Octorara Area School District: Focused on Learning 11/29/2018 10:30 AM Maximizing Opportunities For Success Octorara Area School District: Focused on Learning Welcome to the OASD presentation of the 2013 Annual Academic Report. This evening we will be discussing the state’s new School Performance Profile, the results for each building in the OASD, and the changes already in place to increase student achievement. OASD Annual Report October 14, 2013 © 2007 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries. The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.

OASD SCHOOL PERFORMANCE PROFILE SCORES The School Performance Profile (SPP) is PA Dept. of Education’s new evaluation method for public, public charter, public cyber charter and public career-technical schools. The School Performance Profile takes the place of Adequate Yearly Progress, or AYP. Unlike the AYP model, the School Performance Profile does not provide a broad District measurement. Instead, School Performance Profiles give us a quantitative academic score for each of our schools. Each score is based on data elements in academic achievement, closing the achievement gap, academic growth, other academic indicators and even extra credit points for advanced achievement. The School Performance Profile score for each building in the OASD is displayed on this slide. Scores of 70 and above are acceptable to the state; however, being “good enough” does not maximize success for all students in our schools. We want to be better and we need to be better. The relative placement of the scores for each building is not a surprise to us. As you will see, we have been working to make significant changes in our approach to learning that will, over time, allow us to push past “good enough” and become a learning organization that truly does maximize success for all.

Focus on: Achievement and Attendance The School Performance Profile score is comprised primarily of Achievement and Growth data. Points for Closing the Achievement Gap will not be a factor in this score until next year. This chart depicts our achievement data broken down by building and subject area. Remember that the OJSHS achievement data reflects 7th and 8th grade PSSA and 11th grade Keystone Exams. We have included attendance because it is also a factor in the SPP score. Not seen on this slide, but also included in the Academic Achievement measure is the percent of students competent or advanced on industry certification exams such as NOCTI or NIMS which are exams taken by students in Career and Technical Education programs. 92 percent of our students scored Competent or Advanced on these measures.

Focus On: Growth = or near 0: 1 year’s predicted average growth > 0: exceeded 1 year’s predicted average growth < 0: less than 1 year’s predicted average growth While Academic Achievement comprises 40% of the SPP score, Academic Growth contributes an additional 40% of each building level score. This chart depicts whether or not we have met the state standard for growth in grades 4-8 in the subject areas of math, reading, writing and science, and Keystone Exams in 8th grade and high school. ( In grades 8, 9 and 10, end of course Keystone Exams in Algebra I, Biology and Literature are used to measure growth. Keystone Exams taken in 11th grade are only used to measure achievement.) Note the key in the upper right hand corner of the slide. Again, this chart depicts academic growth, not achievement. The target is zero. If we are at or near zero, it means students in that subject area and grade level have made 1 year’s predicted average growth. Where the bar falls below zero indicates where we have not met the growth standard as predicted.

Jesse’s Annual Growth Compared to Predicted Average Growth: Age 3: +8 Predicted Average Growth forJesse Yearly Average Growth for Boys Think of it this way: Jesse is measured for height one day each year. Last year, Jesse was 3 feet, 8 inches tall. That is an achievement measure, and we can say that, based on the yearly average growth for boys (represented by the blue line on the graph) Jesse is Proficient in Height. When the pediatrician consults her growth chart, she can predict that Jesse, in one year should be 4 feet, 2 inches tall. This prediction is based on the rate of growth Jesse has shown since he was born and the rate of average growth each year for children the same age. This is represented by the orange, starred line. When Jesse and his Mom return to the pediatrician the following year, Jesse is measured and he is only 3 feet, 11 inches tall. Although that height is still considered proficient since he hit the average growth line, (the blue line) Jesse did not meet the standard for growth at the rate that was predicted, and therefore the difference between the predicted growth and Jesse’s actual growth is represented as negative number. Negative growth, does not mean that Jesse shrunk. Age 3: 3 ft 2 in Age 4: 3 ft 8 in Age 5: 3 ft. 11 in

Focus On: Growth = or near 0: 1 year’s predicted average growth > 0: exceeded 1 year’s predicted average growth < 0: less than 1 year’s predicted average growth Likewise, the bars that depict negative growth do not indicate a backward slide in skill or ability. Based on growth data for writing and science in grades 5 and 8, and math in grade 7, our students are not meeting the average predicted growth standard. This does not mean they have regressed or now have a deficit in skill. It does mean that on average, this group was predicted to make a certain amount of growth and based on test scores, they did not do so. In contrast, the grade level cohorts in math and reading, with some exceptions, met or exceeded the state standard for growth. We will discuss reasons why this may be occurring, what our response will be, and we’ll look more closely at the growth for students in all proficiency categories of each tested subject during the Education Committee meeting on October 28th. It truly is a lot of data and is just not practical for us to examine all of it at this evening.

OASD SCHOOL PERFORMANCE PROFILE SCORES Indicators of Academic Achievement Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap (2014-15) Indicators of Academic Growth Other Academic Indicators Extra Credit for Advanced Achievement In review, each School Performance Profile Score is a quantitative academic score based on a 100 point scale using achievement data, growth data, and other indicators of academic achievement such as attendance, graduation rate and the SAT/ACT college ready benchmark. Note that beginning in 2014-15, Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap will also be included as 10% of the total SPP Score. All of these indicators will be reviewed in more detail during the Education Committee meeting because that setting is much more conducive to rolling up our sleeves and digging around in the data to more fully comprehend what it means.

Focus on: Working Harder 11/29/2018 10:30 AM Focus on: Working Harder AYP—since 2003 the OASD has made AYP except for 2004; 2005; 2012 In response: Defined Curriculum via Curriculum Mapping Research-Based Programs Math and Literacy Consultants RTII to address intervention and remediation While the manner in which our schools are evaluated has changed, our data comes as no surprise to us. Through the comprehensive planning process that began last year and via the annual report for 2012, we have communicated our need to do things differently. We have had good people working hard to make a difference. We spent several years on curriculum mapping. This was necessary and we gained much from the process. We have allocated resources to research-based programs for reading and math. We have employed math and literacy consultants to provide professional development and guidance in meeting the new PA Core Standards. We have put focus on interventions and remediation for struggling students through response to intervention and instruction. All of these responses have yielded some gains; however, the administrative team recognized that a more comprehensive approach to school improvement was needed. Simply working harder has not yielded the gains we believe we need and should see. © 2007 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries. The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.

Focus On: Doing Things Differently Learning Focused Schools 2011--Essential Question: What do administrators and teachers need to know and do differently to increase learning? 2012—Transforming Standards into Learning 2013—Connecting Exemplary Practices in Acquisition Lessons In 2011 we asked ourselves this essential question: What do administrators and teachers need to know and do differently to increase learning? The administrative team began the study of the Learning-Focused Schools framework for school improvement. In May of 2012 we rolled this initiative out to the teaching staff in the spirit of answering this essential question. No longer can we just work on individual parts of the puzzle, we need to insure that all pieces fit together to improve learning for all students. In so doing, we are asking teachers to focus on learning rather than teaching. In Aug. of 2012 all teaching and administrative staff were trained in the first component of Learning Focused Schools: Transforming Standards into Learning.

Teacher Centered: Planning for the Teaching We spent the year re-examining our curriculum, organizing it into units that define what we want students to KNOW, UNDERSTAND and DO, and then took those units and built from them Student Learning Maps, not teaching plans, but Learning Maps that engage students in the process of learning. This is ongoing as we work to align curriculum to the PA Core Standards. Student Centered: Planning for the Learning

Focus On: Doing Things Differently Planning for the Learning This past August, all teachers and administrators received training in Connecting Exemplary Practices in Acquisition Lessons. Teachers are learning how to plan lessons for learning that include research-based strategies that have been proven to yield significant gains in achievement. By 2014-15 it is the goal for all teachers and administrators to be planning for the learning, engaging students in the process and using these research-based practices consistently and pervasively across the district. This conversation has been and will continue to be a priority at Education Committee Meetings on the last Monday of the month.

OASD SCHOOL PERFORMANCE PROFILE SCORES Again, our data validates that we need to approach school improvement comprehensively. We are asking teachers, administrators, instructional assistants and educational specialists to focus on learning, rather than on teaching, and our goal is balanced achievement.

OUR GOAL=BALANCED ACHIEVEMENT Balanced Achievement Schools: Students at Balanced Achievement ADVANCED ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROFICIENT (Grade Level) BASIC ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BELOW BASIC Typical Schools: Students not at Balanced Achievement What is Balanced Achievement? Balanced Achievement is the point at which all students are on or above grade level. In the typical school paradigm, lower-achieving students remain well below proficiency, while our higher achieving students are at or above proficiency. Overall, we want more growth for all of our students. Learning Focused Schools is providing a comprehensive research-based framework focused on learning and student achievement. Schools taking a balanced achievement approach see the greatest increases in student achievement and are more likely to close achievement gaps faster than those schools that use stand-alone solutions such as interventions and programs. Our experience has shown us this. We have implemented stand alone interventions and programs which have not yielded large scale results. Balanced achievement occurs when we focus on the learning. And in a balanced achievement model, every student grows.

The Balanced Achievement Model OASD: A LEARNING FOCUSED SCHOOL Research-Based Instruction Comprehensive Literacy K-12 Catching Kids Up Assessments Standards Driven Curriculum Consistent and Pervasive Adapt, Don’t Adopt Leadership for Learning Continuous Improvement What does balanced achievement look like at OASD? It includes research-based instruction, comprehensive literacy K-12, methods to catch kids up who struggle or fall behind, and assessments. These work together as part of a standards-driven curriculum that balances on instructional leadership. The key to balanced achievement is the consistency and pervasiveness of all learning components and the focus on continuous improvement we must have in order to meet our goals. The Balanced Achievement Model MAXIMIZING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUCCESS

Researched-Based Instruction Comprehensive Literacy Program Consistent & Pervasive Instructional Practice Monitoring & Walkthroughs Planned Learning Units Aligned to PA Common Core Standards Consistent Lesson Plan Template Extended Thinking Opportunity Differentiated Tasks via Choice Comprehensive Literacy Program Reading and Writing to learn in all content areas Reading/Writing Workshop K-8 Vocabulary Instruction in Context Methods to "Catch Kids Up" Previewing and Accelerating Strategies Scaffolding Grade Level Learning Opportunity to Schedule "double-up" time Assessment Formative Assessments to Check for Understanding Benchmark Assessments Common Summative Assessments Defined Curriculum Maximizing Opportunities For Success Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum Elite Instructional Practice Learning Focused Schools Target Areas of Improvement by Year B.R.A.V.E.S. =Years 1, 2 =Years 3, 4 The change has begun. This slide provides a more detailed view of our work, already in progress. The boxes in yellow indicate the work already begun. The boxes in red indicate the target areas for improvement beginning in years 3 and 4 of adapting the Learning Focused Schools Framework. For example: Research-Based Instruction: This year, as we continue to complete learning units and student learning maps we have included a focus on consistent and pervasive instructional practice. The administrative team will be monitoring instructional practice via administrative walk throughs and by requiring teachers to use a lesson plan format designed to plan for the learning and the use of best practice. Comprehensive Literacy Program: We have implemented reading and writing workshop in grades 3-8, and there is much to do as we begin the transition to reading and writing workshop next year in the primary grades. Reading and Writing to learn in all content areas and vocabulary instruction in context are also key pieces to the “puzzle”. Assessment: Work in the area of assessment has begun and is ongoing in every content area. Methods to Catch Kids Up: Through Response to Intervention and Instruction programs in each building there are methods in place. We will be working to make these methods consistent and pervasive across the district as is outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Defined Curriculum: Also as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, a curriculum review cycle has been implemented and will be an ongoing process. As always, detailed information in regard to Learning Focused Schools and all components of the District Comprehensive Plan for student growth and achievement have been and will continue to be discussed in the Education Committee meetings throughout the year. These meetings are open to the public, and we encourage you to participate in the conversation. Reaching balanced achievement within a Learning Focused Schools Framework is at best a five year process. We are in year two. Sure, we could coach teachers to teach to the test, skill and drill, spend resources on programs that promise results in record time, all to achieve higher test scores. We have learned through past efforts that there is no quick fix that results in sustainable change. In reality, our end goal should not be higher test scores. Instead, we believe that working collaboratively to focus on the learning will put us on the path toward balanced achievement and success for all students. In so doing, we believe we will see increased achievement that goes beyond the test. OASD: Focused on Learning

OASD: Focused on Learning Find this presentation and links to the SPP Scores at: http://www.octorara.org.k-12.pa.us Or Explore all PA SPP Scores at: http://www.paschoolperformance.org Education Committee Meeting: October 28th, 6:00 PM, OASD District Office This presentation will be posted on the OASD webpage under the Curriculum and Instruction Department. You can also find the link to individual building school performance profile scores on the same page. We encourage you to explore the School Performance Profiles, review the data, develop questions and bring them to the education committee meeting where we will continue the conversation on school improvement. All education committee meetings are open to parents and the community. We encourage and welcome your attendance. QUESTIONS?