High School Redesign in Rhode Island: Performance-Based Graduation System

 

A Field Trip for State Policy Leaders – March 12-13, 2008

From 2007 – 2009, AYPF planned and facilitated a series of field trips around the country to help policy leaders learn more about high school reform. This project, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, supports state and national efforts in high school reform, by providing hands-on professional development activities to state and national policy leaders. Specifically, this project aimed to accomplish the following:

• Expose top education and policy leaders to effective programs, schools, and districts from which they take away concrete, practical lessons;
• Provide time for participants to learn about successful policies and interventions that support high school redesign and discuss various approaches to complex and difficult problems; and
• Encourage education and policy leaders to benchmark their high school redesign efforts, share lessons learned, and build a network of information, resources, and contacts.

On March 12-13, 2008, AYPF brought a group of approximately 20 state policy leaders to Rhode Island to learn about their policies and practices to improve high school graduation and college-readiness rates. The trip will focus on, but not be limited to, Rhode Island’s proficiency-based high school diploma system. This system requires high school graduates to demonstrate proficiency in standard-based content and applied learning skills through at least two performance assessments.

A decade ago, the concerted efforts of teachers, parents, community agencies, administrators, and policymakers to design a plan for the future of Rhode Island’s K-12 education system resulted in the creation of the Comprehensive Education Strategy (CES), which serves as a blueprint for educating all of the state’s students and for preparing all children to be lifelong learners, productive workers, and responsible citizens.  In 1997, the General Assembly passed a landmark education reform act known as Article 31, which actualized the agenda set forth in CES, and since then the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) has invested in initiatives designed to build an education system based on high standards and accountability.  The initiatives focus on investing in teaching and learning, making student success a reality, and placing a greater emphasis on math and science education. Then in 2003, the Board of Regent’s high school regulations established the foundation for the current High School Diploma System, the only statewide diploma system requiring students to demonstrate proficiency through multiple assessments in the nation.

 

Judge Robert Flanders, Chair, RI Board of Regents:  Flanders addressed some of the key aspects of the High School Diploma System.  In 2003, in an effort to infuse more rigor into educational policy, the Regents addressed how to ensure that students demonstrate basic competencies.  The Regulations were passed in 2003, which put the Performance-Based Graduation System into place.  All high schools must have three elements as part of their Performance-Based Graduation Requirements (PBGR): testing; course performance; and some form of performance-based measurement.

In 2007 the Board has been concerned with alignment of school activities with the regulations; access and quality; fairness of the system; communicating information about the new system to various constituencies; and policy development to implement the diploma system. The state and Regents are now reviewing the diploma system plans for every high school, reviewing the curriculum, and whether they merit approval to award a performance-based diploma. By 2010, all high schools will have been reviewed and Flanders expects that most high schools will be approved based on their plans and implementation. The Regents are still trying to determine the balance between testing versus other factors.

Peter McWalters, Commissioner, RI Department of Education
McWalters considers No Child Left Behind to be a civil rights law, as it has been very important in placing the focus on helping all students succeed. He emphasized that there are three non-negotiables in his work: “We have to educate every child; we have to hold them to high standards; and we have to provide differentiated learning and instruction.”  He noted that the education department has tried to be very transparent in its work, meeting with the business community, universities and school district personnel, so that various stakeholders and constituencies know what they are doing and why.

Rhode Island partnered with Vermont and New Hampshire to develop the New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) for standardized tests.  This test, recently used for the first time, revealed that in math, 22% of RI students were proficient; 27% of VT students were proficient; and 28% of NH students were proficient. As it is a new test, RI educators are still trying to align their curriculum with the standards.

McWalters stressed that the state legislature, department of education, districts and schools all need a policy framework that aligns across all agencies in terms of resources, capacity, funding, staff, leadership, and unions. “All have to align, or we are setting up the schools for failure.”

The state requires all high schools to personalize instruction, but it does not tell schools what that looks like. They also require a focus on literacy and reading and creating individual learning plans beginning in elementary school for any student who is not reading at grade level. In addition to a  state reading initiative, the state wants to ensure that humanities and career and technical education are included in instruction and that the focus is not purely on academics.

McWalters said they did not want to lower the bar of proficiency, but they have to recognize that they have large numbers of students who aren’t proficient – 40-50% or more. Thus they recognize the need to help build the capacity of instructors to help all students be proficient and provide students with the needed access and support. “We need to ensure that our system of measuring proficiency is consistent.” As they combine the use of test information, course information and proficiency by demonstration, the future challenges include incorporating standards in the portfolio system, training objective panels of evaluators of the portfolios, and defining what an “A” means. 

McWalters concluded: “I can’t regulate excellence into schools and classrooms from my office. I don’t have the horsepower or the skills to figure out how to do that – which is why we need to let the districts and schools figure out what works best.”

Colleen Callahan, Board of Regents:

Callahan stated that the Board looks at the power of policy as a driver of behavior. “We don’t want policies that tie the hands of educators, we don’t want policies that are so prescriptive, but it’s helpful to have policies that say to districts and schools– you have to do this, but we will let you figure out the best way to do it at the local level.”

She stressed the inclusive nature of the evolution of the high school Regulations, which included high school summits and community involvement.   The Board has created an intensive peer review process to ensure schools are meeting the requirements of the PBGR and intense technical assistance is being provided to schools, districts, and teachers to help them implement the programs.

The three keys to improving schools that she laid out were: 1) literacy; 2) personalization; and 3) graduation by proficiency. She underscored that literacy and numeracy were the anchors for all of the work. They have developed a scaffolded approach to literacy so that literacy is a concern for every secondary school, for every single student, in every discipline.  All students performing below grade level are required to have personal literacy plans.  The state requires all schools to address these three points, but does not prescribe how they should do it; they are letting the districts figure it out on their own.  Some of the challenges districts are encountering with regard to improving literacy include insufficient professional development for teachers, finding targeted intervention programs, and funding positions for reading specialists.  Personalization, while a laudable goal, requires addressing both the provision of time and content for advisory periods. 

Janet Durfee-Hidalgo, Education Policy Analyst of Governor Carcieri:

Durfee-Hidalgo told the group that the governor chairs the P-16 Council in Rhode Island and stays very involved with it.  The P-16 council is looking at the partnership between high school and postsecondary education with a view to making it more transparent, improving dual enrollment (DE), and helping more students move to postsecondary education. They are grappling with how K-12 can penetrate postsecondary education to create more partnerships. At present there are uneven partnerships across all schools and across the state.  Durfee-Hidalgo said they could be much more deliberate in their efforts to create partnerships, and to develop clearer articulation arrangements between high school and postsecondary education.  To this end they have to be much clearer and provide much more communication around the PBGR. The governor believes there needs to be an appropriate balance between standardized tests and PBGR, and has supported using the performance-based component.  He has also encouraged the business community to become engaged in the reform efforts, by helping to judge the projects, and by articulating their expectations of students’ education.

Durfee-Hidalgo stressed that they have faced the challenge of making change, like all states do. The Honor States grant has helped to fund some of the initiatives, including Physics First.  They are in the second year of implementation of this program at six pilot schools. It is a challenge for teachers to shift their teaching and curriculum and it has a ripple effect through the school as the curriculum shifts. They are trying to figure out how to support teachers during these reforms.

Hope High School:

The group heard from the three principals at Hope:  Arthur Petrosinelli (Hope Information Technology School), Scott Sutherland (Hope Arts School), and Wayne Montague (Hope Leadership School).

The school is two-and-a-half years into the process of reconstruction, which, by state order, encompasses four major themes:  breaking the school down into three small high schools; personalizing the learning experience; creating a professional learning community, and fostering meaningful parent and community engagement.  The three schools occupy one building, with each school on a separate floor, and students are designated by wearing different colors. Of the 1, 461-person student body, 90% of students receive free and reduced price lunch, and 31% are in special education or ESL. Eighty percent of Hope students are behind by three grade levels. The school had failed to win accreditation from NEASC, but is now fully accredited. The three principals work closely together and handle different aspects of the school/building, i.e. facilities (Wayne), teaching and leadership and outside meetings (Scott), and disciplinary issues (Art).

Hope High School offers students and parents a variety of educational opportunities: ESL classes for parents; dual enrollment for students through programs in partnership with several postsecondary partners, including Rhode Island School of Design and Johnson & Wales, where students can receive college credit; internship opportunities for students in 10th grade; and athletic team participation.  The core classes for each high school are taught by autonomous teachers, assigned to each school, but the teachers plan together to ensure consistency across schools. Other classes, like Advanced Placement, foreign language, Physical Education, and health are common to all three schools, and they share teachers.

Wayne Montague shared that three years ago, when they decided to move to small schools, they had 154 teachers. Fifty-four of those teachers opted out, so they had to hire that many new teachers. Around thirty percent of teachers are first, second, or third year teachers. The rearrangement provided an opportunity to hire people that they wanted and that wanted to be teaching in that particular environment. Montague emphasized that their focus is on visibility of leadership and relationships in order to change the culture of the building. They also needed to move a number of overage and undercredit students out of the building and place them in GED or alternative education programs, because these students could not be served at Hope.  He commented that, “We haven’t necessarily increased student performance, but we have created a respectful, calm learning environment.”

Within this new environment, each student has an Individual Learning Plan (ILP) to help them gain the skills they need. ILPs also reflect civic participation, literacy plans, and Board of Regents’ requirements. Thus students have multiple options to succeed, with the PBGR providing an opportunity to demonstrate skills and showcase talents, not simply pass a test.  To meet student needs, the school redefined the program of study based on what students need to graduate and the three areas of interest. Fifty four teachers were certified as LEP teachers to meet the needs of the large ELL population.  They implemented an advisory program, whereby all teachers have to advise students, at a ratio of 15-1. In addition, teachers have to call every student at home twice a month to check in.

Projects in the core classes are linked to each school’s theme and can be included in the student’s portfolio. Students take a class in junior year to prepare for the portfolio presentation. Teachers assist the portfolio creation by scaffolding activities to prepare students for the variety of projects, and by building the portfolio into curriculum work.  Hope is adding a writing course to build writing skills for all students.

Hope teachers have high expectations of their students, and develop strong relationships with them.  The teachers are asked to commit to a longer day and make a greater commitment of time to professional development, but they do not receive extra pay for these activities.  Teachers have team teaching and planning time. Core team teachers have common planning time five times in a two-week period.  All teachers have to serve as an advisor for an afterschool activity, while students have to participate in clubs, which are linked to literacy and numeracy, social and civic responsibility, and to the school themes, and which meet school-wide expectations.  

The ultimate aim is to produce students who are lifelong learners, quality citizens and good workers.  This is evidenced in the dropout rate, which has decreased over the past 3 years from 52% to under 20%.

Jack Warner, Commissioner of Higher Education

Warner began his after-dinner presentation by reflecting on a report conducted by the state that examined the levels of remediation needed by students entering postsecondary education in Rhode Island.  The report revealed that many students needed remediation. He commented, “We used this report to call together districts to address the issue of course alignment from high school to college and ensure that students were college ready without remediation.”

He emphasized that the issue now is performance on the 10th grade New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP).  They are grappling with whether this is the level that truly means that students are college ready. If that is the right level, he mused, do students need more time or do they need other supports to be college ready and pass the NECAP, since there are such low pass rates?

Warner also commented on dual enrollment in the state, noting that this is the first year for a statewide dual enrollment program.  Rhode Island has a long history of making dual enrollment available, because Rhode Island College would certify high school teachers if they had a masters degree and the course syllabi met college-level credit, which resulted in a lot more students getting dual enrollment credit. But, he observed, “we weren’t serving low-income students; we were reaching a higher level of students. We are now providing $440k in state funding to design pilot dual enrollment programs at urban high schools, to get more non-traditional students prepared for college.” The state is eager to help students develop the academic and social capital needed to be ready for college. Rhode Island College is working with Mt. Pleasant High School on this type of project, and has had 26 students in the dual enrollment program. All the students have moved into postsecondary education.

At present the state is exploring the creation of a competency-based high school to postsecondary education model that allows students to move through high school as quickly as possible. They are now putting NECAP test scores and portfolio information on high school transcripts for college. The challenge, however, is that college admissions officers need more information about portfolios and what they mean. The state is trying to develop a menu of evidence of college success, beyond reliance on the SAT. Warner posed the question: “What kind of evidence can students put in their portfolio to show to colleges they are college ready? We are trying to address this.”  He concluded by noting that remedial education at the higher education level is a much more nuanced issue, and that not all students need the same kind of remediation, with some students, especially English language learners, having very different needs.

Nick Donohue, President, Nellie Mae Education Foundation

Donohue observed that we know how to deal with a large range of learners, but we only deal with them after they have failed, not before, and we don’t know how to institutionalize personalized education for all students. On the positive side, he observed that personalization has taken root: “We’ve moved beyond blaming students for their poor performance, but we still blame teachers and parents, but we’ll get beyond that too.” 

He shared that he is very interested in watching what happens in New Hampshire when they move to a competency-based system and no longer use Carnegie units. The Nellie Mae Foundation is currently supporting four communities in New Hampshire as they develop competency-based credit systems which would allow students to earn credits after school or in out-of-school time.

Donahue commented that he did not know if the high school diploma would be around much longer because postsecondary education is the end goal, not a diploma.  He noted: “I want to make sure that the foundation’s work is focused on interventions that have the potential to impact 80-90% of kids, not just 10-20% of kids.”

 

Donahue challenged that “we need to redefine schooling, which means we need to look at how time is used, what the structure of school looks like, what staffing looks like, and what teaching really means.” This necessitates a shift to consider learning outside of the school building, which allows for education to occur anywhere and anytime. The challenge for him was struggling with how to offer competency-based education in a school structure that is disciplinary-based, e.g. focused on science, or math.

As a former Master appointed by the state at Hope High School, Donahue commented that the kind of work the Nellie Mae Education Foundation is currently undertaking is for places such as Hope High School.  He applauded the dedication and commitment of Hope’s staff, and noted that the three schools each had a real identity, led by dynamic leaders.  He also commented on the breakthrough nature of the work at Hope on individual learning plans for each student. 

He concluded by reiterating the significant issues he is grappling with, such as investigating how we can deal with funding that is based on seat time when we want to move toward a competency-based model, and how “to educate the wonderful students of today with the skills they need for tomorrow in the schools we built yesterday.” 

Coventry High School

Participants had an opportunity to hear from the principal, teachers, school board members, and students, as well as conduct visits to classrooms at Coventry High School. The school is comprised of 1800 students, 407 of whom are seniors, and 165 staff members.  Nine members of the staff are on a steering committee that meets one to two times a week regarding school policies on implementing the Performance-Based Graduation Requirements.

Coventry requires students to complete a Capstone project, develop a portfolio, and have a job shadowing experience for graduation. Students are required to do a Capstone course, usually in sophomore year, but they can do in their junior year. This is a semester-long course that helps lay the foundation to complete the senior project. The capstone project has to show a student’s knowledge of core subjects linked to learning standards; include a research-based section, and a final product. Career and Technical Education students can do capstones through their programs at the career center. In the past, Coventry had a small capstone project for only certain students, so they had some experience in working with capstone projects.  However, requiring every student to participate in a capstone is a huge undertaking in terms of staff commitment.

A panel of judges reviews the oral presentations that come after the work of the capstone has been completed and met the requirements, based on a rubric developed by the Rhode Island Skills Commission.  Projects are skill-based. If a student does not meet the skill, he/she can redo it until they master it. The school provides a RampUp program after school to help students master skills and knowledge needed to complete the capstone.

Coventry has three coordinators that teach the Capstone courses and support the teachers and rest of the staff with the process. The union was supportive of moving to a capstone. It has taken a lot of work and a lot of professional development for teachers to implement the Capstone.  Implementing the portfolio has also been challenging, as it requires every teacher to support the development of the portfolio in each class and to develop performance assessments that students can use to include in their portfolios.  In the next year or so, students will be able to develop an electronic, rather than a paper portfolio, and the school has opened up a new portfolio laboratory to provide access to computers for students.

A panel of students shared their experiences with the new requirements.  They articulated the “learning stretches” they experienced, such as the time management and public speaking skills they still needed to hone, the challenges involved in selecting a topic, and the benefits of engaging in job shadowing and compiling their projects.  They noted a greater awareness about what they wanted to become, and the benefits of seeing different aspects of jobs.  One student emphasized that, while the Capstone demanded a great deal of time and effort, “I think it’s a good thing to challenge students.”

Shea High School

Shea High School has 1200 students, a 45 percent mobility rate, a large ELL population and a poverty rate of 70 to 80 percent. The 130 special needs students are fully integrated and mainstreamed. The school has some academies that include hospitality, in partnership with Johnson & Wales University, and a national government academy. They are developing a trades pathway as well.

Student needs are attended to by the 199 faculty who have ESL certifications, the Read 180 literacy program that helps develop basic skills, and the courses and tutoring that are provided year-round due to the mobility rate.  The school operates on a trimester system, with students taking five classes during a 60-day trimester, under the assumption that if a student is failing, it is easier to identify them quickly and provide them with remediation.

The PBGR elements at Shea include course assessments in every course and portfolios which demonstrate applied learning skills. Students have several opportunities to make their portfolio presentations and they select four to six pieces from their portfolio to show to a panel and demonstrate their competencies. Seniors just arriving at the school have to write a reflective essay and do an oral presentation. Most of the work is conducted through advisories with teachers. Shea also uses report cards that show letter grades, while information regarding how students have met the standards is shown on another document. Letter grades are not consistent across schools and districts, but standards can be consistent.

Shea prides itself on personalizing students’ learning experience, and thus the school has set up advisories with a teacher and 12 to 15 students. Four days a week these meeting take place for 8 minutes, and on one day 30 minutes are devoted to advisory. Every student has an individualized learning plan.

Catalysts of Change

Presenters emphasized the varied and essential catalysts of change.  These included:

• Postsecondary institutions, as evidenced in the pilot projects currently underway between high schools and postsecondary institutions

• Board of Regents

• The Governor

• Business Community

• Teacher’s Union

•  School Committees

•  Principals

 

Lessons Learned, In Brief

Throughout the trip, participants had opportunities to debrief and reflect upon the information presented and sites visited. Some of the lessons garnered include:

Personalization of student environment

Over and over again, presenters emphasized that personalizing the learning environment was a critical component to engaging students, and emphasizing to them the value of the proficiency-based graduation requirements.  This was especially evident in the use of individualized learning plans and advisory periods.  Good relationships between students and teachers also helped imbed the realization that the graduation requirements were there to stay, and that students would have to comply with these requirements in order to graduate. 

Preparation of teachers

Teachers have to be trained in the prompts and rubrics, so that they can support students as they develop pieces for their portfolios.  Teacher union buy-in has to be courted and fostered, as this is critical to the successful implementation of the new requirements. 

Partnerships

Partnerships with higher education are critical: these have to be deliberately fostered, with the goal of helping students develop the academic and social capital necessary to be ready for college. The nature of remedial education at the higher education level has to be addressed, as not all students need the same kind of remediation.

Accountability and Flexibility

The state government needs to continue to hold schools accountable and to emphasize high expectations, but they need to simultaneously give schools flexibility to meet these standards.  State officials do not have the capacity to figure out what works best at the local level, and thus they need to let the districts and school decide what works best for them. 

Participant Takeaways

Here are some remarks from trip participants that summarize their lessons learned and reflections from the visit to Providence:

• What I learned is that there are viable and effective alternatives to high-stakes testing and standards based accountability measures. I was also most impressed with the emphasis on personalization and literacy.

• I was truly impressed with the leadership qualities of the principals and school leaders we met.

• The models we received for the Portfolio, Exhibitions, and Student Success Plans were terrific.

• This was an excellent experience to see firsthand how the requirements are implemented as well as hear from the practitioners and students themselves. I shared this with our state superintendent and with our High School Redesign staff.

• I plan to work with the DOE (Department of Education) to consider implementation of two aspects of reform in Rhode Island: 1. Dedicate time to teacher advisories 2. Capstone project as a requirement for graduation

 

For more detailed information regarding Rhode Island’s PBGS, please contact:

Roy Seitsinger
Rhode Island Department of Education

Director of Middle and High School Reform

255 Westminster Street

Providence, RI 02903

Telephone: (401) 222 8461

Resources

Background Material

The Rhode Island High School Diploma System
The Providence Public School District at a Glance
Providence Public High Schools: Individual Learning Plans Program Guide
Commissioner’s Decision and Order.  The Hope High School Complex: Final Report
Hope High School: Program of Studies
Coventry High School:  Proficiency-based Graduation Requirements Handbook

Other information of note:

The Met School:
The Met Center is a network of seven small public high schools in Rhode Island.  All Met students have tailored curricula and apply their academic learning at internships in the community. 

YouthBuild:
YouthBuild (YB) is a year-long program that offers job training, education, counseling, and leadership development opportunities to unemployed and out-of-school young adults, ages 16-24, through the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing in their own communities.

YouthBuild AYPF Forum Brief:

Young Women’s Leadership Charter School of Chicago:
This school provides a challenging curriculum in a small school environment which nurtures girls' self-confidence and optimism and inspires them to achieve in math, science, and technology.

Monadnock Community Connections School (MC Squared)
MC² is a public school of choice for students in the Monadnock Regional School District (www.mrsd.org), serving high school age students who want a different learning experience: personalized, experiential, negotiated and community-based. 

Souhegan High School, New Hampshire:
A vanguard member of the Coalition of Essential Schools, Souhegan is committed to a culture of respect, trust, and student engagement focused on students learning to use their minds well. They embrace interdisciplinary  instruction, teams, advisory groups, and performance assessment.

Newspaper articles on field trip:

Hope High School visit:

Coventry High School visit:

Agenda

Helping Policy Makers Understand High School Redesign

 

American Youth Policy Forum   1836 Jefferson Place NW,  Washington DC 20036
Telephone 202-775-9731      |      Fax 202-775-9733      |     Email aypf@aypf.org