1 / 46

Dr. Kenneth Jenkins, Principal Specialist

Building Blocks. of Restructuring. Colleton Middle School. Dr. Kenneth Jenkins, Principal Specialist. Building Blocks. Leadership Team HQ Teachers - P rofessional D evelopment (PDP) Curriculum Resources Standards-Based Instruction Aligned Assessment Positive, Safe Learning Environment.

malini
Download Presentation

Dr. Kenneth Jenkins, Principal Specialist

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Building Blocks of Restructuring Colleton Middle School Dr. Kenneth Jenkins, Principal Specialist

  2. Building Blocks Leadership TeamHQ Teachers - Professional Development (PDP)Curriculum ResourcesStandards-Based InstructionAligned AssessmentPositive, Safe Learning Environment Comprehensive Systematic School Plan for Improvement

  3. Restructuring Processes Need for rapid change! Needs Assessment using dataxxxCollaboration and capacity buildingProgress Monitoring Comprehensive Systematic School Plan for Improvement

  4. Restructuring Looking back 2008-2009

  5. Bulldog Pride! CMS students Like other high poverty schools, CMS has struggled to reach the report card targets for which the bar is raised each year. 1 of 3 middle schools in CCSD Poverty index 81% 409 students in grades 6, 7, and 8 264 African American students 122 White students 42 certified staff members (11 males, 31 females) Changing demographics since school began tracking data for “expected progress” 857 then to 409 students now

  6. "I don't care what they do on TV, Jerome, you can not call a life line." CMS students 50% or more students enter CMS lacking essential skills (e.g. multiplication facts) 50% or more students enter CMS reading below grade level

  7. In what ways does reading impact all subjects? High priority need  READING • On the average, CMS students begin the school year approximately 2 years below grade level in reading. • STAR reading assessmentFall 2008 • Most 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.

  8. An almost impossible challenge Accelerate progress 1+ grade levels in a single year with students who failed to master reading in grades 1-5. Meeting the Reading Challenge STAR reading assessment Growth 2008-09 • The average reading level at all grades improved! • 6th grade growth exceeded expectations: equivalent to 8 months of growth in 7 month period

  9. ACCOUNTABILITY  Student Achievement  CMS PACT PERFORMANCE LEVELS • Proficient /Advanced 2006 – 2007Significant gain in percent of students attaining proficient/advanced performance for all 4 core areas 2008School choice resulted in decrease Proficient/Advanced students (significant number of former top students no longer attend CMS) • Below Basic (BB) 2006 – 2007Less BB students in math, science, social studies 2008Less BB continued for math but not other subjects Subject Year % BB % Basic %Prof. %Adv ELA 2008 49.6% 40.6% 9.1% 0.8% 2007 48.6% 39.3% 11.2% 0.9% 2006 43.3% 44.9% 11.6% 0.2% Math 2008 33.8% 52.1% 8.6% 5.5% 2007 35.2% 49.0% 11.9% 4.0% 2006 45.8% 43.0% 8.4% 2.9% Science 2008 51.9% 30.2% 10.3% 7.6% 2007 51.7% 29.9% 9.4% 9.1% 2006 58.4% 30.2% 6.5% 4.9% Soc. St. 2008 46.8% 41.6% 6.7% 4.8% 2007 46.0% 41.4% 9.7% 2.9% 2006 49.8% 40.9% 5.7% 3.6% Approximately 1/2 of students performed below grade level in ELA, science, and social studies.

  10. Accountability • Federal • No Child Left Behind legislation • Adequate Yearly Progress • Proficient/Advanced performance targets in ELA and Math • State • Education Accountability Act • School Report Card • All core subjects

  11. A constantly moving target… Learning is like rowing upstream, not to advance is to drop back. – Chinese proverb

  12. Looking beneath the surface… What can we learn from disaggregated data by subject, grade, etc.? School Report Card Scores The challenge of hitting a moving target * Targets based on value needed to move out of “at risk” status - The bar is raised each year Target* CMS All Based on 4 core subjects grades 6, 7, and 8

  13. PACT Student Performance Data Data analysis leads to identifying root causes and key leverage areas to target for improvement • Data analysis by school, grade, subject, subgroups • Teacher role • In/ Out reports • Expectation is at least 10% of students will move up 1 performance level on state test with no students slipping • Teacher reflection and collaboration (PDP) • Goal setting and working with “bubble” students • Achievement gap analysis and planning • African American students • Students from a culture of poverty • State and Federal Accountability

  14. School Report Card Scores Disaggregated by grade Target* CMS All Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 Continuing to look beneath the surface... What are pockets of excellence? ... and areas needing support?

  15. School Report Card Scores ELA disaggregated by grade Target* CMS All ELA Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 Continuing to look beneath the surface... What are pockets of excellence? ... and areas needing support?

  16. School Report Card Scores Social Studies disaggregated by grade Target* CMS All Soc. St. Continuing to look beneath the surface... Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 What are pockets of excellence? ... and areas needing support?

  17. School Report Card Scores Science disaggregated by grade Target* CMS All Science Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 Continuing to look beneath the surface... What are pockets of excellence? ... and areas needing support?

  18. School Report Card Scores Math disaggregated by grade Target* CMS All Math Continuing to look beneath the surface... Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 What are pockets of excellence in math? How has each grade improved over time?

  19. Teachers with In/Out 2008 PACT growth Mathematics* Science** ** Only students with matching 2007-08 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** ** Only students with matching 2007-08 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 met ELATarget 5 student participation objectives met  5 student achievement objectives not met MathTarget 5 student participation objectives met  5 student achievement objectives not met Other  1 attendance objective not met CMS Subgroups: All, W, AA, F/R, Spec. Needs

  22. More Special Needs students Less Honors/ SPICE/ Advanced students A changing population over time • Attendance zone changes

  23. Basic Proficient Advanced Adequate Yearly Progress (NCLB) AYP Changes • 2008-2009 Extended team of teachers working with top students (SPICE/Honors) • PASS replaces PACT - New performance levels SC like other states’ definition of “proficient” in 2009 old PACT new PASS AYP performance AYP performance • “Met” Standard • “Exceeded” Standard 

  24. Comparison to other CCSD schools Improvement from 2005 to 2008 English Language Arts Basic and Above = On/above grade level performance = Met or Exceeded Standard New AYP target will equate to “Basic and Above” performance 58.8%of students * denotes READING FIRST school

  25. Comparison to other CCSD schools Improvement from 2005 to 2008 Mathematics New AYP target will equate to “Basic and Above” performance  57.8% of students Target increases in 2011 79%of students

  26. 2008-2009 Focus Plan (FSRP) • External Review Team Requirements (ERT) • Goal-setting • 3 instructional goals • 2 school leadership goals • 2 district leadership goals • Monitoring “satisfactory implementation”

  27. 2008-2009 Focus Plan Goals By April 1, 2009, students in grades 6-8 will demonstrate achievement in…. • English Language Arts as evidenced by 75% of the students attaining a passing score of 70% or higher on a comprehensive standards-based exam. • Mathematics as evidenced by 77% of the students attaining a passing score of 70% or higher on a comprehensive standards-based exam. • Science as 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 Achievement By April 1, 2009, the principal will provide supportto 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 Achievement By 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) Bimonthly support and oversight: • ERT-Liason on site • District leadership support/review of data • Classroom Common Assessments (SMART goals) • Classroom Observation Data

  30. 2008-2009 Goals Achieved • Percent of students passing comprehensive standards-based exams

  31. Comprehensive Standards-Based Exams Bi-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” Assessments STAR Reading and Accelerated Reading Assessments Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) (2 times per year for all students; 3 times per year for special populations) 2008-2009 Progress Monitoring PDP and Teacher Reflection Coaching Cycle Plan  Teach / Observe / Assess  Reflect

  32. 2008-2009 Progress Monitoring Reading MAP • 41% of CMS students improved one performance level: • Not Met  Met  Exceeded • Grade 6: • 56% improved one level • 44% scored Basic or above (Met +) • Grade 7: • 38% improved one level • 59% scored Basic or above (Met +) • Grade 8: • 27% improved one level • 68% scored Basic or above (Met +) Basic / Met Below / Not met Fall 2008 Spring 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 level • 64% scored Basic or above (Met/Exceeded) • Intervention MET3 students: • 57% improved one level • 54% scored Basic or above (Met/Exceeded) • Students with learning disabilities in self-contained classes: • 27% improved one level • 12% scored Basic or above (Met/Exceeded) • Only 40% of SPICE/Honors had matching fall and spring scores Basic / Met Below / Not met Fall 2008 Spring 2009

  34. Restructuring Looking forward 2009 - 2010

  35. School Status 2009-2010 • Expected Progress on PACT for ERT-supported “at risk” schools • 0.3 increase over 3 years on report card score • CMS was 0.001 point from reaching this target • State of Emergency • CMS 2009-2010 PPS Status

  36. 2009-2010 • PPS partnership • 1 out of 41 schools in the state • 3 levels of support based on need: Turnaround, Support, District-Assisted • CMS – Tier 2 Support • SCDE – Assistancewith 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 2009-10

  37. 2009-2010 Support and Oversight Bi-weekly: • PPS-Liason on site SC Dept. of Ed. Support Monthly: • District leadership support/review of data • Classroom Common Assessments • Classroom Observation Data Theory of Action Regional S2MART Centers PPS Professional Learning Community Collaboration Meetings Regional Meetings Regional Monthly Teacher Support Support Services for Making a Real Transformation

  38. Obstacles and Challenges • Retention and recruitment of high quality teachers and leaders • Acceleration of reading progress for struggling ELA students • Parent involvement • Numerous teacher and administrative turnover in recent years • Inability of our students to read and comprehend 50% Below Basic – ELA 2008 • Reduction in funding – loss of administrative and curriculum personnel, teacher cut backs lead to higher teacher/pupil ratio “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 Personnel • Part-time Parent Facilitator • Parent and Data Communication Coordinator • Learning at Home • Parent Center Resources • Family Night – Math/Science/Literacy • Decision-making • Parent Teacher Organization • School Improvement Council • Parent Advisory Committee for Title I • Two-Way Communication • In 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 Message • Agenda books – Homework assignments; • correspondence • Integrade Pro grade reports, missing tasks, etc. • Parent Conferences • Community Collaboration • SIC Members/Community Leaders • Career Fair • Volunteers • Sign up at 6th grade orientation, GAP Kickoff, Open House

  40. Restructuring “Do what you can, where you are, with what you have.” --Theodore Roosevelt The challenge is for us to get all stakeholders to work collaboratively and cohesively together for the benefit of our students.

  41. Which of these are already in place at CMS? 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 Development • School Leadership Team • Approved SCDE curriculum • Instruction aligned with curriculum • Comprehensive assessment system • Stakeholder collaboration • Student-centered school climate • Strategies to address weaknesses (specific grade/content based on data) • Comprehensive needs assessment

  42. ommitted to aking C M 2009-2010 • Fine-tuning – • Precision and intensity of implementation of existing initiatives • “Stay the course…” • Action Plan – specifics to be determined • Instructional Goals for ELA and math • Administrative 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 students will be assessed, determining ongoing adjustments to be made according to the progress of students, ensuring academic improvement by May 3, 2010.” --sample goal from SCDE • Measurement will be determined by growth indices from Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) • Required Principal Instructional Leadership Goals • Monitor instructional practices • Lead staff in improvement in instructional climate(surveys) Required District Instructional Support Goal – Monitor all of the above

  44. SIF Grant SIF Grant Literacy • Collaboration among stakeholders • Literacy improvement plan • Leveled texts and SRA reading instruction daily • SRA – Scientific Research Associates Program Direct Instruction in Decoding and Skill Kits • Novel Units for “test out” groups • Schoolwide Student Writing - connections to character education • Schoolwide Reading Assessments: STAR, MAP, AR • Classroom ELA assessments with “cold text” • On-going Professional Development • Reading Interventionist/ ELATE Program • Literacy Coach/ Instruction Facilitator

  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

  46. C M

More Related