Once the indicators were developed, and it was determined how best to measure each one, work began at the IDT level. IDTs, who identified a problem and committed to a process of data collection and collaboration, had time together to work toward solutions. One example is a team formed to improve composition in 10th-grade required Global Studies. “We wanted our students to write persuasively, taking a clear position about important topics like ‘Should Voting be Mandatory?’ or ‘Is the United Nations Still Relevant?,’” says social studies teacher Laura Binder, who teamed with colleagues Kelly Gillette and
Another IDT was formed of ninth-grade guidance counselors Anne Marie Larkin, Kathleen Machnik, and Lyndsie Sumner with Guidance Department Head Jessica St. George. School social worker Brooke Leone and school psychologist Deb Spera joined the team as did Sachem Campus counselor December Heffernan and guidance intern Kasimu Fletcher. “We had a common goal to create a ninth-grade guidance curriculum to address social and emotional development,” says St. George. The group developed a series of lessons for counselors to present in all ninth-grade classes. “Students need to learn how high school works,” says St. George.
– Mike Wasta Matt Gitkind, and special education teacher Eric Page. Student teacher William Seddon joined the group. Social Studies Department Head Karen Cyr Cook ‘89 participated peripherally. “There’s no doubt we were asking students to think critically and synthesize complex material,” says Binder, “but we collected baseline data, developed a rubric, and established an instructional improvement plan for ourselves.” “The level of institutional support we were given in this project was critical,” Binder says. “We were able to team our efforts and we each brought a different point of view, different skills and strengths to the table. We also brought an honest desire to improve our students’ performance.” Although the details of the project are important, the process is more so. “Because we were doing this together, we were able to do so much more collectively. We changed our practice; as a result, the students became more confident and the level and quality of their work improved,” she continues. “Even more interesting is that the students didn’t realize the evolution of the process on our end. I think that is important. While we were helping one another, our students were truly benefiting. On both sides of the desk, there was growth and change.”
“We needed to teach them about our Naviance system, have them take and use interest inventories, and do some work with them on mindset. In addition, students needed to understand earlier and more clearly about high school credits, graduation requirements and transcripts.” The group based lesson content on an initial survey. “What do students know; what do they need to learn? The survey even helped us sequence and pace instruction and topics, so that students were learning material at optimal times. We wanted 80 percent of our students to meet benchmarks on post-testing.” The team reviewed the target points which students did not meet, and together adjusted delivery and instruction. “This was a great process for our department with good outcomes for students,” says St. George. “It gave us time to comb through the data and to be guided to make effective instructional decisions; we changed our practice to improve student learning.” Never an institution to rest on its laurels, NFA has a 160-year history of seeking excellence, often by significantly reinventing itself to remain relevant to students and community. The recent dedicated, hard work of NFA faculty and staff demonstrates that same spirit, sustaining the Academy and carrying its mission far into the future.
Summer 2016
13