Presentation on theme: "Dr. Kenneth Jenkins, Principal Specialist"— Presentation transcript:
1 Dr. Kenneth Jenkins, Principal Specialist Building Blocksof RestructuringColleton Middle SchoolDr. Kenneth Jenkins,Principal Specialist
2 Comprehensive Systematic School Plan for Improvement Building BlocksLeadership Team HQ Teachers - Professional Development (PDP) Curriculum Resources Standards-Based Instruction Aligned Assessment Positive, Safe Learning EnvironmentComprehensive Systematic School Planfor Improvement
3 Comprehensive Systematic School Plan for Improvement Restructuring ProcessesNeeds Assessment using data xxx Collaboration and capacity building Progress MonitoringComprehensive Systematic School Planfor ImprovementNeed for rapid change!
5 CMS students Bulldog Pride! 1 of 3 middle schools in CCSD Poverty index 81%409 students in grades 6, 7, and 8264 African American students122 White students42 certified staff members (11 males, 31 females)Changing demographics since school began tracking data for “expected progress” then to 409 students nowLike other high poverty schools, CMS has struggled to reach the report card targets for which the bar is raised each year.
6 CMS students 50% or more students enter CMS lacking essential skills (e.g. multiplication facts)enter CMS readingbelow grade level"I don't care what they do on TV, Jerome, you can not call a life line."
7 High priority need READING On the average, CMS students begin the school year approximately 2 years below grade level in reading.STAR reading assessment Fall 2008Most 7th and 8th graders who are over 2 years below grade level in reading have built up walls of resistance and don’t want to keep trying because of past failures in learning to read.Grade LevelAverage Instructional Reading Level64.2 Scored as well as a 4th grader after 2 months of instruction74.6 Scored as well as a 4th grader after 6 months of instruction85.7 Scored as well as a 5th grader after 7 months of instructionIn what ways does reading impact all subjects?
8 Meeting the Reading Challenge STAR reading assessment GrowthGradeBeginning of YearGrade EquivalentAfter 7 MonthsChange after7 Months64.65.4+0.875.35.7+0.486.36.7The average reading level at all grades improved!6th grade growth exceeded expectations: equivalent to 8 months of growth in 7 month periodAn almost impossible challengeAccelerate progress 1+ grade levels in a single yearwith students who failed to master reading in grades 1-5.
9 ACCOUNTABILITY Student Achievement CMS PACT PERFORMANCE LEVELS Proficient /Advanced 2006 – 2007 Significant gain in percent of students attaining proficient/advanced performance for all 4 core areas2008 School choice resulted in decrease Proficient/Advanced students (significant number of former top students no longer attend CMS)Below Basic (BB)2006 – Less BB students in math, science, social studies2008 Less BB continued for math but not other subjectsSubject Year % BB % Basic %Prof. %AdvELA % 40.6% 9.1% 0.8%% 39.3% 11.2% 0.9%% 44.9% 11.6% 0.2%Math % 52.1% 8.6% 5.5%% 49.0% 11.9% 4.0%% 43.0% 8.4% 2.9%Science % 30.2% 10.3% 7.6%% 29.9% 9.4% 9.1%% 30.2% 6.5% 4.9%Soc. St % 41.6% 6.7% 4.8%% 41.4% 9.7% 2.9%% 40.9% 5.7% 3.6%Approximately 1/2 of students performed below grade level in ELA, science, and social studies.
10 Accountability Federal State No Child Left Behind legislation Adequate Yearly ProgressProficient/Advanced performance targets in ELA and MathStateEducation Accountability ActSchool Report CardAll core subjects
11 Learning is like rowing upstream, not to advance is to drop back. A constantly moving target…Learning is like rowing upstream,not to advance is to drop back.– Chinese proverb
12 The challenge of hitting a moving target School Report Card ScoresThe challenge of hitting a moving target* Targets based on value needed to move out of “at risk” status -The bar is raised each yearLooking beneath the surface…What can we learn from disaggregated data by subject, grade, etc.?20052006200720082.42.52.62.72.3Target*CMS AllBased on 4 core subjectsgrades 6, 7, and 8
13 PACT Student Performance Data Data analysis leads to identifying root causes and key leverage areas to target for improvementData analysis by school, grade, subject, subgroupsTeacher roleIn/ Out reportsExpectation is at least 10% of students will move up1 performance level on state test with no students slippingTeacher reflection and collaboration (PDP)Goal setting and working with “bubble” studentsAchievement gap analysis and planningAfrican American studentsStudents from a culture of povertyState and Federal Accountability
14 Disaggregated by grade School Report Card ScoresDisaggregated by grade20052006200720082.42.52.62.72.3Target*CMS AllGr. 6Gr. 7Gr. 8Continuing to look beneath the surface...What are pockets of excellence?... and areas needing support?
15 ELA disaggregated by grade School Report Card ScoresELA disaggregated by grade20052006200720082.42.52.62.18.104.22.168Target*CMS AllELAGr. 6Gr. 7Gr. 8Continuing to lookbeneath the surface...What are pockets of excellence?... and areas needing support?
16 Social Studies disaggregated by grade School Report Card ScoresSocial Studies disaggregated by grade20052006200720082.42.52.62.22.214.171.124Target*CMS AllSoc. St.Continuing to lookbeneath the surface...Gr. 6Gr. 7Gr. 8What are pockets of excellence?... and areas needing support?
17 Science disaggregated by grade School Report Card ScoresScience disaggregated by grade20052006200720082.42.52.62.126.96.36.199Target*CMS AllScienceGr. 6Gr. 7Gr. 8Continuing to lookbeneath the surface...What are pockets of excellence?... and areas needing support?
18 Math disaggregated by grade School Report Card ScoresMath disaggregated by grade20052006200720082.42.52.62.188.8.131.52.12.2Target*CMS AllMathContinuing to lookbeneath the surface...Gr. 6Gr. 7Gr. 8What are pockets of excellence in math?How has each grade improved over time?
19 Teachers with In/Out 2008 PACT growth Mathematics*Science**Steedley+.40Fanchette+.23SPICE+.18Wiggins+.10BarnhillINTERVENTIONIST+.28MillenSpecial Needs+.17Archer+.58Morton+.20KennedyMillenSpecial Needs+.67Jeffords+.10** Only students with matching scores; Testing only gr. 4, 7 for all students* All students tested annually
20 Teachers with In/Out 2008 PACT growth English Language Arts*Social Studies**Walsh+.49Martin+.44TriplettINTERVENTIONIST+.30Edwards+.24ReidSpecial Needs+.15Thomas+.10** Only students with matching scores; Testing only gr. 4, 7 for all students* All students tested annually
21 CMS AYP 2008 (Adequate Yearly Progress NCLB) 10 out of 21 objectives metELATarget58.8%% of students scoring Proficient/Advanced 5 student participation objectives met 5 student achievement objectives not metMathTarget57.8%% of students scoring Proficient/Advanced 5 student participation objectives met 5 student achievement objectives not metOther94.0%Attendance Rate 1 attendance objective not metCMS Subgroups: All, W, AA, F/R, Spec. Needs
22 A changing population over time Attendance zone changesMoreSpecial NeedsstudentsLessHonors/ SPICE/ Advancedstudents
23 Adequate Yearly Progress (NCLB) AYP ChangesExtended team of teachers working with top students (SPICE/Honors)PASS replaces PACT - New performance levelsSC like other states’ definition of “proficient” in 2009old PACTnew PASSAYP performanceAYP performanceBasicProficientAdvanced“Met” Standard“Exceeded” Standard
24 School Improvement rank Comparison to other CCSD schoolsSchool% Basic & Above 2005% Basic & Above 2008Change from 2005 to 2008School Improvement rankNSES55.5%79.1%23.6%1CES65.1%73.1%8.0%2*BSES60.7%66.7%6.0%3CMS48.1%50.4%2.3%4FCMS52.8%54.9%2.1%5RMS63.3%61.5%-1.8%6FHES72.9%70.4%-2.5%7HSES59.3%-4.0%8BES75.2%61.6%-13.6%9Improvement from 2005 to 2008EnglishLanguageArtsBasic and Above =On/above grade level performance =Met or Exceeded StandardNew AYP target will equate to “Basic and Above” performance 58.8% of students* denotes READING FIRST school
25 School Improvement rank Comparison to other CCSD schoolsSchool% Basic & Above 2005% Basic & Above 2008Change from 2005 to 2008School Improvement rankCMS46.7%66.2%19.5%1NES62.7%80.8%18.1%2CES64.5%73.1%8.6%3HES58.0%64.0%6.0%4FCMS50.1%55.8%5.7%5RMS66.3%67.3%1.0%6FHES63.3%0.6%7BSES65.9%54.4%-11.5%8BES71.4%55.1%-16.3%9Improvement from 2005 to 2008MathematicsNew AYP target will equate to “Basic and Above” performance 57.8% of studentsTarget increases in 2011 79% of students
26 2008-2009 Focus Plan (FSRP) External Review Team Requirements (ERT) Goal-setting3 instructional goals2 school leadership goals2 district leadership goalsMonitoring “satisfactory implementation”
27 Focus Plan GoalsBy April 1, 2009, students in grades 6-8 will demonstrate achievement in….English Language Artsas evidenced by 75% of the students attaining a passing score of 70% or higher on a comprehensive standards-based exam.Mathematicsas evidenced by 77% of the students attaining a passing score of 70% or higher on a comprehensive standards-based exam.Scienceas evidenced by 70% of the students attaining a passing score of 70% or higher on a comprehensive standards-based exam.
28 2008-2009 Focus Plan Goals continued Principal’s Instructional Leadership to Increase Student AchievementBy April 1, 2009, the principal will provide support to increase student achievement as evidenced by attainment of targeted pass rates on comprehensive standards-based exams as follows: English Language Arts, 75%, Mathematics, 77%, and Science 70%, ….….through monitoring the instructional program.… through providing professional development.District Administrators’ Instructional Leadership to Increase Student AchievementBy April 1, 2009, the district will provide support to ensure that students in grades 6-8 will demonstrate achievement as evidenced by attaining the three content goals (ELA, math, and science pass rate targets).
29 2008-2009 Focus Plan (FSRP) Classroom Common Assessments (SMART goals) Bimonthly support and oversight:ERT-Liason on siteDistrict leadership support/review of dataClassroom Common Assessments (SMART goals)Classroom Observation Data
30 1st semester % Passing (70+) Goals AchievedPercent of students passing comprehensive standards-based examsSubjectsFSRP Target Set1st semester % Passing (70+)FSRPTarget Met2ndsemester % Passing (70+)Mathematics77%78%80%Science70%74%81%English Language Arts75%75.4%Social Studies79%
31 2008-2009 Progress Monitoring PDP and Teacher Reflection Coaching CyclePlan Teach / Observe / Assess ReflectComprehensive Standards-Based ExamsBi-monthly S.M.A.R.T. Goal Assessments (80% of students score 80% with reteaching/retesting as needed for mastery learning)Weekly ELA “Cold Text” AssessmentsSTAR Reading and Accelerated Reading AssessmentsMeasures of Academic Progress (MAP) (2 times per year for all students; 3 times per year for special populations)
32 2008-2009 Progress Monitoring Reading MAP 41% of CMS students improved one performance level:Not Met Met ExceededGrade 6:56% improved one level44% scored Basic or above (Met +)Grade 7:38% improved one level59% scored Basic or above (Met +)Grade 8:27% improved one level68% scored Basic or above (Met +)Basic /MetBelow /Not metFallSpring 2009
33 2008-2009 Progress Monitoring Mathematics MAP 48% of CMS students improved one performance level:Not Met Met Exceeded“Bubble” students:47% improved one level64% scored Basic or above (Met/Exceeded)Intervention MET3 students:57% improved one level54% scored Basic or above (Met/Exceeded)Students with learning disabilities in self-contained classes:27% improved one level12% scored Basic or above (Met/Exceeded)Only 40% of SPICE/Honors had matching fall and spring scoresBasic /MetBelow /Not metFallSpring 2009
35 School StatusExpected Progress on PACT for ERT-supported “at risk” schools0.3 increase over 3 years on report card scoreCMS was point from reaching this targetState of EmergencyCMSPPS Status
36 2009-2010 PPS partnership 1 out of 41 schools in the state 3 levels of support based on need:Turnaround, Support, District-AssistedCMS – Tier 2 SupportSCDE – Assistance with finance, budgeting, staffing, recruitment, retention, partnerships, leadership team, district/state programs and initiatives, support system of professional development activities for teachers, principals, and district staff to include a developmental curriculum approach model for
37 2009-2010 Support and Oversight Bi-weekly:PPS-Liason on site SC Dept. of Ed. SupportMonthly:District leadership support/review of dataClassroom Common AssessmentsClassroom Observation DataTheory of ActionRegional S2MART CentersPPS Professional Learning Community Collaboration Meetings Regional Meetings Regional Monthly Teacher SupportSupport Services for Making a Real Transformation
38 Obstacles and Challenges Numerous teacher and administrative turnover in recent yearsInability of our students to read and comprehend 50% Below Basic – ELA 2008Reduction in funding – loss of administrative and curriculum personnel, teacher cut backs lead to higher teacher/pupil ratioRetention and recruitment of high quality teachers and leadersAcceleration of reading progress for struggling ELA studentsParent involvement“When parents are involved, students achieve more, regardless of socioeconomic status, ethnic/racial background, or the parents’ education level.”—National Standards for Parent/Family Involvement
39 Family Involvement Strategies School Parenting PersonnelPart-time Parent FacilitatorParent and Data Communication CoordinatorLearning at HomeParent Center ResourcesFamily Night – Math/Science/LiteracyDecision-makingParent Teacher OrganizationSchool Improvement CouncilParent Advisory Committee for Title ITwo-Way CommunicationIn Touch – Parents view discipline, grades, attendance, PACT scores, and may correspond with the teacher via the internet. Teacher posts major assignments. Current data is exported from SASI and Integrade Pro on a regular basis. Teachers update grades weekly.Auto-Dialer MessageAgenda books – Homework assignments;correspondenceIntegrade Pro grade reports, missing tasks, etc.Parent ConferencesCommunity CollaborationSIC Members/Community LeadersCareer FairVolunteersSign up at 6th grade orientation, GAP Kickoff, Open House
40 “Do what you can, where you are, with what you have.” Restructuring“Do what you can, where you are, with what you have.”--Theodore RooseveltThe challenge is for us to get all stakeholders to work collaboratively and cohesively together for the benefit of our students.
41 2009-2010 Palmetto Priority School Requirements Co-development, implementation, and monitoring of the SCDE approved PPS Plan of Action (Focused School Renewal Plan format)Monitor teacher’s instructional practices (observations, written feedback, conferences with teachers, follow-up observations)Professional Learning Communities for School-Based Professional DevelopmentSchool Leadership TeamApproved SCDE curriculumInstruction aligned with curriculumComprehensive assessment systemStakeholder collaborationStudent-centered school climateStrategies to address weaknesses (specific grade/content based on data)Comprehensive needs assessmentWhich of these arealready in place at CMS?
42 C M 2009-2010 Fine-tuning – Action Plan – specifics to be determined ommitted toakingFine-tuning –Precision and intensity of implementation of existing initiatives“Stay the course…”Action Plan – specifics to be determinedInstructional Goals for ELA and mathAdministrative Leadership Goals (principal/ district)Progress Monitoring
43 Guidelines for PPS Action Plan Goals Required Instructional Goals for ELA and math“Through a development curriculum approach, specific needs of studentswill be assessed, determining ongoing adjustments to be madeaccording to the progress of students, ensuring academicimprovement by May 3, 2010.” sample goal from SCDEMeasurement will be determined by growth indices from Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)Required Principal Instructional Leadership GoalsMonitor instructional practicesLead staff in improvement in instructional climate (surveys)Required District Instructional Support Goal –Monitor all of the above
44 Literacy Collaboration among stakeholders Literacy improvement plan Leveled texts and SRA reading instruction dailySRA – Scientific Research Associates ProgramDirect Instruction in Decoding and Skill KitsNovel Units for “test out” groupsSchoolwide Student Writing - connections to character educationSchoolwide Reading Assessments: STAR, MAP, ARClassroom ELA assessments with “cold text”On-going Professional DevelopmentReading Interventionist/ ELATE ProgramLiteracy Coach/ Instruction FacilitatorSIF Grant
45 “Teaching is hard work. Success can be ensured for every student only when teachers pool their strengths and support each other by engaging in a common quest for continuous improvement.”-Turning Points, p. 141
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.