110 likes | 218 Views
Examining our Professional Practice: Student Outcomes. November 5, 2012. IMPACT NETWORK SCHOOLS (INS) RESULTS YEAR 1 2011-2012. Impact Network Purpose.
E N D
Examining our Professional Practice:Student Outcomes November 5, 2012 IMPACT NETWORK SCHOOLS (INS) RESULTS YEAR 1 2011-2012
Impact Network Purpose • Draw a line in the sand and declare an end of tinkering around the edges of school improvement in our under performing schools. Embedded in RttT, Assurance E • Create a network of 11 underperforming schools supported by a separate intensive infrastructure – 2 to 3 year process • Focus on quick win strategies and long-term transformational systems for sustained student growth
Partnerships with 11 Schools • 8 Schools Partnering with the University of Virginia’s School Turnaround Specialist Program (3 year program: 2 summer retreats, 2 winter retreats & on-site coaching) • 3 Schools Partnering with USDOE/ODE as School Improvement Grant (SIG) Schools. Leadership Development Through Ohio State University (3 year program: on-going PD and on-site monitoring)
INS Year 1 Focus • LEADERSHIP: Rigorous selection of principals based on turnaround competencies. Enhanced teacher voice & leadership. • PEOPLE SYSTEMS: Priority for high quality teachers and staff. • STRUCTURES/HIGH QUALITY INSTRUCTION: Teachers trained & provided time to meet to analyze data, collaboratively plan, reflect on instruction, & intervene or enrich immediately • CLIMATE: Create affirmed and empowered staff and community to gain commitment to the mission of the school and district. • GREENFIELD THINKING: Increased autonomy with increased accountability.
After Only 1 Year - RESULTS • Value Added: All but one school MET or ABOVE • Ratings: 1 school moved up 1 rating, 2 schools moved up 2 ratings, 4 maintained (but PI ), 2 dropped (but PI ) • Helen Arnold, AW to CI • Crouse, AE to CI • Seiberling, AW to EF • AOC, AE to CI
Other Shining Stars • Akron Opportunity Center • Academic Emergency to Continuous Improvement • Improved Performance Index from 59.4 to 66.7 • Buchtel CLD • Improved Graduation Rate from 84.3 to 87.9 • 4th Highest Graduation Rate in APS, only Behind Akron Early College, Firestone & Ellet
Elem PrincipalsWhat Made a Difference • Moving our staffs from compliant to committed - keeping data notebooks, acceleration sheets on select students • Weekly PLC’s - looking at student data and adjusting instructional practices • Parental Involvement - increased the number of opportunities that we engaged our stakeholders and in variety of ways (Title I math/rd. nights, website updates, newsletters)
Elem PrincipalsWhat Made a Difference (cont’d) • Student involvement and engagement-talking with them about their individual data, setting goals, personal data folders • Support of district policies and leadership that allowed principals and staff to access targeted and accountable supports directly related to either student/teacher outcomes.
OBJECTIVE #1 – HIGH QUALITY TEACHING AND LEARNING CREATING A CULTURE OF EXAMINING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE IN THE AKRON PUBLIC SCHOOLS Targeted Universal • Instructional Framework • Planning for and Delivering Instruction • Implementing Teaching for Learning • and Understanding • Developing Professional Growth • and Responsibility Intensive Professional Development Embedded & Sustained Training Instructional Rounds Professional Learning Communities Instructional Support Instructional Coaching Walkthroughs Accountability Monitor Student Growth Staff Performance Embedded in the School Improvement Planning (SIP) Process