However, I also believe there are large pockets of people who misunderstood that Georgia's 85% alignment to the CCSS document means they can continue with the same teaching and learning methods that don't always hit the mark to teaching children to think.
This is new. Teachers are doing on-going training and work with CCGPS. They are beginning to feel more confident, but that will take time.
Teacher understanding is evident; however certain areas are still in need of growth and attention.
Hard to answer at this time - many are just now "getting there feet under them"
Our teachers are not adjusting well to this change. This has been a very difficult start, in many cases they are continuing to teach the way they have always taught.
We are moving in the right direction, but we are not at the point of clear understanding yet with our entire staff. Assistance with scope and sequence is much needed. Our teachers are committed to learning about the CCGPS. Some of us have only our toe in the water while others
213

have waded out neck deep. This change is huge...way too much for anyone to accomplish in this first year.
During the first year of implementation, NWGa RESA is conducting ongoing reflective sessions and follow-up visits based on districts' requests to support teachers' efforts
Teachers are working hard to implement the lessons that are being created. Without truly aligned and complete resources, it is difficult to differentiate instruction to meet the diverse levels of students. We have very little appropriate assessment tasks and formative assessments.
Both grade level, department level, and vertical teams are meeting throughout the year to roll out the CCGPS. It is pervasive throughout the system at every level.
Because so many teachers have just recently experienced the change from QCC to GPS, they are hesitant about another change. They do not feel that the state has prepared them for implementing CCGPS. It appears that we are attempting to build the plane and fly it at the same time. Teachers are overwhelmed.
Teachers are gaining a better understanding as they work through this first year of implementation.
I wish there was a "somewhat" category. I can't say I completely agree with all of the statements above, but they are working as hard as they can. It has been very difficult to be experts in both reading and math at the same time in elementary.
Web training and RESA
Primary through middle school understand content changes much more than the high school level teachers.
Our school system did not depend solely on the DOE to providing professional learning on the implementation of CCGPS. We began last year educating our teachers by grade level on the who, what, when and how of the new state curriculum. During the 2012-13 school year we have written units for grades K-12 in Reading, ELA, and Mathematics along with 12 and 24 week benchmarks in grades 1 - 5 and 9 week benchmarks in grades 6-12. We will also give a summative test in grades one and two during the week of CRCT testing.
They are progressively learning. Training is still needed to actualize standards-based instruction in a consistent manner.
214

Section V: Areas of Promise and Improvement
215

Areas of Promise

From your experience, please provide areas of strength in CCGPS implementation that you think have promise for replication across the state.

Answered Question 185

Comments organized by theme

Skipped question 88

Online videos, webinars, podcasts, etc.

Continued use of online videos, webinars and podcasts.

Elluminate sessions

The webinars provide great opportunities for teachers to learn about implementation of the standards. From our experience, I believe it will take quite a bit of time for the teachers to feel secure and confident about what/how they are teaching.

The math webinars were more interactive than the ELA webinars. Increase modeling and exemplars in both and provide greater opportunities for questions and discussions from participants. In addition, videos that illuminate teacher practice would be helpful.

The unit webinars are much stronger than the initial video series.

I think the examples that were provided in the math webinars were much more explicit as to what and how to teach the content. They started doing some of this in the ELA webinars; however, I think more examples would benefit teachers. The teaching guides in mathematics were also very beneficial.

I like the webinar format, and I like that the webinars are archived so teachers can go back to them as often as needed.

Webinars and other training opportunities

Math webinars

The PBS videos have great potential.

Webinars directly tied to instructional delivery of concepts in a unit of instruction.

216

The webinars were helpful to most teachers. The webinars provided a consistent model for implementation. The use of wikispaces to warehouse information was extremely helpful...especially for mathematics. Training provided by GaDOE through GPB broadcasts, at GACIS, and at GCTM were particularly helpful. The Grade Level Overviews have been particularly helpful for grades K-5 (Math). The webinars on text complexity by Cindy Synder were very helpful. They provide practical classroom examples. The scope and sequence, year-at-a-glance documents were helpful to frame the curriculum. -RESA support on offering professional development has been superb. Their training has been well-received and well-presented. -The simultaneous implementation of TKES with CCGPS has forced productive conversations about teaching and ways to improve DOK levels. The broadcasts for math included modeling of teaching. Anything that could be shared as models for teaching standards, as well as assessing mastery of standards would be great. The use of GPB and webinars are very helpful. The summer academies are also very beneficial. Model lessons for teachers to watch in reading and mathematics. * Exemplars in writing at each grade level with feedback stating how the student exceeded the standard. Online math demonstration lessons There have been many webinars, training videos, etc. that have helped teachers implement the CCGPS. The webinars have made it possible for ALL teachers to go through the training, instead of a select few. The webinars with the standards for mathematical practice being integrated to the content standards were excellent. Having the sessions recorded and able to download was a plus for our schools. They were able to go back and review them. The Professional Development was consistent through webinars and GPB.
217

Frameworks, units, sample tasks, etc. Frameworks are very strong Unit developments and sample tasks. Accessing model instructional units is extremely helpful. Framework units and curriculum maps provide a guide. The frameworks The resource documents and teacher guides help teachers understand CCGPS. Sample units The frameworks for mathematics have definitely been a strength in the CCGPS implementation. The GCTM academies demonstrated promise for helping to include more teachers in professional learning as it relates to the Common Core. The sample completed frameworks and lesson plans were helpful. We appreciate the state frameworks and associated units. We understand that they aren't perfect; but we believe they are our current best estimate of the rigor of the new standards. Unit building The frameworks that are included on the GADOE website have been very useful in guiding teachers through the transition in our district More lessons aligned to the standards and frameworks. More exemplar lessons Frameworks, scope and sequence The Math CCGPS are clear and easy to understand. Replication of the math framework would be nice in all areas. Frameworks and units have been helpful. The provision of CCGPS Math frameworks are helpful. CCGPS MATH Unit-By-Unit webinars served as a great introduction. Math units
218

The frameworks The degree of specificity found in the GaDOE frameworks has been incredibly helpful for our teachers. Model or sample units I agree that the train-the-trainer model of GPS was ineffective and am glad we did not repeat that with CCGPS. State frameworks, teacher implementation guides, and sample units have been helpful. Literacy implications for science, social studies, and CTAE. The emphasis on writing and accessing more rigorous texts will benefit all. LDC modules and exemplars are helpful. I think some of the guidance resources have been useful. The frameworks are much improved and offer a great starting point for planning. Feedback from teachers, administrators, and districts indicated that the Math CCGPS training, resources, materials, etc. was of much higher quality than the ELA and Literacy. Feedback indicated that the math units were easier to follow than the ELA units. There was stronger leadership in Math. Guides DOE website, unit plans, mapping, etc. K-5 math units are a strength. They are developmentally appropriate and are helping our students become critical thinkers and problem solvers.
Implementation (roll-out, access, communication, etc.) Preparation and timing or rollout and ongoing communication efforts The advance preparation for teachers was an area of strength. The unit-by-unit roll-out of math. The rollout of CCGPS in mathematics has been focused with great support. The math had a fantastic roll out. Replication for other subjects would be great.
219

Communication about resources such as Learnzillion, SLDS, etc.
Communication and website availability
Website communication
Opportunities for the whole state to get the same information
The information provided on changes to assessments Summer academies & face-to-face training
I feel face-to-face/one-on-one with the districts is a very effective way to answer questions/calm nerves about this implementation. I know that DOE staff can't visit everywhere but feel a schedule of visits to each RESA for Q/A sessions would allow for understanding and implementation.
We have learned that direct face to face PL with interaction among educators has been more successful with learning about CCGPS and implementation this year than the "train the trainer" model that we used with GPS a few years ago. The state webinars were not as effective as we had hoped partly because of that lack of interaction.
Face to Face trainings have beneficial in our RESA District and could be replicated across the state.
School systems of our size need to be able to offer the summer institutes to more of our teachers.
Face to face learning is essential. I believe that is why the summer academies were more effective.
Summer Academies
It sounded as though the summer institutes were promising, but they were not brought close enough to Early County (in southwest Georgia) that we could attend because of the expense of travel and overnight expenses. If DOE personnel could travel to ALL areas of Georgia instead of just a few, we could certainly benefit.
State face to face sessions
The summer institutes were successful.
220

The face to face training with teachers across our area has been very beneficial.
The Summer Academy experiences were an area of strength.
Summer institutes
Math summer institutes were valuable and could be replicated.
Use of district and RESA staff
One of our systems has the luxury of having a number of math coaches at the elementary level. They provided professional learning to teachers about the design and organization and the implementation. A couple of our systems have sent instructional coaches to the professional learning that RESA has provided at the unit levels to build capacity and redeliver.
We have spent the past two years meeting with representative groups of teachers. We used the state frameworks to create our own mathematics and ELA units. We still have work to do to finish out this school year and we will spend a great deal of time next year in revising our units. However, this has been a very powerful process and a necessary process towards CCGPS implementation.
We implemented a CCGPS Institute during June 2012 with select teachers in our district to work on assessments and unit revisions/refinement--this was a great jump start for our system-however, we only had the first nine weeks available at the time of the training and needed more time to plan for the 2012-2013 school year. We have completed this additional planning through use of subs.
Our small group work was productive. Training in DOK has truly helped to open eyes.
Regularly, scheduled conversations about implementation issues. Data team sessions are critical.
The webinars during the 2011-2012 school year were not very helpful to teachers, the Teacher Academy held within the system was very helpful, GADOE information was used for this training.
Training provided by Sharon Erickson (GaDOE) was very helpful. Another successful practice employed by our system was bringing in classroom teacher from system already implementing the CCGPS to have her share a unit of instruction she developed and model how she introduces it to her class.
221

The wiki spaces in our county have proven very helpful. We also offer sharing sessions across the county where teachers just meet to share ideas. I like the GPB broadcasts better than the webinars. They tend to be more engaging.
Working together in grade groups with selected teachers to develop units and then share with all teachers, working at this over time--not trying to complete all units during the summer, providing time for feedback after teachers have taught the unit and revise as needed
Our local RESA developed units
The Literacy Design Collaborative Tasks and Templates performance tasks and rubrics are most helpful in describing the writing rigor needed in middle/high ELA and NON-ELA Literacy. Some systems are utilizing this resource through a pilot partnership and next year there are plans to have RESAs provide further training on this tool to all other systems.
Literacy Design Collaborative; Math Design Collaborative; use of RESAs for face-to-face sessions and support
The RESA specialists have been the most helpful in our district in providing training and information, but their funding and reduced workdays make it difficult to schedule much of their time.
RESA support through collaborative meetings of teachers in grade levels by content
Providing high quality training to the RESA ELA and Math specialists has allowed for the best integration.
The collaborative work between RESAs and the DOE is something that I think could be strength if it is more fully developed. While the travel involved can be a limiting factor for bringing all ELA Specialists together face to face, there are many options for virtual meetings to be conducted. Skype and Google Collab offer free and easy to use tools for virtual communication. RESAs can provide direct, tailored service to client systems and can be the conduit between DOE and the schools. Our partnership has begun with the implementation of CCGPS and as it grows, will be a valuable and necessary collaborative approach to making sure the new curriculum is effectively taught.
Math in the Fast Lane Coaching Cycles has been a strong factor in the implementation of the CCGPS with best practices that focus on engagement, formative assessment, prominence of understanding and communication of the standards, as well as implementation of the Standards for Mathematical Practice. Also consortiums and learning communities that meet monthly as
222

facilitated by our RESA staff provide strength to all those involved. That would include the Curriculum Directors meetings, the High School Mathematics Professional Learning Community, the AP Statistics Professional Learning Community, the ELA Consortium, and the Literacy Consortium. These gatherings of teachers and administrators on a monthly (or almost monthly) basis provides great opportunities for these groups to grapple with the day-to-day implementation of the CCGPS.
Our NEGA RESA has offered a lot of support.
RESAs are key to replication. Principals and teachers in our small county depend on their assistance either at their facility or in our county.
Ongoing in-school support.
We have participated in RESA level team meetings at each grade level to analyze each unit and to generate assessment questions that can be used in a formative means to gauge the level of student mastery. It has been very beneficial for teachers to get to dialogue with teachers from other counties on the teaching of the units and the acquisition of resources.
NWRESA is supporting our region with the purchase of BLUE DIAMOND and each district is contributing CCGPS questions that are vetted by content specialists to create another resource for appropriate assessment items.
On-site RESA support
The PBS recordings were a good source that provided consistent information to all teachers. The NGRESA specialists provided superb information when they delivered training. I don't believe there are enough of them to serve our counties.
The best thing that we did for our teachers was to begin our CCGPS professional development last summer by digging deeply into the standards. When the teachers had to come to a common understanding about what each standard was requiring students to know and be able to do, they began to see the rigor involved in CCGPS implementation.
We have established an electronic resource on our district's webpage for parents, students, and teachers.
223

Formative assessments Development of Formative assessments, scoring rubrics, sharing of GA DOE resources Benchmarks should be created at the state level to ensure all teachers understand the depth of the material to be covered, especially in math. The teaching of Formative Assessment The CRCT and EOCT content descriptors were very helpful. There remains a lot of concern about how the assessments will look this year.
Webinars and curriculum exemplars Providing online webinars for all to view and providing CCGPS sample lesson plans in ELA and math. Use of state sponsored Frameworks to provide a uniform transition. Statewide use of webinars to provide up to date information. Continue development of units; video teachers implementing (short clips) The webinars and instructional resources are a strength. However, I do think that the ELA resources such as the list of novel from the frameworks need to be reviewed. We obtained several of the suggested novel sets only to learn once we began previewing that the book was not appropriate for that grade level. For example, the Rosa Parks book was not appropriate for 5th grade. Webinar trainings, instructional units, maps and benchmarks Webinars, wikis and frameworks for math. Informative and helpful in addressing questions / misconceptions and assist in planning.
224

Modeling/live teaching Examples of "live teaching" Video captures of instruction for teachers to ""see"" how instruction has changed. Focus on high levels of questioning related to DOK to assist teachers with moving instructional depth of understanding forward. The best training provided is where teachers are videotaped teaching/modeling lessons. Teachers learn best when they see others doing!
Other combinations or training and support methods Archived professional learning (GPB and Webinar); example GaDOE units; curriculum maps; wikis; teacher list serves; Web site; newsletters; annual conferences with National presenters; spring/summer academies; Literacy Design Collaborative; Mathematics Design Collaborative The webinars are beneficial, and the units on DOE website are useful. The continual updates on the GADOE website are very helpful. Webinars, summer training, and instructional resources have been useful GPB sessions, GaDOE and RESA support Various forms of presentation used - face to face, webinars, videos, workshops, etc. Math Webinars, summer sessions, and units Webinars and RESA System academic coaches have provided grade/content specific professional learning. Curriculum guides have been aligned for content, context, and cognition. Summer Academies, Curriculum Frameworks, The close work of teachers in the content-specific RESA environment was beneficial. Summer academies were a good preparation as well. The use of GPB and webinars are very helpful. The summer academies are also very beneficial. Workshops sponsored by the area RESA and Webinars
225

The PBS recordings were a good source that provided consistent information to all teachers. The NGRESA specialists provided superb information when they delivered training. I don't believe there are enough of them to serve our counties. REPEAT
Sharing resources & info across the state & w/ other states
The state should work with other states to determine how they approached implementation (Ohio, NY, IL,). In addition, a cohort group of district representatives should form a state planning team for CCGPS to allow for cross-sharing, sharing of resources and creation of materials to be used across the district.
The development of the state example unit frameworks in ELA and Math was critical to the understanding of the expectations of CCGPS. For Georgia this was a major flaw, especially in ELA. While the state is new to the process there are other states which have already developed frameworks and have experienced experts to help guide our process and at least vet our products that were shared as exemplars. DOE numbered the ELA frameworks, which led teachers and districts to believe that they were to be taught in sequence. In many cases the sequence was totally inappropriate which led to confusion.
Seeking out "best practices" and "stars" at the local level (successful practitioners) is the key to showcasing successful implementation statewide.
I think every school should establish a CCGPS implementation team that meets together regularly with other teams across the state to assure implementation is taking place. There should be data shared at state-wide sessions and conversations taking place to highlight resources that are used, pitfalls to keep from having, and how to support each other. Wealthier districts should be able to share benchmarks with those that are unable to have digital systems in place for data analysis....
Other responses
Districts in which grade level teams have collaborated to build assessments and unit lessons report the highest level of confidence in CCGPS implementation.
-
N/A
Daniel Rock conducted a great workshop in literacy across the contents.
226

Performance based curriculum that will engage students in critical thinking and reasoning skills necessary beyond high school. This is great for students. Also, now teachers can share resources across the nation.
Difference in rigor compared to GPS
Common core is the right direction for our State. The low CRCT level that students must meet to "meet" does not prepare a child to be College and Career Ready. However, the State needs to look at communities that are rural and serving large number of students in generational poverty and provide some real support. We cannot educate students fewer days and provide them with the tools they need to succeed. In Crisp County, students come to us in pre K (on average) 3 years behind. We cannot make one year gain and provide them with the acceleration needed to achieve. We must make two years gain every year if we want our students to be reading on grade level by third grade. The disconnect is growing wider with Common Core because the rigor of the Lexile is increasing. Our students have very limited vocabularies and teachers don't have time to teach in depth to close the gaps. Don't get me wrong. We are trying. We want our students to succeed. However, we are causing the problem of poverty. We just have to deal with the consequences with fewer resources. I am writing grants and working very hard to provide the resources necessary. However, real consideration needs to be given to schools that are rural and poor serving a high percentage of students that are in the same category.
The 5 step protocol has seemed to have gotten some positive feedback. Websites such as illustrative math were helpful. The FALs have also been well received.
N/A
Parental Knowledge is needed
N/A
The training was universal and consistent.
Our teachers need more examples of what good CCGPS teaching and assessment looks like. They are getting anxious about the PARCC assessment.
The training in Athens by the GAEL affiliate, GACIS was the best training that we participated in this entire year! Even though it was not directly overseen by GaDOE, it was well organized so that the participants could see the progression of thought as well as how everything fit together. I like the webinars because they are very convenient, but my teachers do not like them because they feel that they don't have time to watch them during the school day - perhaps they can be
227

shortened. I like the regional RESA training with the staff and the summer Academies. Many teachers did not participate, but I can say that for the ones that did - it was tremendously beneficial. When those teachers returned to school they were on fire to implement the CCGPS curriculum.
When students transfer within the state the test will be a national test, therefore no other test will be required. The strength will be students will be able to show and apply what has been mastered.
Mathematics
N/A
The people at the DOE have done a phenomenal job with the task they were given. I'm just sorry we always try to build the plane as we are flying instead of doing the prep work ahead of time so it can be a smooth flight.
Providing teachers with release time/stipends to "unpack" the standards; dissect them; identify appropriate activities and resources for teaching them; release time to observe other teachers who are exemplars; time for collaboration and reflection.
Teachers are finally noting that the use of novels and informational texts are making a positive difference in student learning
None
I don't know.
Ensuring that teachers at least have a basic understanding of the standard and they are able to translate them into their planning and connect the standards to the lessons.
Work across the curriculum on close reading, vocabulary, informative / explanatory and argument writing. Teachers also need to study the various test prototypes to understand the scale of the rigor that is coming.
N/A
None
The implementation of the Rigorous Curriculum Design by Larry Ainsworth
228

N/A
The information provided this fall at GACIS was the best information we have received!
N/A
XX
LDC will prove very positive --I think.
This survey was way too long---we are so overloaded---I can't even begin to list the issues.
The DOE support for TKES/LKES have been exceptional. The tenets of the new evaluation systems have assisted in communicating the instructional expectations necessary for successful CCGPS implementation.
While we feel expert at nothing, there is a definite instructional shift in our classrooms. Our students are citing evidence to support claims, and they are loving the non-fiction texts.
Unit by Unit content training
None
Some student samples of essays and writing samples that are aligned with CCGPS would be helpful.
N/A
Please use experts such as Lissa Pijanowski to help with the transition; her approach is understandable and useful. Provide systems with clear and useful resources; do not expect us to "dig out" the implications. For example we should have told CLEARLY in which grade(s) transition standards will be tested this year; instead we were referred to the CRCT Content Descriptors. Systems need straightforward answers to our questions as opposed to referrals. As mentioned before there are not enough hours in the day to read and truly understand the plethora of information that has been thrust at systems. We need "nuts and bolts" as we sincerely attempt to proceed in a sustainable and effective manner; our teachers cannot have everything dumped on them at one time; we are trying to provide information in "meaningful chunks" in order that teachers may assimilate information without being overwhelmed. We are trying to use "common sense with common core!"
229

Training in the Common Core shifts, unpacking the standards, and instructional and formative assessment strategies that support increased rigor or Depth of Knowledge (DOK).
We had training from The Leadership and Learning Center last year on the CCSS. It was excellent. Our teachers believe that they know more about the CCSS than their peers in systems that had no additional training than what was offered by the GaDOE.
Regularly scheduled release time for teacher collaboration.
No comment at this time
Integration across subject areas and job-embedded skills from K to 12
My area of strength is in mathematics.
Math web innards
Commonality in the curriculum will help the exchange of ideas...
Trainings for grade specific teachers across districts since most of our districts are small. Time to share with one another and determine what is working....
Since the standards are covered throughout the year, implementation of difficult standards can be revisited for students who did not understand concepts the first time introduced.
Our teachers want Spring Academies. They are also interested in what other states did with the GaDOE units.
The presenters are knowledgeable. Some ELA units are well done.
More in-depth webinars that show explicitly areas where the sessions address and are aligned to CCGPS. Continue face-to-face meetings and collaborations with districts and RESAs. Continue all of the digital support, newsletters, and meeting with stakeholders of our state.
Any activities that replicate the development of best practice support materials.
Using the provided frameworks and implementing CCGPS. Many resources are available for teachers. Sharing resources from other states.
House all information in readily accessible site; accessibility of math specialists; assessment
Access to frameworks
230

Website Webinars RESA
231

Areas for Improvement
Please provide areas that you think need to be improved to strengthen CCGPS implementation. Where possible, suggest how you would improve those areas.
Answered Question 188
Skipped Question 85
Comments organized by theme
Assessments (formative, benchmark, summative, PARCC) Sample assessment items
More examples of tasks and sample assessments as well as more time for the implementation We use our RESA diligently so the more training that can be provided by or through them would be wonderful.
Formative assessments need to be added immediately after webinars so we can determine the teacher's level of understanding and re-teach if needed.
Assessment is a concern for educators currently.
What I would like to improve or strengthen would be assessment - making sure I know the differences and similarities between the Depth of Knowledge levels.
Still need to explore DOK, formative assessments, and summative assessments.
More consistent formative assessments are necessary across the state. Standards-based grading is necessary.
Webinars
More information for K-2 on assessment types, and examples for the common core. Very little is available for these grades. Especially since the state abandoned the CRCT in grade 1, 2 the last few years.
More information about the implementation is needed: progress monitoring loops and assessments
232

Provide more specific examples to help teachers better understand vague standards. Much of the stress that the teachers are feeling is because they are afraid that they are not interpreting the standards correctly. Also providing more information about how the standards will be assessed to help teachers feel confident that they are teaching and assessing as the CCGPS is intended. The recent announcement that the state is providing assessment items through OAS may help alleviate some of this anxiety.
Begin with assessments and student performance before getting into instruction. What does success in student work look like as well as assessments? A design with the end in mind would be more effective, in my opinion. Teachers know they are accountable and would like a clear picture of the destination - before "flying the plane.
Teachers are concerned about their ability to provide CCGPS instruction adequate for the unknown of student evaluation through CRCT. Assessment is always described as separate from instruction, however teachers know there is a link and do not feel their available benchmark assessments are adequate for CCGPS summative assessment. They describe the state online assessment system (OAS) as lacking in many areas and do not feel that it represents the more rigorous type of assessment that students may be expected to participate in at the end of the school year. They are hesitant about their ability to develop their own benchmarks that adequately evaluate their students' ability to perform well on the state-mandated tests.
CCGPS-aligned formative and summative assessments would help our teachers identify and "operationalize" the learning targets and expectations of the CCGPS.
Timely information regarding assessment
More assessment resources
More assessment examples
Provide adequate benchmark questions, provide concrete examples of DOK questions; can't wait until 2014 to possibly implement performance tasks; provide rubrics for assessing performance tasks
The implications of our new approach towards assessment with rigor need support.
Provide formative and summative assessments modeled after the PARCC
Assessments
Sample assessments...per grade and per content area
233

Our system embraces Understanding by Design wherein we begin with the end in mind. If DOE could have offered more information about what PARC assessments will look like, systems would have been able to develop units and common assessments for CCGPS well in advance. We were fortunate to be able to hire Dr. Karen Hess who had access to PARC and Smarter Balance items to use in our summer workshops. Having these examples, we were able to develop powerful common assessments with Depth of Knowledge 1, 2, and 3 levels of difficulty. We think (hope) we will be better prepared for the PARC assessments because of this intensive work with Dr. Hess.
Area and/or district presentations about PARCC for teachers
Additional models of tasks, assessments, prompts, etc. would be helpful for struggling students.
I believe the information about the change in assessments needs to be given to RESA to spread across our districts in a timely manner. I have been asked questions about prompts, organization of the tests, if current tests will take the new format, etc.
I wish that our students did not have to take the writing test in FY 2013 and FY 2014. The kind of writing that is required by the PARCC assessment will take several years of preparation for our students to be successful. FY 2013 and FY 2014 should be devoted to preparing our students for research and research writing without the added stress of another writing test.
It would be helpful to have more specific information about how assessments are changing (i.e., both classroom and state-wide assessments). Examples of questions and tasks would assist teachers in understanding the changing rigor of assessments.
However, several years of assessment data/results will need to be analyzed to exactly where we are and what how we need to adjust instruction. More samples/examples of what is to be taught thus assessed and some type of stronger timeline as to where one should be at certain parts of the school year.
More CCGPS test item questions available to district to use in benchmark assessments.
OAS questions should better reflect PARCC.
The online assessment tools (OAS) need to work, and be up and running by the start of the school year. Ensure that the educational jargon or terminology is explained in depth so that teachers can comprehend the meaning.
234

Interactive/Intensive Training (face-to-face, classroom lessons, modeling, etc.)
One of the issues in our large school system is that we cannot bring all of our teachers to the table to write and revise our units. There are simply too many teachers. That is a definite flaw in the implementation. I believe the state could help with more webinars designed to model effective CCGPS implementation and teaching. The webinars would need to be grade specific. This could be done by the DOE staff or exemplary teachers around the state could be videotaped.
Elluminate sessions- they need to be interactive
PBS webinars are out of touch with practice. Classroom lesson studies would be preferred
Many teachers sat through the webinars because they had to, and they did not pay attention to the content. Then when the same slides were used in face to face PL, the teachers acted as if they had never seen the slides before. I believe the teachers need more face to face CCGPS sessions.
Webinar
The broadcast seminars need to be more engaging and offer more actual substance. A little variety.
We need real intensive professional development. Teachers must learn how to differentiate and accelerate students with high impact practices and then assess often to make sure that the teaching resulted in learning.
Provide less literacy and more modeling of strategies. In addition, greater opportunities for faceto-face professional learning or train-the-trainer sessions. Resources for district support personnel to use for re-delivery with administrators and teachers would be helpful as well.
Let RESAs do most of the training. Face to face is a much better venue and they know the needs of the particular schools.
These are comments from a Math Coach: The unit webinars for math were too general. It seems like they are giving out information, but not getting into the meat of the standards. The teachers need more details about ways to use manipulatives and ways to reach struggling learners with these concepts. They would like to see more assessment samples. It would also be beneficial to start with an actual reading and explanation of what is expected with each
235

standard. Interpretations vary when individuals are unpacking. Some of the vocabulary in the standards is vague or confusing.
I think teachers still need more examples in the integration of the reading/English Language Arts. The examples need to be hands-on and practical for use in the classroom. I also believe that funding for digital resources is going to be a problem for rural areas. In order to have students meeting some of the standards that require digital tools, they are going to have to find a way to have digital resources available.
Many districts look at the webinars as "opportunities" for teachers to learn more about CCGPS; whereas, I think administrators should be held accountable for ALL teachers participating even if at home with "time off" or PL units offered for their time.
Modeling lessons, differentiated instruction
I would like to see more opportunities for face-to-face hands-on training. It may even be possible to have bi-monthly academies that allow teachers the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the curriculum and how it should be implemented.
The webinar/broadcast method did not promote engagement for all teachers because many had to watch the recorded sessions and could not participate the live webinars.
Webinars should be more specific to the day-to-day instruction practices for the Unit of Study.
I think that the webinars are great; however, the length and the time in which they are shown is very inconvenient. In other words, teacher do want to actively participate, but they cannot do that in the middle of the day during instructional time - what about 3:15pm to 4:15pm? In addition, the webinars need to show cohesiveness with a progression of thought and understanding of the CCGPS not just a hit or miss presentation of the concepts and standards. There needs to be correlation between each one so that teachers can see how everything ties together as one complete unit.
The interest level of the videos produced by GPB was very dry. I understand that the individuals involved in the videos are not actors but they were extremely dry and difficult to watch for the amount of the time that they lasted.
Teachers need hands-on activities for developing deeper lesson and content specific training.
236

The state-produced webinars were ineffective and only touched the surface. They did not have any "meat" to them and were not engaging. Teachers and administrators felt they were a waste of time. There must be a basic level of understanding the 3 levels of reading and understanding in order to implement the CCGPS. This did not happen. Teachers must be trained. The professional development money must be reassigned for professional development. It is being used for other things; therefore, no training. More in-depth training on the performance task More in-depth training on the Math Performance Tasks More direct and in-depth training needs to be provided. Implementation to takes good planning. I think that I would suggest offering more face to face trainings and hands on attempts at planning and review by trained personnel with teachers. Teachers need more time to digest, practice, and reflect upon the changes in standards. Additional collaboration methods that teachers can access, upload samples, and view others' ideas and resources would be helpful. Capturing more examples in actual classrooms More standards-based, hands-on training Work needs to be done to enhance teacher training sessions. The implementation of the Rigorous Curriculum Design at the state level Webinars/ professional learning design and delivery More thorough trainings in a more timely manner Listening to the teachers. Modeling of performance tasks and lessons in the units of the framework during the webinars. Please improve the webinars and make them more engaging, less repetitive. Online information and training would benefit from being more interactive.
237

Adjust webinars slightly to target specific unit goals, the tasks demonstrated are helpful, but expanding and clarifying expected unit outcomes would help
PBS recordings could have been shorter. The Train the Trainer model was not utilized, but I believe it is a valuable tool to get teacher buy-in.
Just provide more webinars that reflect the standards being taught.
I have participated in some of the webinars with my teachers. They have not been engaging and at times the presenters did not seem prepared. Our teachers are working hard trying to stay ahead and to implement with fidelity, but they have no direction from the state.
The webinars will be more beneficial if they will address the implementation of the units and provide an avenue for dialogue for teachers to learn about elements in the units that are confusing and/or difficult to explain.
Improve the ELA online demonstration lessons
Better understanding about performance tasks, rigor, and DI and face-to-face training with follow up.
Implementation (timing of supports, roll-out schedule, funding, etc.) The scheduled times for the webinars were an area of weakness.
IF the units and website had more information before implementation that would have been more beneficial.
SLOW DOWN
The state needs to work on a timely basis and not train and implement on the fly.
Time for planning for implementation, face to face training on assessments for ELA and math, exemplars of what this is suppose to look like and final products, RESOURCES
There seems to be no coherent battle plan or funding available to do much training, at least for those school systems who are not Race to the Top. I feel that we are building the airplane as we are flying it, and I hope we make it to our destination.
Too much at one time. CCGPS has been overshadowed by so many initiatives.
238

Time allocations for teachers to collaborate with peers across the state
More clarification for teachers. The transition is going to take time to fully and successfully implement.
Math in the High school will likely be one of the weaker areas. That may be due to the fact that it is being implemented over a 4 year period. The release of the framework for 9th grade was slow. Perhaps getting frameworks up a little faster would be a help.
Timing of training has been challenging. It has placed districts in a reactionary mode. District level personnel and district trainers need an opportunity to be trained prior to the launch of webinars, GPB videos, etc. to the schools. ELA and Math resources and information were inconsistent.
A preview guide to the GPTV broadcasts would have been helpful. In addition, since the webinars were scheduled throughout the day at very "odd" times for teacher viewing, many of our schools watched the recordings. It would have been helpful to provide some supplemental pieces so that school leaders and instructional coaches could utilize them as study groups.
Break down the implementation into very small chunks of instruction... Start with unwrapping standards, developing units, assessments, etc.
Timing! Since the fleshed-out models and frameworks were not available until last spring, we could have used this year to prepare. Our teachers are struggling tremendously because there just wasn't enough time to work with the frameworks before school began in early August.
I think we need additional time. Specifically, I believe the implementation should have happened in phases, rather than trying to do all of ELA and math at the same time. In addition, it would be helpful to know well in advance about opportunities like the summer academies. When we found out about these, we had already committed to local efforts.
We need more money for PL so that we can pay our teachers for additional days to receive training.
Feedback indicated that districts felt that the Math team provided more effective leadership for the CCGPS implementation than the ELA. Districts said that their Math teachers were better prepared for the implementation than the ELA teachers. There is a need to continue collaboration between ELA and Math so that the CCGPS will be successful in Georgia. There should be consistent messages sent out to stakeholders.
239

Districts need state assigned CCGPS program specialists (similar to the TKES/LKES pilot) to provide another layer of support. In addition, there needs to be further clarity regarding proven resources to support CCGPS and significantly more guidance regarding the content and format (level of questioning) on the transitional CRCT (prep for PARCC). Minimal sample test items have been released.
Strengthen the use of the RESA content specialists.
PL days for teachers to actually work on lessons and units - lack of money limited the training during the summer. Some systems did a great job preparing during the summer, other systems did not. Teachers are attempting to teach the new CCGPS and learn the new content all at the same time. If more systems had RTTT funds, they would be better able to give teachers some release time to prepare for this implementation.
There is a shortage in funds to provide the necessary training to teach at the levels of depth which are needed. We need to retrain our staff and this is very time consuming and costly.
GaDOE needs to emphasize "quality" vs. "quantity" and tap into exemplary practices from other states such as New York. A continued focus needs to be on the "shifts" that must occur to maintain the fidelity of implementation.
In my opinion, teachers will not fully comprehend this paradigm shift until they are evaluated and receive specific feedback on their implementation.
LDC and MDC has been too limited in its rollout. We do not have access to the training for LDC and MDC until next year. And we don't know at what time of the year the training will take place. That puts us way behind in applications because we don't have access to the collaboratives.
I continue to believe that continuity and consistency are issues even though systems and schools can go from point A to point B in whatever way "they" choose. The exemplars seem to be missing in all aspects of CC implementation. Exemplars in training manuals and training modules that will promote moving toward point B. If everyone builds his/her house in different ways, standard size doors and equipment will not fit. I think it's better to establish an explicit plan for those who need direction, and then let those who choose to go off the plan have the freedom to do so. There is a smorgasboard of selections, but leaders and teachers are struggling to connect the dots. Some are selecting paths to follow that are not quality. Leaders and teachers are struggling to determine what is believed to be quality professional learning, quality units, quality resources, etc. An organized, systematic, explicit PLAN would enhance the
240

path for everyone. Our state leaders have done a wonderful job and we so much appreciate them! It is very difficult to manage both ELA and math at the same time in elementary. These teachers are overwhelmed trying to learn new strategies and standards in both areas. We could use more support geared toward elementary teachers. I think the pace of roll out was too fast, especially after the planned roll out of the GPS. My teachers are working long hours to implement and they are frustrated. I still have to assure teachers that we are not going to learn this Curriculum to only start a new one in 2 years. Provide state funding for coaches in ALL schools K-12 to support the implementation of curriculum in the state. Strong instructional coaches are the linchpin to success in the classroom where new learning takes place. This is researched-based and when implemented with fidelity shows huge gains in student achievement. Teachers need to see the "HOW" rather than the "Spray and Pray" approach to professional learning. The Georgia Department of Education has done a fabulous job providing training and resources, the best I have seen in my 34 years in education. More timely resources There were no funds aligned with this implementation. Online books would have been helpful. More time is needed - furlough days have limited opportunities for teachers to work on curriculum maps and instructional units. Funding for resources beyond textbooks. The delivery of this information needs to be on-going. One website for all CCGPS resources, video demonstrations of classroom instruction, more face to face training
241

Frameworks, units, exemplars, etc.
Frameworks that are complete, additional rollout training, etc.
Correct errors on the GaDOE CCGPS workshop and provide collaboration with neighboring districts
I am concerned that the units are examples only. It is obvious that the units were written in isolation; at not in collaborative teams. The teachers do not have a lot of experience in unit design. Transitioning to performance-based tasks in ELA is a major paradigm shift for teachers.
Units for instruction for ELA. Rework as teachers grow in understanding. More teaching resources related to the text. Provide resources that are easily attained. Some of the texts were on broken websites and books out of print.
More attention to standards as opposed to units, as many of the units are built upon controversial instructional resources and are entirely too lengthy
More in-depth explanations of grade level standards and the tasks in the Georgia Frameworks
Some of the math units were not as well developed as others. It would be helpful to revisit the math units.
Continue to collect feedback from teachers about the frameworks. The ELA frameworks seem to be the least helpful to my teachers. The math frameworks have been extremely well received. Another tool besides OAS (which seems dated and difficult to navigate) for online assessments. Continue to populate the OAS databank with CCGPS aligned DOK Level 3-4 questions. Those are very helpful.
ELA frameworks to make tasks more generic and not dependent on specific texts as well as providing guidance on how to address the standards--not every standard every quarter. Include more specific content knowledge information in the math unit webinars for elementary and middle grades teachers--discussing more of the misconceptions students (and teachers) may have in respect to the unit. One unit webinar did focus on misconceptions but the discussion of this could be enhanced in each unit.
Science, social studies, and CTAE teachers need specific content area help with CCGPS Literacy Standards. Also, teachers need support with CCGPS math standards-content area classes to teach the standards. Finally, teachers need help with writing and time management of the tasks.
242

Though sample units were shared by the state, there is a lot of confusion on how to deliver the units most effectively. Many districts are using the state units as the core CCGPS instructional guidance.
The book specificity of the ELA sample units created confusion. Suggesting several texts or a theme rather than texts may have helped teachers understanding that the standards did not have to be text specific.
My teachers have been frustrated with the ELA units. I don't think some of the unit writers thought through some of the literature that was chosen, and our teachers have had to wade through that. It's not bad that teachers have had to go through the literature & I do appreciate the units (which is better than when GPS was thrust upon us), but teachers have complained.
ELA CCGPS have been very difficult to execute because they require in depth unpacking to actually understand what needs to be taught.
Hire a group of teachers from each grade level or content area to make the units sequential and to make them teacher-friendly. There are too many tasks in each unit. The units can be modified and made into quality units with time and effort from people in the trenches.
Content descriptors should be real descriptions and not just a retyped version of the standards.
While Framework developers may have had an understanding that the tasks were the assessments, teachers struggle to understand how the knowledge learned from those tasks will be tested on the CRCT or EOCT. For many teachers, use tasks as assessments was new. Since they do not believe they are trained to write test assessment questions nor rubrics, they have struggled making all the pieces "fit": new standards, new teaching materials, new ways of teaching, teaching to a higher level of understanding all while trying to complete skeletal frameworks and gaining an understanding of how to use tasks as assessments.
Trying to put out all the unit plans for the entire curriculum was a nightmare. Perhaps the state should concentrate on one exemplary unit for each grade level. GA units were not designed around the UBD or RCD plan and left out some key components. More work / information on how to move from the basal reader in K-5. Also, how to implement a scope and sequence for K5 reading.
The quality of the lessons and scope and sequences need to be improved. The lessons are not aligned to CCGPS and do not demonstrate any of the shifts. We need to provide samples of quality lessons on video so that teachers can see it in action.
243

Some of the framework activities continue to yield issues with alignment and rigor. They sometimes lack the instructional direction teachers need to truly understand the CCGPS expectations.
It would be helpful for ELA to focus their professional learning on specific topics such as close reads, differentiation, text complexity, etc. We were not able to use the state units because we were not able to purchase the texts. It would have been helpful for them to have created informational or literacy units based around concepts and strategies instead of a text. This way we would have been able to use the units with the text we had in our district.
I do think that the ELA resources such as the list of novel from the frameworks need to reviewed. We obtained several of the suggested novel sets. After we began previewing that the book, we realized it was not appropriate for that grade level. For example, the Rosa Parks book was not appropriate for 5th grade.
Communication about the resources, such as, they are not complete and districts will have to tweak and add to cover all standards. We were prepared to teach them how they were and found out very quickly that much work needed to go into them and the time to do that was absent. Perhaps having a year to prepare the units would have been better. Units rolled out very slowly in ELA.
Teacher friendly frameworks
ELA implementation was weak and inconsistent. Units were not vetted. We did not find them very useable or reliable Math was better.
The ELA training sessions and materials are very disjointed, and the teachers are having great difficulty with implementation.
Having continuity of curriculum and materials
CCGPS lessons tied to assessments and diagnostic tools.
ELA units and academies need work
English Language/Arts training that focuses on the major instructional shifts that are required to implement the CCGPS
ELA units are OK, but do need some revisions. The K-3 units especially seem to assume that kids are already proficient readers and writers. Structure needs to be added to the frameworks to
244

TEACH kids HOW to read and write before they are expected to apply their reading and writing in a task.
Development of core instructional modules that support development in instruction, rigor, and differentiation
Next time do not provide specific novels--teachers need the focus and use a variety of materials for different students--I know this was not required but when they state presented it teachers thought that was the book they had to use--I heard this same comment from other counties
Other responses
LEAs to develop additional resources to post for all to share...
Georgia will experience statewide CCGPS implementation with fidelity when state, RESA, and district leaders move in a unified direction toward that goal. It is incumbent upon all leaders to respect the dedicated efforts of each branch and to develop a sincere understanding of the capabilities and constraints inherent to the work in every role. Failure to collaborate and to provide each other with candid feedback is a powerful obstacle to success in this venture.
ELA webinars, meet timelines, and statewide benchmarks for each 9 week period. Benchmarks available on OAS had inappropriate Lexile measures and were really no different than previous benchmarks.
Not having teachers watch video broadcasts without previewing. This was not a good moment in Georgia.
GaDOE ELA specialists need to know their craft.
We desperately need stability in the ELA program with personnel that understand early childhood learners as well as secondary learners.
Regional conferences for school districts who don't have content specialist
Educational research, such as that of Bill Daggett, indicates that there are entirely too many standards. I think an overwhelming majority of teachers would agree. Since we tout researchbased instructional strategies, we should certainly pay attention to validated research such as this.
245

Certain areas of CCGPS will be difficult for schools such as ours to score well due to the nature of our program. Perhaps some flexibility or possibility of waivers would strengthen it for us.
We previously were a part of the America's Choice process so we had a clear and distinct readers and writers workshop. The integration of reading writing while keeping direct foundational reading instruction and direct writing instruction has been a challenge for scheduling. We developed a suggested framework for our literacy block showing the skills to be taught and the possible resources that could fit within each section. We need to integrate the direct genre specific writing instruction back into our first and second quarter units. Teachers have expressed utter frustration with the multitude of language skills. They have tried to hit them all each unit, knowing they are recursive. We have often said that a rolling stone gathers no moss - trying to cover too much too fast. Teachers are feeling a little better as the year progresses, and teaching the language skills in context of the text has been good.
Administrators need a specific list of what to look for in classrooms as evidence of implementation of CCGPS. They are well-trained by SI to need that focus walk form. If there is not a curriculum driven roll-out of what administrators should look for, we will continue to have administrators looking for that posted standard and teachers & students chorally reading that standard and all its coding. The best efforts of curriculum training does not stand a chance when the teacher's evaluation hinges on the administrator's perception.
Provide more training for administrators who will be evaluating the teachers. Funds (know this cannot be helped) - but money to provide more time for training and more consultants and conference time - sharing with other systems.
Some of our teachers have been given specific directive from their system leadership to not veer from teaching by the GDOE frameworks, yet the GDOE frameworks (although excellent as a model for starting) do not include sufficient differentiation or rubrics. Additionally, administrators and special education teachers seem very concerned and confused by how this curriculum will be appropriately modified or accommodated for students of such cognitive and instructional need.
They are a lack of resources and teachers are finding themselves on a quest to find appropriate resource.
Parental Knowledge
Continue to offer recorded sessions that people can access on their own time.
246

We need more parent friendly, CCGPS aligned resources for parents. Resources need to be in ONE Location!
We need a repository of materials, units, ideas, etc, that have been generated by educators in all states for Common Core. Those do not have to be endorsed by GaDOE, just made available. Provide DOK webinars by state.
Opportunities for teacher collaboration across subjects
A platform or accountability check-in opportunity to engage teachers in dialogue to ensure teaching and learning are meeting the demands of CCGPS. A forum to ensure that administrators are communicating the same message as GaDOE.
All systems need information and professional learning even if they are not Race to the Top or SIG. The math CCGPS is the biggest barrier at this time -teachers have a high learning curve and trying to implement with effectiveness and quality. They do not feel comfortable right now. Parents are upset as well because they know teachers are learning and feeling inadequate.
We need to do a better job of informing our parents of the new expectations of CCGPS
We need to revisit the frameworks, because there are some obvious issues with ELA and Math at some grade levels. States need to be sharing resources through a national repository (even something free like Wiki Spaces or Dropbox. We should not have to search items or pay someone to produce mediocre units. We also need to provide some appropriate benchmarks statewide to prepare for the PARCC assessments.
Webinars, standards, units, assessment sample models, and other materials all need to be in one location on the internet where teacher access can be more efficient--easily accessible.
Do not send us to multiple locations to unravel information; pick one landing for providing CCGPS info and route all information to the one site. Keep in mind that most of our systems do NOT have a big central office staff. Most of us wear many hats therefore we cannot devote all day every day to CCGPS ... viewing endless webinars, reading endless documents, and attending numerous trainings, etc. Please connect to where most of us are ... we are NOT in Metro Atlanta. We are genuinely trying to move forward with this implementation but trying to keep up with "GDOE stuff" is over the top.
Offer a brief, but powerful online course (4 to 6 modules).
-
247

N/A More modeling in DOK and differentiation of instruction, provide benchmark assessments. provide free training experiences throughout the state to support the implementation. More teacher training N/A N/A An array of training for Educators...In all areas by training Not sure N/A Not sure N/A None N/A N/A XX No comment at this time
248