Program Plan for Science Department Vertical Alignment

Sarah Shields
July 8, 2018
Colorado State University
Executive Summary
This proposal outlines all components of the Vertical Alignment Program for the science

department at Conservatory Green Middle School (CGMS). Included is an introduction to the

school district as well as a description for the need for this program. The goal of this program is

for the science department at CGMS to have a coherent set of terminology and strategies to use

when teaching graphing, data analysis, and writing data supported conclusions in alignment with

the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).

This program will be marketed to participants and superiors via email communication

and setting up digital event reminders. The program will be conducted in a collaborative fashion

during a face to-to-face half day work session during the first week of contract in-service. The

cost of the program will have minimal impact on the science departments funds, as materials and

meeting space are provided by the school. The effectiveness of the program will be determined

through peer surveys and observation as well as pre- and post-student testing data. The

anticipated results of this program include teachers using consistent vocabulary and strategies,

students producing high achievement data and better retention of material, and increased teacher

evaluation scores. This program model is sustainable for the science department to use for any

academic standard or skill, despite potential hurdles of teacher turnover or changes to

curriculum.

Introduction
Denver School of Science and Technology (DSST) was established in 2004 in effort to

provide quality, rigorous education to a diverse community of over 5,300 students in a state that

currently ranks #30 in K-12 education (Ziegler, 2018). Parents of these students and investors in
this charter network demand academic excellence for students to increase post-secondary

opportunities and positively impact small communities within the city of Denver. The teachers

and administrators embrace the hard work and challenges of urban education to support students

and meet the demands of their parents and the network investors. The efforts of staff are

summarized in the network’s mission statemen (DSST, 2018, p.1):

DSST Public Schools transform urban public education by eliminating educational

inequity and preparing all students for success in college and the 21st century. DSST

Public Schools is a values-driven organization and a deliberately integrated community,

serving students from all walks of life. Our six Core Values [Responsibility, Respect,

Curiosity, Courage, Integrity, and Doing Your Best] are central to our program and to our

results.

To best serve this mission, it is necessary for administration and educators to constantly

evaluate practices to ensure teaching methodologies are up to date, relevant, and most effective

for student learning and retention of knowledge. Specifically, the science department at DSST

Conservatory Green Middle School is dedicated to student mastery of scientific investigation

principles, and aspires to be coherent in teaching methodologies while ensuring students are

engaging in a challenging curriculum. Upon approval from the Director of Curriculum and

Instruction (DCI) to run this program, the teachers department will participate in a half day

professional development opportunity in order to collaborate on these best practices. This

program will be conducted in a collaborative fashion during a four-hour work session in the first

week of contract in-service with a minimal budget. The effectiveness of the program will be
determined through peer surveys and observation as well as pre- and post-student testing data.

The anticipated results of this program include teachers using consistent vocabulary and

strategies, students producing high achievement data and better retention of material, and

increased teacher evaluation scores. This program model is sustainable for the science

department to use for any academic standard or skill, despite teacher turnover or changes to

curriculum.

The vision of this program is to promote DSST’s mission of preparing all students for

success in higher education, it is the science departments responsibility to become vertically

aligned in teaching the skills of graphing, analyzing data, and forming data supported

conclusions with appropriate rigor and complexity with each increasing grade level. Teachers

will emulate the Core Values of Respect, Courage, and Doing Your Best to collaboratively create

a scaffolded curriculum for best student performance outcomes (Bryk & Schneider, 2002).

Needs Assessment for Vertical Alignment Program

The Next Generation Science Standards require students in grades six through eight to

demonstrate mastery of graphing, analyzing data, and constructing data-supported conclusions.

Currently, three out of five science teachers at CGMS have never taught the NGSS standards,

nor are teachers consistent with the vocabulary and strategies used to teach these standards.

According to Pearson, a leading K-12 assessment service, for students to comprehend and retain

skills and scientific practice, it is necessary for the science curriculum at CGMS to be vertically

aligned in terminology and teaching methods, while scaffolding rigor and complexity of the

content with each grade level (Case & Zucker, 2018).

 It will be necessary for the members of the science department to efficiently collaborate

to create a cohesive curriculum. From previous experience working together, some department

members prefer to work independently, while others prefer discussion. In order to ensure

learning transfer with each participant, the format of the program will contain a balance of

independent and group work in order to suit the needs and preferences of all participants in the

program.

Program Goal, Objectives and Format

Goal:​ The science department at CGMS will accomplish vertical alignment for teaching

the NGSS standards of graphing, data analysis, and forming data supported conclusions. The

scaffolding of the curriculum will be presented through a graphic organizer to ensure the

progression of rigor and complexity in each increasing grade level. This goal directly correlates

with the DSST mission statement, as the vertical alignment will serve to better prepare students

for the “innovative, new test questions that measure students’ readiness to master rigorous

academic content, think critically and apply knowledge to solve problems, and conduct research

to communicate a point of view” on the nation-wide standardized assessment for college and

career readiness (PARCC, 2018, p.1). This program goal will be accomplished through

completing, in order, three objectives.

Objective 1​: The CGMS science department will assess their current knowledge of the

NGSS standards and evaluate where current practices do not correlate with these new standards.

This will be conducted through all members participating in individual reading and

reflection followed by communal brainstorming and discussion. Participants will be provided

with paper copies of the NGSS curriculum as well as current unit plans containing these

practices. Participants will be allotted time to independently review the NGSS information, and

highlight where current curriculum practices do or do not comply. At the end of the allotted

time, participants will share out their notes and comments, which will be documented on poster

board for all to see and use for objective two.

Objective 2​: The CGMS science department will evaluate terminology and techniques

for teaching NGSS standards of graphing, analyzing data, and forming data supported

conclusions to determine best strategies for scaffolding curriculum.

Staff will first independently construct a list of strategies and vocabulary they currently

use in teaching graphing, data analysis, and writing data-supported conclusions. These

independent lists will be compiled, and common strategies will be identified, discussed and

evaluated. Through collaborative discussion, teachers will determine the terminology and

strategies that should be consistent across grade levels.

Objective 3​: The CGMS science department will construct a graphic organizer

containing common terminology, and each grade level strategies and requirements for student

mastery of graphing, data analysis, and forming data supported conclusions.

This graphic organizer will be digital, and all department members will be granted editing

rights to the document. At the top of the document will be the agreed upon terminology and

definitions from objective two. The left most column of the graphic organizer will be for each

skill, while the columns to the right will represent grades six, seven, and eight. For each

standard the teachers at each grade level will fill in their additional strategies and criteria for
rigor and student mastery of these standards. An example graphic organizer is illustrated in

Figure 1. This graphic organizer will be presented to the building Director of Curriculum and

Instruction (DCI) for feedback and serve as evidence of participation in professional

development during the week of in-service before the start of the school year.

Figure 1: Outline of the Program Product (Graphic Organizer)

Common Terminology (all grades):
6​th​ Grade 7​th​ Grade 8​th​ Grade
Graphing A – minimal rigor A A
B – moderate rigor B
C – most rigorous
Data analysis A – minimal rigor A A
B – moderate rigor B
C – most rigorous
Writing data A – minimal rigor A A
supported B – moderate rigor B
conclusions C – most rigorous

Vertical Alignment Program Plan Details

Schedule and Facilities: ​The program is scheduled to run for four hours, or a “half day”

and will be held during the week of teacher in-service in a classroom on campus. This time

frame and location were selected because it is during teacher contract time and participants will

have access to classrooms and materials, so no additional payments or purchases need to be

made by the science department or school administration for compensation or supplies. The

afternoon time slot was selected so staff would be sufficiently energized after the lunch hour and

there are a balance of individual and collaborative activities in the program, to address the

different working and learning preferences of each department member. Breaks are included in

the timing of the program to ensure participants sustain stamina and maintain focus and energy
throughout the working portions of the session. The detailed schedule is outlined below in Figure

2.

Figure 2: Program Schedule

Date: Tuesday August 7, 2018 (Or another day during teacher work week)
Time: 12:00pm - 4:00pm (after lunch)
Location: Conservatory Green Middle School – Room 222

12:00 - 12:10 Ice breakers, catch up from summer session

12:10 – 12:15 Review agenda and goal for the program
12:15 – 1:00 Objective 1: Comprehending NGSS
(20 minutes) Independent reading and note taking
(25 minutes) Group sharing, discussion, note taking
1:00 – 1:10 Break
1:10 – 2:30 Objective 2: Determining Best Practices
(10 minutes) Individual brainstorm
(10 minutes) Create collective list of individual ideas
(60 minutes) Debating common terminology and teaching strategies
2:30-2:40 Break
2:40 – 3:50 Objective 3: Finalizing Graphic Organizer
(10 minutes) Reviewing graphic organizer outline and entering in agreed
upon terminology from objective two
(40 minutes) Within grade levels, entering mastery criteria and teaching
strategies
(20 minutes) Reviewing as whole content group and looking for increased
rigor with each grade
3:50 – 4:00 Closure, send product to DCI, ending survey

Budget: ​The science department budget is funded by the network in the form of an

organizational subsidy. This budget is zero-based and typically utilized for ordering basic school

supplies and lab materials throughout the year until funds are depleted. However, funds can be

used to offset any department costs. Because many resources are already provided by the school

such as office supplies, computers, and workspace, the cost impact of this program on the

science department budget is minimal, as shown in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Budget Outline
Science Department Budget 2018-2019 $2,000.00
Meeting space (at school) $0.00
Participant fees (during contract hours) $0.00
Guest speakers (none) $0.00
Participant laptops with internet access (provided by school) $0.00
Highlighters, writing utensils, poster paper (provided by school) $0.00
Headphones (optional, for independent work time, brought by participant) $0.00
Paper copies of current practices and NGSS standards (provided by school) $0.00
Snacks and Drinks for five participants (​must have gluten free options​ ​!) $20.00
TOTAL PROJECTED COST OF PROGRAM $20.00
Return from Program $0.00
Remaining Budget Funds 2018-2019 $1,980.00

Marketing: ​This program will be promoted through online tools including email and

event reminders, as electronic communication is most effective during summer recess. Email

correspondence will occur between the DCI and School Director to seek approval to conduct the

program. Alterations to the schedule will be made according to their feedback. Once approved,

emails will be sent to department members explaining the purpose and logistical details of the

program. The email will contain an outlook event invitation containing the program time and

location which participants can accept, and outlook will send reminders of the session details a

day before the program so individuals can plan their personal schedules accordingly. A separate

email will also be sent to members of the district home office, to see if anyone is to facilitate or

provide additional information on NGSS. These individuals will be identified below under the

“potential partners” section of this program plan.

Participants Roles and Potential Partners: ​The five members of the science

department each hold equal value and influence in the department. Because the power in the

department is symmetrical, it is essential each person actively contributes to the program goal.
According to Yang, Cervero, Valentine & Benson (1998) Model of Power and Influence Tactics,

as shown in Figure 4, the best approach for reaching consensus among a group of people of

symmetrical power who are proactively solving a problem is to utilize “Reasoning” tactics.

Figure 4: Model of Power and Influence Tactics

The Power and Influence Tactics Scale (POINTS), suggests reasoning can be associated

with “Convincing <the person> that your plan is viable, Presenting <the person> with facts,

figures, and other data to support your plan, and Using logical arguments to convince <the

person> to support your plan” (Yang, Cervero, Valentine & Benson, 1998, p.237). All

participants in the program are expected to demonstrate the DSST Core Values of Respect,

Courage, and Doing your Best in the Reasoning of ideas and suggestions for common

terminology and best teaching practices for graphing, analyzing data, and constructing data

supported conclusions.

Other responsibilities include the Program Planner being responsible for the gathering

and organizing of materials for the program, keeping time, and recording notes. The Science
Department Chair will be responsible for facilitating discussion, most importantly using slightly

more power as a leader to counteract ideas, as illustrated in Figure 4, to ensure the department is

deriving the best plan of action with minimal opportunities for failure. The DCI will be

responsible for evaluating the product of the program. As an administrator, power level between

this position and the science department is asymmetrical. After reviewing the program product,

the feedback from the DCI will either involve bargaining tactics if the graphic organizer is not

approved, or consulting tactics if the work is deemed acceptable, as seen along the z-axis

(diagonal axis) in Figure 4.

A potential outside partner for this program is Lauren Jones-Kaplan, Manager of

Professional Learning for Middle School Science in the DSST network of schools, and head of

sixth grade science. Lauren works as part of the “Home Office” team which is considered upper

leadership in the district. She can serve as a resource for understanding and implementing the

NGSS curriculum, and if willing, can provide feedback on the graphic organizer constructed

during the final objective of the program. Additional potential outside partners include

Samantha Knipp and Schuyler Fishman, who are teachers and serve as head of sciences for

grades seven and eight, respectively.

If the program receives positive feedback from the building DCI and members of the

Home Office and proves to be successful through the series of evaluation tools, it can be shared

with the other middle school science departments in the district to benefit their students. It can

also serve as a model for leaders of other content departments so they can vertically align their

curriculum.

Evaluation Methods
 The evaluation of the program’s success will be conducted in quantitative and qualitative

fashions. Teachers will participate in a survey to record their initial reaction to the program,

conduct observations of each other’s teaching to ensure the new learning is translating into

teaching practice, and data from student pre- and post-tests will be analyzed for measuring

results of student’s academic achievement of the NGSS standards.

Survey​: A cross sectional survey will be conducted among members of the science

department after the program. The survey will include Likert Scale questions to determine the

overall effectiveness of the program, followed by open-ended questions for suggestions and

comments for future professional development opportunities. The survey will be digital so data

from the Likert Scale questions can be averaged and displayed in a chart, and the open ended

responses will be coded for positive and negative feedback.

Observations​: Non-formal observations will be conducted among members of the

science department during the first unit of the school year. The purpose of this is to ensure all

teachers are coherent with the determined terminologies and techniques agreed upon for the

program. These observations will be qualitative by leaving notes for the observed teacher, and

having follow up discussions during department meetings.

Pre- and Post-Tests​: At the beginning of the school year, students at each grade level

will be given a common assessment on graphing, data analysis, and forming data supported

conclusions. After the first instructional unit of teaching these standards, students will be given

the same common assessment, and pre and post scores will be compared to measure student

mastery of the material. Though analyzing the overall growth scores as well as growth on each
of the three specific standards, the department will be able to determine if the terminologies and

techniques agreed upon during the program achieved desired results, or if modifications should

be made for the following school year.

Program Sustainability and Probable Results

Financially, this program is extremely sustainable. Although no revenue is generated,

there is minimal impact on the science department’s subsidy. This program is also easy to

recycle with different science standards, or for other departments to use with their content.

Potential hurdles to the sustainability of this program include changing curriculum and teacher

turnover. K-12 education is constantly evolving in best practices/methods. However, the overall

concept of vertical alignment, increasing rigor and complexity with content at each grade level

and develop student’s intelligence and critical thinking skills, is the overall goal of education, no

matter the current trends. In regard to turnover, if one or two department members leave at the

end of a school year, the goal of the program and documentation of the graphic organizer will

still remain with the school, as well as three to four members to continue the momentum and

progress towards the goal.

The key outcome of this program is cohesion among teachers in utilizing specific

terminologies and strategies when teaching graphing, analyzing data, and writing data supported

conclusions while increasing rigor and complexity at each grade level. Tangible results of this

program include high student achievement data on these standards determined by pre- and

post-test data, as well as greater retention of these skills through sixth, seventh and eighth grade

and into high school. Indirectly, teacher evaluation scores will also increase. This is because

evaluation scores are partly determined by student achievement, and partly through a criteria
titled “collaboration with and contribution to teams.” With the graphic organizer and pre- and

post-test data as evidence, teachers have two solid pieces of evidence to contribute to their

evaluator that they did not have in previous years.

Program Planning Model

The Vertical Alignment Program for the science department at CGMS was constructed

using a pragmatic approach. This method was used in order to address real-world constraints

and fluctuating elements of the program. The pragmatic approach to program planning made

addressing the four administrative components of the Interactive Model of Program Planning

(scheduling, budgets, details and marketing) highlighted in Figure 5 incredibly feasible. Of the

five areas of foundational knowledge, shown on the outside of Figure 5, Power and Interest and

Adult Learning were most critical to the program’s success, whereas technology, relationship

building and cultural differences were less relevant. An advantage to using the Interactive model

is it “is designed so it can be used at a local, regional…level”. (Caffarella, Daffron, & Cervero,

2013).

Figure 5: Interactive Model of Program Planning

 References

Bryk, A.S., & Schneider, B. (2002). ​Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement.​ New

York: Russel Sage.

Caffarella, R. S., Daffron, S. R., & Cervero, R.M. (2013). Planning programs for adult learners: a

practical guide (3​rd​ ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Case, B., & Zucker, S. (2005). Horizontal and vertical alignment. ​Pearson Policy Report,​ 1-6.

Retrieved from

https://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/tmrs_rg/HorizontalVerticalAlignme

nt.pdf?WT.mc_id=TMRS_Horizontal_and_Vertical_Alignment

DSST. ​About DSST Public Schools​. (n.d.). Retrieved June 8, 2018, from

https://www.dsstpublicschools.org/

PARCC – Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. Ensuring every

student succeeds. Retrieved June 20, 2018, from ​https://parcc-assessment.org/

Yang, B., Cervero, R., Valentine, T., Benson, J. (1998). Development and validation of an

instrument to measure adult educator’s power and influence tactics in program planning

practice. ​Adult Education Quarterly, 48(​ 4), 277-244. doi: 10.1177/074171369804800403

Ziegler, B. (2018). These U.S. States Have the Best Education Systems. Retrieved July 5, 2018,
from https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/education