F acing the Urban Challenge: The Story of the “Big Six Schools”

1. Facing the Urban Challenge: The Story of the “Big Six Schools” L

2. Magical Partnership L

3. Houston ISD Demographic Information • Largest school district in Texas • Seventh-largest school district in the United States • 287 schools • 6 early childhood • 164 elementary • 40 middle • 44 high • 26 combined/other • 210,047 students • 61.8% Hispanic • 25.8% African American • 3.3% Asian • 8.0% White • 106 languages spoken • 80.3% economically disadvantaged P

4. HISD Position Statement Every child in our district deserves to attend a safe school and receive a consistentlyrigorousquality education. P

5. Houston ISD Award Recognition First ever two time winner ofBroad Prize for Urban Education 2002 2013 P

6. HISD Organization Structure General Superintendent Dr. Terry Grier Chief Academic Officer Dr. Andrew Houlihan High School Chief Middle School Chief Elementary School Chief 1 Elementary School Chief 2 Dr. Sydney Zulliger Elementary School Chief 3 P

7. HISD Organization Structure Elementary School Chief 2 Dr. Sydney Zulliger Director James Metoyer School Support Officer James Benfield School Support Officer Patsy Cavazos School Support Officer Kimberly Fonteno School Support Officer Dr. Tim Jenney School Support Officer Dr. Matilda Orozco P

8. Who is the Big Six ? Some of the Characteristics • Historically Academically Unacceptable • Decreasing Achievement • Changing Program and Enrollment • New Campus Administrators ( Range 1 -3 Years) • Low Benchmark Results • High Poverty Minority Campuses M

9. Big Six Campuses: Who Are We? • Dodson Elementary – New School-wide Montessori • FoersterElementary – Refugee & ELL Population • Grissom Elementary - Decline in all STAAR tests large homeless • Gross Elementary – Fractured campus culture • Mitchell –new administrator with previous testing irregularities • Woodson- Historically under achieving K-8 campus M

10. What are we going to do about all that RED!!!!!! M

11. How were they Identified • Benchmark data trends • Length of principal tenured • SSO classroom observations • Sense of uncertainty M

12. Process • Meeting with open and transparent feedback with big six campus leaders • Big Six Principal Cohort created to continue the collaboration • Principals voiced type of support that was needed • Campuses created a strategic plan • Area 2 discussed how we could support plan K

13. What does central office support look like? • Strategically redeployed Teacher Development Specialist(TDS) • Conducted campus data talks • Build teacher capacity through job embedded Professional Development • Supported principals in aligning staff strength with student needs • Realigned the support of the NCUST facilitator • Chief teamed SSO’s to provide additional support • Bi-weekly visits by SSO teams to provide feedback • Monthly visits by entire area 2 team with NCUST facilitator K

14. Changes in Cohort Data Over Time K

15. Perspectives K

16. K

17. Big Six Considerations • The test was administered 3 weeks earlier than last year • Some schools were more consistent with the plan than others • Are the practice quizzes at the same level of rigor as the actual STAAR test J

18. Outcomes Tobacco story with electricity J

19. AYP Identified Schools Lowest Classification is Priority • 297 Priority Schools in State of Texas • 31 Houston ISD Priority Schools • 0 Priority Schools in Area 2 J

20. STAAR Reading Data Cohort Data Grade level Data • Districtdecreasedby 5% in Reading • Big Six increased by 1% in Reading • Gross 6% increase • Mitchell18% increase • Districtincreasedby 3% in Reading • Dodson 12% increase • Woodson 15% increase 3rd 3rd – 4th • Districtdecreasedby 5% in Reading • Woodson 11% increase • Dodson 15% increase • Mitchell 18% increase • Districtincreasedby 10% in Reading • Big Six increased by 21% in Reading • All six schools had double digit increases • Gross 20% increase • Woodson 25% increase • Dodson 26% increase • Foerster 27% increase 4th • Districtincreasedby 9% in Reading • Foerster8% increase • Gross 10% increase 4th – 5th 5th J

21. STAAR Math Data Grade level Data Cohort Data • Districtdecreasedby 1% in Math • Big Six increased by 2% in Math • Woodson 5% increase • Mitchell 22% increase • Districthad no change in Math • Dodson 36% increase 3rd • Districtincreasedby 1% in Math • Big Six increased by 4% in Math • Dodson 7% increase • Grissom 8% increase • Mitchell 27% increase 3rd - 4th • Districtincreasedby 16% in Math • Big Six Results in Math • Foerster16% increase • Grissom 18% increase • Woodson 21% increase • Gross 21% increase • Mitchell 37% increase • Dodson 43% increase 4th • Districtincreasedby 7% in Math • Mitchell 23% increase • Dodson 35% increase 4th - 5th 5th J

22. Overall Highlights Area 2 Moved the Bottom Schools STANFORD Results • Of the bottom 40 schools for STANFORD Reading all grade levels combined we only had 8 schools. • Of the bottom 40 schools for STANFORD Math all grade levels combined we only had 9 schools. Information from Research and Accountability Report submitted to the board

23. Performance Bonuses By Percent

24. 2014 FOCUS • Curriculum • Instruction • Assessment C

25. 2014 Curriculum Focus • Implement District Curriculum • Breaking down standards • Formative assessment – “Blue Prints” P

26. 2014 Instructional Focus • Use formative assessments data to create “Just in time Training” • Use data to identify strongest teachers and allow time for them to share strategies with principals and struggling teachers • Embedded coaches working directly with struggling teachers • Teachers are provided with daily problem-solving ice-breakers based on struggling standards • Identify successful consultants and meet weekly to ensure alignment continuity P

27. 2014 Assessment Focus • On-going data conversations with struggling campuses • Common calendar • Spiral back weakest standards based on formative assessment data • Timely turnaround of formative assessment data for teachers re-teaching and interventions • Identify successful consultants and meet weekly to ensure alignment continuity • Data system more sophisticated (see next 2 slide sample) C

28. Campus Level and Teacher Level Data Teacher Initials P

29. Student Level Data with Standards P

30. Challenges • Maintaining Timelines for 40+ schools • Harder to Personalize support (Team support has to be diluted) • New data system that has glitches K

31. For Additional Information: Kfonteno@houstonisd.org morozco@houstonisd.org