1. District Program Improvement Update Title I Schools Board of Education Study Session August 18, 2009

2. 2 Presenters  Princetta Purkins, Principal of Parklane Elementary School  Carol Rivas, Principal of Needham Elementary School  Denice Shigematsu, Principal of Oakwood Elementary School  Graciela Uribes, Principal of Lawrence Elementary School  Lisa Hayes, Director of Educational Support Services

3. 3 District Program Improvement In 2005, the Lodi Unified School District entered into District Program Improvement as a result of not meeting, for two consecutive years, the Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) performance Targets in English/Language Arts for our Students with Disabilities. Since that time, the District has systemically implemented and monitored a laser-like focus in significantly improving student performance and eliminating the achievement gap through the following initiatives:

4. 4 District Program Improvement Initiatives Nine Essential Program Components  Instructional Program – Fully Implementing the Standards-Based Core Curriculum  Instructional Time  Principal’s Leadership Training  Credentialed Teachers and Professional Development  Student Achievement Monitoring System – Data Director  Instructional Coaching  Monthly Collaboration – Common Planning Time  Lesson Pacing – Curriculum Pacing Guides  Fiscal Support

5. 5 District Initiatives (con’t)  English Language Development (ELD)  Cycle of Inquiry  TAASA (Through Adaptations All Students Achieve)  Supervision & Evaluation – Walkthroughs/ California Standards of the Teaching Profession  District Equity Initiative – Culturally Responsive Learning Environments

6. 6 Program Improvement (PI) - Schools  Title I schools that do not reach yearly AYP (Annual Yearly Progress) goals in English/Language Arts and/or Mathematics in all subgroups  Schools that do not reach goals move forward in PI and are given sanctions

7. 7 PI Schools – Lodi Unified Year 2: Westwood Year 3: Needham, Beckman, Creekside Year 5: Sutherland, Heritage, Parklane, Oakwood, Wagner-Holt, Washington, Lawrence

8. 8 High Poverty – High Achievement Some Characteristics of High Poverty-High Achievement Schools  High Expectations for students  Rigorous and consistent curriculum  Engaging instruction  Effective research based approaches, instructional strategies  Teacher Collaboration  Parent Involvement Efforts

9. 9 High Poverty – High Achievement (con’t)  Universal Screening for each student  Frequent monitoring of student progress for at risk students  Targeted interventions when indicated that are aligned with the core program  Extended time opportunities  Instructional coaching in the core curriculum  Orderly, safe learning environments

10. 10 Lodi Unified PI Schools Improvement Strategies FOCUSING ON IMPROVING KEY AREAS IN EACH PI SCHOOL

11. 11 Key Improvement Areas 1. Program Assessments 2. Data Analysis 3. Effective Classroom Instruction 4. Additional Support for Improvement

12. 12 1. Program Assessments Core Program Assessments:  Reading Lions Assessment  Language! Placement tests

13. 13 Program Assessments (con’t) Other Assessments  DIBELS – (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills)  CELDT (California English Language Development Test)  CST (California Standards Test) Diagnostic Assessments  Houghton Mifflin Emerging Literacy Survey  CORE Reading Assessments (Consortium of Reading Excellence)  Houghton Mifflin Basic Phonics; BPST (Beginning Phonics Skill Test)

14. 14 2. Data Analysis  Use of Data Director  Teacher collaboration – Cycle of Inquiry

15. 15 Data Analysis (con’t)  Disaggregate CST data  Previous year’s data diagnostic and assessment results  Language! Placement results  Quarterly Benchmark results

16. 16 3. Effective Classroom Instruction

17. 17 Effective Classroom Instruction ( con’t)  Strategic Teacher Institute

18. 18 Effective Classroom Instruction (con’t)  Instructional Coaching

19. 19 Effective Classroom Instruction (con’t)  Professional Development

20. 20 Effective Classroom Instruction (con’t)  Professional Development  SB 472  Teacher Modules  Coach Presentations  Data Director training  TAASA  Special Education Teacher Professional Development Grant  ELD  Equity training

21. 21 4. Additional Support for Improvement

22. 22 Additional Support for Improvement (con’t)  Systemic K-3 Diagnostic Assessments & Interventions  Interventions for Students in Need  Universal Access Differentiated Core Instruction oRe-teaching; Pre-teaching; Practice; More explicit explanation; more immediate feedback  Language!

23. 23 Additional Support for Improvement (con’t  Extended time- oAfter school tutoring (BRIDGE) oIntersessions oSummer School  IST (Instructional Support Team) Process oData-based problem solving model

24. 24 Additional Support for Improvement (con’t  OTHER SUPPORT

25. 25 Additional Support for Improvement (con’t Other Support:  AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination) – Support for Achieving Students  Parent Involvement – Parent Education, Community Partnerships

26. 26 2009-2010 Program Improvement Plans  District School Leadership Team (DSLT)  One DSLT Visit in addition to an Accountability and Monitoring Visit Report  District-School Leadership Team o Assistant Superintendent of Elementary Instruction, Director of Elementary Education, Administrative Director of Curriculum and Instruction; Director of Educational Support Services; Coordinator of Assessment, Research, and Evaluation  Focus on oData Analysis oEffective Classroom Instruction oCoach and Intervention Teacher Report

27. 27 2009-10 Program Improvement Plans (con’t)  Vice Principal Support  Due to three of the Program Improvement schools, Oakwood, Wagner Holt, and Washington Elementary Schools, having significant program and student needs in the areas of Year 5 PI status, 550+ student enrollment, student suspension rates, and number of special education students, a request is being made to utilize the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funds to provide.5 FTE vice principal support at each of these schools; a total of 1.5 FTE vice principals.  This request will be included as part of tonight’s District Budget Update presentation.