1. Capstone Project EDLS 642 O’Donnell

2. Parent Involvement Strengths Parents choose to attend the school and generally start with greater agreement with the school’s core values. Parents feel welcome at school. Parents volunteer regularly on campus. Parents generally support the classroom with time and treasure. Parent involvement allows for greater utilization of parent expertise in science, reading, and math to assist students. Weaknesses Parents can blur the line between support and control. Parents may have a different view of the definition of the school’s core values and may consider themselves at odds with how administration implements those same values. Parents may lack an understanding of the public school mandates that are required of a charter school. Parents may perceive a teacher as excellent because that teacher is “fun,” which may create tensions when that teacher does not stay at the school because of poor performance or a significant lack of traction with the school’s instructional philosophy. Parents may lack the skills necessary to assist in the classroom.

3. Budget Strengths Even with cuts from the state, the budget is able to cover instruction. Being a part of a strong and proactive district allows the school to benefit from community decisions like passing the mill levy over-ride. As a charter school, there is some freedom in how the budget is determined. Weaknesses The school’s main source of funding come from the PPR which is based on how many students are in each classroom. Because the school embraces smaller class sizes, the PPR received is limited, which limits the school’s ability to have truly competitive salaries. In order to sustain the school’s philosophy and commitment to small class sizes, fund raising from parents and other sources is an absolute necessity. Higher staff turnover is possible due to smaller salaries and is more likely in areas like Student Support Services creating potential inconsistent delivery of services.

4. School Culture Strengths The school has a strong instructional philosophy that drives decisions from hiring to teacher coaching and evaluation, to instructional improvements. Teachers, administration, and parents are involved in relational learning to increase understanding of the school’s core values and how that impacts instruction and student achievement (mind) and the development of the whole person (mind, body, and spirit). A mentorship program is available to assist all teachers, but specifically new teachers in implementing the instructional philosophy. All departments, including Student Support Services, are involved and committed to these values. Teachers willingly attend and attempt to implement professional development that is provided by the school administration. Weaknesses The size of the school – North Elementary has 612 students and the other two elementary campuses have between 550 and 600 students each, it is challenging to keep the philosophy consistent between teachers, grade levels, and campuses. Training is extensive, time consuming and must be constantly tended. Professional development is driven by needs decided upon by administration and is rarely if ever chosen by teachers.

5. Student Achievement According to the Three Year Unified Improvement Plan: TCA meets all state targets in all areas of performance with our reading and math rating as “Exceeds” with a school percentile of 92 for a 3 year average in reading and a school percentile of 90 for a 3 year average in math. TCA received a rating of “Meets” for the school percentile 3 year average in writing (89 th percentile) and in science (86 th percentile). While CSAP data indicates a high achieving school overall with positive results on the School Performance Framework, there are trends to be addressed in reading, math, and writing. Even with the target moving from 89.09 to 93.98, our students with disabilities closed the gap and made AYP for 2010-2011. The subgroup went from achieving a performance score of 88.58 to 99.53 Though the subgroup made AYP, the median student growth percentile was not met in math for students with disabilities, but did increase (SPF 3 year - 2010- 35/61 to 2011-37/59). This subgroup did increase their percentile over a 1-year period (44/53)to move to an Approaching rating. Although our students in this category grew, their median growth percentile was 35 (2010) now 37 (2011). To meet state expectations students needed an adequate median growth percentile of 53.

7. Further Thoughts… The UIP attributed the lack of growth for students with disabilities to: High staff/ administrative turnover in Student Support Services Lack of training for staff connected to Student Support Services Lack of collaboration between regular education staff and Student Support Services Needed teacher training for implementing the core math curriculum Even with the training specific to the core math curriculum: The growth for the school overall is fairly stagnant, if not beginning to decline. The rate of growth for students with disabilities was insufficient to close the growth gap or produce growth that will close the gap within a reasonable span of time.

8. Conclusions Student Support Services can not be entirely responsible for the growth of students with disabilities as there is turn over and students on balance, spend far more time each day with regular education teachers. Even though teachers currently use data to make decisions for students in their classrooms, they need to have access to school wide data to see how instruction is affecting all groups of students. After having awareness of this data, teachers need to have an opportunity to develop strategies based on the data that will improve student achievement within the context of the school’s instructional philosophy. Grade levels need to have opportunities to collaborate through instructional rounds to answer questions of implementation of the strategies that have been developed. Administration needs to collaborate with grade levels and teachers to provide budget and time resources to implement plans all within the context of the school’s instructional philosophy.

9. Further Conclusions “Most of us in the profession of education have never been a part of a system or community of practice dedicated to continuous improvement.” Seven Disciplines for Strengthening Instruction 1.Urgency for instructional improvement using real data. 2.Shared vision of good teaching. 3.Meetings about the work. 4.A shared vision of student results. 5.Effective supervision. 6.Professional development 7.Diagnostic data with accountable collaboration.

10. Still Concluding …unless and until there is an understanding of how to organize schools and districts for the continuous improvement of teaching, learning, and instructional leadership, smaller classes and other structural changes will not be enough to ensure that all students learn new skills and graduate from high school college-ready, or are able to take up employment in a twenty-first century workforce.”

11. Canary in the Coal Mine The lack of adequate achievement in math for students with disabilities begs a larger question. How do we know that excellent teaching is taking place and that progress we appear to make is the result of that teaching? When students with disabilities make progress in the regular education classroom, it may indicate that there is excellent teaching taking place overall. Therefore, the SMART goal is focused on watching the progress of students with disabilities as an indicator that the action plan is effective. A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats.

12. Smart Goal Part of the smart goal is already defined in the school’s UIP for math. The data that is received is based on all three campus scores on TCAP. What isn’t stated is how the goal will be reached at our campus. By the end of 2012-2013, students with disabilities at The Classical Academy will improve the median growth percentile in math from 37 to 40. This will be accomplished through raising awareness of the school wide data with teachers, allowing teachers to create plans and collaborate with other teams through the implementation of instructional rounds, and supporting these efforts through the instructional budget.

13. What has happened so far… During the past three years there has been, Professional development with the Saxon trainer for grades K-5. Development of a classical math lesson plan based on questioning. Professional development in implementing the classical math lesson plan to include observations and coaching. Ability grouping in math in fifth and sixth grade was stopped except for high students. External Review for accreditation with District 20 on the math curriculum for content and implementation During this past school year, About half of the staff was brand new to teaching and so received mentoring for an entire school year in all areas of teaching. New teachers have received professional development in the area of math and language arts. Veteran teachers were invited to attend the professional development sessions in math and language arts during the year. Two weeks of grade level specific professional development in math and language arts has been offered to all teachers at the end of this current school year through the school’s Idea Institute.

14. Action Plan to Increase Student Achievement through the use of Instructional Rounds This will be ongoing through the school year… Current Math TCAP data is received at the end of the summer of 2012. This information will be compiled and compared with last year’s data by the AP. Teachers continue with math assessments (DIBELS Math, AIMSweb, Saxon and Prentice Hall assessments). Data will be reviewed and collected by the RtI Grade Level Consultants and the AP. Outcome Student achievement will be monitored so adjustments to instruction can be made. Possible Barriers Teachers could administer assessments and progress monitoring inconsistently and provide incomplete data. Booster Teachers are encouraged by the progress in their students. Student Data continues to be collected through the year

15. September 16 – October 12, 2012 Math student achievement data is shared with staff during staff meeting by September 16, 2012 by Principal and AP. Instructional Rounds are introduced by September 16,2012 by Principal during the same staff meeting.. Teachers are informed of dates for the Instructional Rounds are sent to teacher Outlook calendars by the Office Manger. Information about each step will be embedded into the Outlook calendars for easy access by teachers by the Office Manger. Principal and AP will meet with each grade level to answer questions and clarify process as needed. During the first SAC meeting, Principal will explain Instructional Rounds to parents. Outcome Teachers will begin reflecting on their own practice and planning for the implementation of Instructional Rounds. Obstacles Lack of time to gather current math data. Possible security trainings that are required this year may take up the early meetings during the start of the year. Teachers may feel overwhelmed taking in information Communication Plan Staff meetings and Outlook Calendar Budget None needed Booster Teachers are excited about the new year and are ready to dig in to new ideas as they are refreshed from summer break. Awareness Begins

16. September 17 – November 16 Teachers begin to reflect on their practice using the rubrics introduced 2011-2012 school year. Principal and AP continue to meet with grade levels to answer questions and support the process. Outcome Teachers will use the Classroom Observation Rubric to reflect on their individual practice and their grade level practice. Obstacles Teachers may be overwhelmed by the demands of the needs in their classrooms and not have enough time to collaborate. Communication Plan Small Group Meetings Booster Built into the schedule is one hour of daily planning time. Also, every Friday is a half day without students. This time is to be used to collaborate. Resources Classroom Observation Rubric Grade Level Reflections on Practice

17. November 26 – December 19 Grade levels identify questions with assistance of mentors dealing with a problem in practice focused on math instruction and share with observing grade level by December 19, 2012. Principal and AP collect and review questions. Grade Levels Working Together Kindergarten and Sixth First and Second Third and Fourth Fifth and Mentors Outcome Grade levels will create questions dealing with a problem of practice to be answered through observation by a different grade level. Obstacles Teachers have difficulty narrowing their questions to two or three. Teacher run out of time with the Christmas holiday approaching. Communication Plan Small Group Meetings Booster Teachers will have a specific focus where improvement is desired. Questions are Identified

18. January 7- February 13, 2013 Grade Levels will conduct Instructional Rounds by observing each teacher of the assigned grade level for 20 minutes in each room. Grade levels will discuss what they observed and share a narrative with the observed grade level to answer the questions. Principal and AP will meet with grade levels to assist with the process. This should be completed by February 13, 2013. Outcome Grade Levels will conduct Instructional Rounds. Obstacles Teachers may perceive that this takes too much time. Communication Plan Small Group meetings and email Booster Teachers are not required to fulfill typical colleague observations. Instructional Rounds

19. February 13-March 1, 2013 Grade levels collaborate with mentors and Instructional Philosophy Director to create a plan to address data that has been presented by the observing grade level. Principal and AP collect the Grade Level plan by March 1, 2013. Outcome Each grade level will have a plan to address the data that was presented by the observing grade level. Obstacles The questions may have been weak, or the observation was inadequate to answer the questions. Communication Plan Small Group Meetings Booster Grade levels are collaborating and owning their own professional development. Teachers have more control over what they want to learn. Plans are Created

20. March 1-May 25, 2013 and Beyond Teachers begin to implement the plan they created by March 1, 2013. Plan may span into the next school year. Principal and AP continue to meet with Grade Levels to monitor progress and to support the process. Outcome Grade levels implement plans that they have created to increase student achievement. Budget 500.00 per grade level to start Communication Plan Small Group Meetings Obstacles Teachers requesting resources that require a bigger budget. Time is short as we are coming to the end of the year and entering TCAP season. Booster Teachers are excited about owning their own PD and follow through. Teachers have a starting point for their work in Fall 2013. Implementation of plans now and into next year

21. End of 2012-2013 School Year Math student achievement data is collected by AP/ Principal and reviewed to assess efficacy to this point. Celebrate any achievement and reflect on how the process worked to prepare for next year. Share with SAC results of student achievement during the May meeting. Share with parent community through weekly newsletter. Outcome Data collected (specifically looking at students with disabilities) will indicate the effectiveness of the plan. Communication Plan Staff Meeting/ SAC Meeting/ Newsletters Obstacles Time to gather the data before the end of the year may be challenging and there will still be the wait to receive the math data until August of 2013. Booster Teachers will be encouraged to see how their efforts have resulted in student achievement gains not only for students with disabilities, but all students. Student Data continues to be collected through the year

22. Concurrent Tasks for Improvement 2012-2013 Teachers will engage in individual reflection of their instructional practice using the Classroom Observation rubric. Formal and informal classroom observations by administration using the Classroom Observation rubric will take place. Formal and informal conversations between administration and teachers about the self reflection and the classroom observations will take place. Mentors will continue to model lessons and coach teachers through the year starting with the first year teachers in the building. Teachers will have a formal end of the year reflection that will be shared with administration. Grade levels will have an end of year team reflection that will be shared with administration.

23. Communication Plan Before the beginning of the next school year, this plan will need to be shared with the TCA President, other elementary principals, and the Dean of Instructional Philosophy. Rationale Once other administrators are aware of the plan and the intended outcomes, it will be easier to ask questions and hold the north campus principal accountable. After the introduction meeting on September 16, teachers will be communicated with through small group meetings, email, and updates posted in their Outlook calendars. Rationale Teachers will need ongoing support and checkpoints for accountability as the year progresses. Parents will be informed of the implementation of Instructional Rounds through the SAC meeting and newsletter, the weekly campus newsletter, and first Friends of the School meeting in September. Rationale Parents will want to be informed of how teachers are working to improve their practice and to continue to see that our school is learning community. Their continued support for our schedule that includes half day Fridays is crucial for ongoing staff improvement. At the end of the year at the last Lead Team meeting and the last Elementary Lead Team meeting, the results of the plan will be shared. Rationale If this is successful, the results will encourage the other principals to incorporate Instructional Rounds into their campus culture. The overall time frame for this project is to implement for two years until the mentorship program comes back to the north campus. The Instructional Rounds would be implemented again when the mentors travel to the next campus. Two years on and one year off.

24. Final Thoughts The ultimate goal of this plan is to increase student achievement for all students, with specific attention given to the results and advancement of students with disabilities as a barometer of how we are progressing overall. Our common focus on improving instruction using an agreed upon standard of quality based on an objective rubric will aid us in this endeavor. Through a persistent desire to reach all students, this plan will move us closer to that outcome.