Educational Excellence in a Changing World

1. Educational Excellence in a Changing World Rigor + Relevance + Relationships = RESULTS Cuyahoga Falls City Schools Home of the Black Tigers! 2013-2014

2. Welcome Back! Educational Excellence in a Changing World

3. Professional Learning Communities Community

4. Professional Learning Communities First Big Idea of PLCs: Focus on Learning We accept high levels of learning for all students as the fundamental purpose of our school and therefore are willing to examine all practicesin light of their impact on learning. Second Big Idea of PLCs: A Collaborative Culture We can achieve our fundamental purpose of high levels of learning for all students only if we work together. Third Big Idea of PLCs: Focus on Results We assess our effectiveness on the basis of results rather than intentions. Individuals, teams and schools seek relevant data and information and us that information to promote continuous improvement.

5. Five Essential Questions • What are we doing? • Why are we doing it? • Have we been successful? • How do we know? • What are we going to do about it?

6. 2012-2013 GoalsReview • Academic • Meet each student at his/her cognitive level and guarantee at least one year of academic growth for each year in our system. • Business • Assure a first-class service delivery model that provides our communities with the highest degree of customer satisfaction possible within fiscally responsible parameters. Cuyahoga Falls expenditures will not exceed revenues in FY13.

7. How did we do?

8. 2012-2013 GoalsReview • Academic Goal • 77% of K-8 students met the end of year i-Ready benchmark in reading • 74% of K-8 students met the end of year i-Ready benchmark in math

9. 2012-2013 GoalsReview • Business Goal

10. 2012-2013 OAA/OGT Results

11. Performance Index

12. Performance Index

13. OAA Data – Elementary Schools

14. OAA Data – Middle Schools

15. OGT Data - CFHS

16. 2013-2014 Projection

17. 2013-2014 Projection

18. New Report Card Based on Letter Grades

19. ReportCard Components

20. Gap Closing Component Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO’s)–A through F for this measure is defined as follows: 90 – 100% = A; 80-89.9% = B; 70-79.9% = C; 60-69.9% = D; Below 60% = F. Our simulated grades are as follows: 2011-20122012-2013 District = F District = C Bolich= C Bolich = F CFHS = C CFHS = C Price = F Price = A DeWitt = F DeWitt = F Lincoln = F Lincoln = F Preston = F Preston = C Richardson = A Richardson = A Roberts = A Roberts = F Silver Lake = D Silver Lake = A

21. Achievement Component Performance Indicators–A through F for this measure is defined as follows: 90 – 100% = A; 80-89.9% = B; 70-79.9% = C; 50-69.9% = D; Below 50% = F. Our simulated grades are as follows: 2011-20122012-2013 District = A (22/24) District = B (21/24) Bolich= B Bolich = C CFHS = A CFHS = A Price = D Price = D DeWitt = B DeWitt = C Lincoln = B Lincoln = C Preston = C Preston = D Richardson = A Richardson = A Roberts = B Roberts = B Silver Lake = BSilver Lake = B

22. Achievement Component Performance Index–A through F for this measure is defined as the percentage of the total possible 120 points: 90 – 100% = A; 80-89.9% = B; 70-79.9% = C; 50-69.9% = D; Below 50% = F. Our simulated grades are as follows: 2011-20122012-2013 District = B (99.1) District = B (98.3) Bolich= B Bolich = B CFHS = B CFHS = B Price = C Price = B DeWitt = B DeWitt = B Lincoln = B Lincoln = B Preston = C Preston = C Richardson = B Richardson = B Roberts = B Roberts = B Silver Lake = B Silver Lake = B

23. Graduation Rate Four-Year Graduation Rate– A through F for this measure is defined as follows: 93-100% = A; 89-92.9% = B; 84-88.9% = C; 79-83.9% = D; less than 79% = F. Our simulated grades are as follows: 2011-20122012-2013 District = B (92.5 Cohort 2011)District = B (91.7 Cohort 2012) CFHS = B CFHS = B

24. Graduation Rate Five-Year Graduation Rate–A through F for this measure is defined as follows: 95-100% = A; 90-94.9% = B; 85-89.9% = C; 80-84.9% = D; less than 80% = F. Our simulated grades are as follows: 2011-20122012-2013 District = C (89.7 Cohort 2010) District = B (94.4 Cohort 2011) CFHS = C CFHS = B

25. Progress Component Value Added for All Students – A through F for this measure is based on the bell curve and standard deviation calculation: 2011-20122012-2013 District = D Data due today Bolich= C CFHS = N/A Price = F DeWitt = D Lincoln = C Preston = A Richardson = F Roberts = A Silver Lake = F

26. Progress Component Value Added for Gifted Students – A through F for this measure is based on the bell curve and standard deviation calculation: 2011-20122012-2013 District = D Data due today Bolich= C CFHS = N/A Price = C DeWitt = C Lincoln = B Preston = C Richardson = F Roberts = C Silver Lake = F

27. Progress Component Value Added for Students with Disabilities – A through F for this measure is based on the bell curve and standard deviation calculation: 2011-20122012-2013 District = D Data due today Bolich= C CFHS = N/A Price = N/A DeWitt = C Lincoln = D Preston = C Richardson = C Roberts = C Silver Lake = N/A

28. Progress Component Value Added for Lowest Quintile – A through F for this measure is based on the bell curve and standard deviation calculation: 2011-20122012-2013 District = C Data due today Bolich= C CFHS = N/A Price = F DeWitt = C Lincoln = C Preston = A Richardson = C Roberts = C Silver Lake = N/A

29. K-3 Literacy Component K-3 Literacy: Reduce the number and percent of students not on grade level in reading Not reported this year

30. Prepared for Success Component

31. Opportunities to Excel 2013-2014 • OTES • OPES • New Report Card • 3rd Grade Guarantee • Biennium Budget – HB59 • New Strategic Plan 2014-2015 • PARCC Assessments • End-of-Course Exams • Replacement of OGT • 1 of 3 Renewal Levies • Pension System • Educational Delivery Model

32. 2014-15 Assessment System End-of-course Exams Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2 English 1, English 2, English 3 Physical Science, Biology American History, American Government College and Career Readiness Assessment will replace the OGT. PARCC assessments will be given in grades 3-8 in reading and mathematics, grades 4 and 6 in social studies and grades 5 and 8 in science. Cut scores for these tests will be equivalent to NAEP Level 4 or roughly equivalent to current Advanced and Accelerated levels. Proficient levels are likely to drop from 82% to 46% based on 2012-13 data

33. College & Career Readiness Level 5: Superior command of the knowledge, skills, and practices embodied by the CCSS assessed at the grade level/course. College and Career Ready. NAEP’s proficient level Level 4: Solid command… Level 3: Partial command… Level 2: Limited command… Level 1: Very Limited command…

35. BOE Focus Areas Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Commitment to a shared vision Culture/Student Life Create a systemic culture of caring in which students flourish – Every student, every day Stakeholder Involvement Cause intentional community engagement Resource Leveraging Utilize and design human, physical and fiscal resources to meet the needs of today and tomorrow

36. Cuyahoga Falls2013-2014 Goals Academic Growth • By the end of the 2013-14 school year, 85% of our students will demonstrate one year’s growth in reading and mathematics as measured by iReady (grades K-9) and common assessments (grades 10-12).

37. Cuyahoga Falls2013-2014 Goals Fiscal Responsibility • In FY14 district revenues will exceed district expenditures.

38. Cuyahoga Falls2013-2014 • Mission statement: The mission of the Cuyahoga Falls City School District is to assure each student is equipped with the skills necessary to meet the challenges of the future.

39. Cuyahoga Falls2013-2014 • Academic – Our community demands growth with each student annually • Business – Our community demands fiscal responsibility with the use of our public funds

40. Cuyahoga Falls 2013-2014 • Academic • Data collection • Improving our classroom instruction • Business • Identify cost-savings areas • Identify alternate forms of revenue

41. Cuyahoga Falls2013-2014 • Academic • i-Ready data • State/national data • Common Assessment data • Business • Financial reports • Stakeholder surveys/feedback

42. Cuyahoga Falls2013-2014

43. What are we doing about it? Academic Goals Instruction meets the standards rigor and relevance Utilize assessment data to progress monitor & inform instruction Is technology improving instruction? CFHS work Implementation of 6 design challenges per grade level • Implement Common Core and revised standards • Purposeful data use • Instructional technology • Small interest-based learning community process(CFHS) • Design Challenges (MS)

44. High School Summer Institute • August 12, 13 & 14 • 60 Participants • Evolution of schooling • Business Advisory Council perspective • 8 Work/Research Groups • Share out, reflection, and next steps • Communication is critical!

45. Middle School Summer Institute • August 19, 20, & 21 • 70 participants • Design Challenge study • Rigor & Relevance with instruction • Provide MS students exposure to career clusters • Communication is critical!

46. In schools where teachers examined the evidence of the impact of teaching effectiveness on student achievement and regard their professional practices as the primary cause of student achievement…Reeves, D. (2007). Ahead of the curve. Solution Tree

47. …the gains in student achievement were three times higher than those in schools where the faculty and leaders attributed the causes to factors beyond their control.Reeves, D. (2007). Ahead of the curve. Solution Tree

48. High School and Middle SchoolWHY? • Meeting increased RIGOR of the CCSS & PARCC • Students need to see RELEVANCE of content and school • Build RELATIONSHIPS with all stakeholders: our colleagues, our students, our parents, our community • Prepare students for “next step” • We ALL need to share the why when asked by our stakeholders!

49. Connection across ALL levels

50. Not just the “flavor of the month”… Stakeholder Relationships Design Challenges