Skip to content

Professional Learning Modules with Institutional Research

College Bridge’s process to build capacity for continuous improvement integrates program evaluation techniques (Alkin et al., 2017) into a cyclical process of action research (Koshy, 2005). The following model was developed to improve outcomes in distance learning:
Click on the tabs below for details for each phase of the process:

Administrator Sessions

Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Evaluate current policies and practices for distance learning based on best practices.
  • Revise Learning Continuity and Attendance Plan based on research findings and best practices.
  • Set student outcomes for distance learning.
Grounded in decades of research of distance learning (Bernard et al., 2009; Croxton, 2014; Freeman et al., 2014; Hake, 1998), participants learn best practices as they relate to the current environment. Components of the Learning Continuity and Attendance plan involving Student Engagement, Learning Time, and Professional Development for Distance Learning are examined with participants providing current outcomes. Administrators engage in project planning for continuous improvement and set goals for their distance learning program.
Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Revise current policies and practices for distance learning based on data.
  • Identify tangible supports for teachers that align to measurable student outcomes.
  • Evaluate the site’s distance learning programs.
  • Use quantitative and qualitative data to drive decision-making.
Utilizing methods from program evaluation (Alkin, et al., 2017) and action research (Koshy, 2005), participants review qualitative and quantitative data to analyze their distance learning program. Administrators monitor progress toward previously set goals and determine tangible teacher needs to help reach student outcomes.
Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Revise current policies and practices for distance learning based on data.
  • Revise plan of tangible supports for teachers that align to measurable student outcomes.
  • Evaluate the site’s distance learning programs.
  • Use quantitative and qualitative tools to drive decision-making.
Utilizing methods from program evaluation (Alkin, et al., 2017) and action research (Koshy, 2005), participants review qualitative and quantitative data to analyze their distance learning program. Administrators monitor progress toward previously set goals and determine tangible teacher needs to help reach student outcomes. Data tools are provided to build capacity in administrators to continue the program evaluation cycle in subsequent school years.

Math Teacher Sessions

Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Apply the 3-strand framework of interaction to create effective engagement opportunities for all students.
  • Utilize various engagement methods to connect with students both synchronously and asynchronously.
Based on the work of (Moore, 1989; Bernard et al., 2009; Croxton, 2014), participants are introduced to the three strands of engagement: student to content, student to instructor, and student to student. Participants work with several examples of student engagement to evaluate and extend a variety of classroom techniques to intentionally include all three strands of engagement. Participants learn the relevant research results showing the optimum balance of the three-strands to improve student learning outcomes by increasing student engagement, access, and motivation.
Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Use three problem designs to create valid assessments.
  • Evaluate existing assessments relative to the current environment.
  • Evaluate the use of various assessment structures as an alternative to timed, synchronous testing.
Utilizing the evaluative structure presented by (Miller, 2012), educators will take a fresh look at existing assessments and consider their validity relative to the new realities of student access to technology, notes, etc. as well as the equity issues posed by assessing in traditional ways during remote instruction. In this session, participants are introduced to a variety of valid, practical, and aligned assessment methods that can immediately be used in a remote instruction math class. Educators will be introduced to alternative types of problem designs that are less amenable to completion by computer Algebra systems. Educators will also discuss other types of assessments including, portfolios, written reflections as well as other methods of demonstrating mastery of mathematical concepts and skills.
Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Define the fundamental concepts of Universal Design for Learning to design a remote/online math class.
  • Choose appropriate content organizational schemes for their situation(s) and course(s).
  • Define the total learning time for a course.
  • Utilize backwards design to plan their courses.
  Outcome alignment is a critical component to addressing current needs, given the constraints placed on synchronous class time during the current pandemic. This session incorporates the work of (Fink, 2013; Nilson, 2010; Wiggins, 2005; Hattie 2017) to walk participants through course redesign for the remote environment. In this session, participants examine the use of universal design principles and backwards design to take a fresh look at math classes in grades 6-12 in the context of distance learning. From considering the “Four W’s (situational factors) of universal design to exploring the path from learning outcomes to assessment to lesson planning, educators revise existing courses to incorporate the new realities facing students, educators, and institutions and develop their plan to address them equitably.
Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Define flipped learning and explain its utility for remote instruction.
  • Use the Seven Steps to Flipped Learning Design process to create lesson plans that combine synchronous and asynchronous components.
  • Create a pacing plan to ensure all standards are met by the end of the course.
  Based on the work of (Talbert, 2017), educators will work on a lesson plan that utilizes the seven steps design process as a model for their own lesson planning. Instructors will examine the use of flipped learning concepts to maximize the effectiveness of their synchronous class time by shifting the initial setup of new course material into pre-class asynchronous prep work, making content more accessible and approachable to students.
Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:
  • Evaluate and choose appropriate grading systems by considering equity, access, and technology
  • Describe the key elements of a mastery grading system
  • Evaluate current grading systems to identify sources of bias and the lack of transparency
  From the ongoing work toward Mastery grading in mathematics (Feldman, 2019; Guskey et al., 2016; Heubech et al., 2020) This session will have educators examine the use of Mastery Grading, a philosophical approach to grading where grades reflect demonstrated mastery of course content and have a positive effect on student learning. During this session, participants will learn about a variety of mastery grading components including how to break course content into assessable learning targets, what types of options exist for allowing students to demonstrate mastery, how productive struggle and the opportunity for revision of student work support the development of growth mindset in all students.

Meet the Hosts

This webinar is led by an intersegmental team specializing in university and secondary mathematics, professional development, curriculum design, and e-learning. 

Sharona Krinsky
Robert Bosley
Melissa Wong
Owynn Lancaster

To learn more or schedule your site:

Call Us

(310) 903-8022

Send E-mail

maribell.ramos@college-bridge.org

Sharona Krinsky
Sharona brings over 25 years of professional development experience in teaching math at the university as well as extensive experience teaching in hybrid environments and dual enrollment (high school/college) using technology. She is currently teaching Calculus and Statistics, coordinates the Statistics pathway course at Cal State LA, and is a peer mentor at her campus’ Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.
sharona.jpg
Robert Bosley
Robert currently teaches Statistics and serves as a math education researcher, intervention coordinator, and peer coach. He has extensive experience providing professional development to math instructors in content, pedagogy, and data analysis as well as effective use of LMS systems (Schoology, Canvas, Illuminate, etc.).
Robert_Bosley.jpg
Melissa Wong
Melissa Wong is an instructor in the School of Information Sciences at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign where she teaches courses in instruction, e-learning, and higher education. She has nearly 20 years of experience with online instruction, having taught online since 2001, and is the author of Instructional Design for LIS Professionals (Libraries Unlimited, 2019).
Melissa
Owynn Lancaster
Owynn Lancaster is an instructional designer with Cal State LA’s Center for Effective Teaching and Learning. As both a university faculty member and a credential high school teacher, Owynn is uniquely positioned to assist both K-12 faculty and university faculty in navigating both the short-term and long-term challenges of the current environment.
Owynn_Lancaster.jpg