"WRITINGS" ON PROGRAM EVALUATION SCHOOL/DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTWritings on Program EvaluationSchool/District Improvement School Improvement 1. Document: Guidelines to School Improvement Planning. August 1999 (distributed to participants of summer 1999 Campus Leadership Team Institute)
see pp. 1-16 of using data for decision making and prioritizing
pp. 29-30 on Plan Evaluation.) 2. Memorandum in Feb. 9, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on conducting a formative evaluation of the progress on the School Improvement Plan with attached ERS research article: School Improvement
Factors Leading to Success or Failure 3. Document of notes made by Bonnie Lesley in efforts to analyze the first ALT results in spring 2000, by school 4. Memorandum in Dec. 16, 1998, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley establishing the waiver process, with attached application form, including a required evaluation design. Title I 5. Memorandum to Cabinet from Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 4, 1999, requesting feedback on a draft plan to restructure the Districts Title I program in order to align it with new literacy and mathematics curricula and Smart Start, as well as with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ^7 6. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley, June 9, 1999, clarifying Title I program issues and the importance of aligning Title I programs with efforts to improve achievement. 7. Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 12, 1999, on issues relating to changes in the Districts Title I Plan for 1999-2000. ^7 8. Memorandum to John Walker, et al, from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 1, 1999, relating to changes in the LRSD Title I Plan for 1999-2000
attaching copy of the plan. Arkansas Quality Award 9. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award to 1999 application for Level I Award, September 8, 1999 37 10. Planning document to write the application for the Arkansas Quality Award, prepared by Bonnie Lesley in April 200011. E-mail to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 26, 2000, thanking them for contributions to the writing of the application for the Arkansas Quality Award i3 12. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff. May 4, 2000, with attached copy of application to Arkansas Quality Award program 13. Application for the Arkansas Quality Award: Little Rock School District: Dedicated to Excellence, May 5, 2000 14. Agenda for planning meeting for Arkansas Quality Award site visit. August 14, 2000, with attachment, Arkansas Quality Award Application Procedure 15. Agenda for Arkansas Quality Award Site Visit, August 16-18, 2000 30 16. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award after site visit on August 16-18, 2000. Evaluation Reports from ODM 17. Memorandum to Ann Brown and ODM Staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 4, 1999, in response to draft of their report. ^0 18. Memorandum from Ann Brown to Bonnie Lesley, Oct. 15, 1999, in response to Aug. 4 memorandum. 19. Letter from Kathy Lease to N.W. Marshall at ODM, Oct. 11, 1999, stating concern that NCEs were used to make judgments in Achievement Disparity report. 20. Letter from N.W. Marshall to Kathy Lease, Oct. 22, 1999, in response to her concerns. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 10, 2000, with copy of feedback from ODM on curriculum documents. 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 16, 2001, with assignment to rewrite the grade-level and course benchmarks for the parent publications
example attached. (Reference feedback from ODM evaluation of curriculum documents, April 25, 2000). Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Supplement to the Handbook for Campus Leadership Team Developed by the Division of Instruction Little Rock School District August 1999 1School Improvement Planning This draft of the guidelines for School Improvement Planning is the result of a commitment made by the Little Rock School District to consolidate all the planning requirements at the school level so that when a school designs its annual and long-range School Improvement Plan, it is satisfying district requirements, Title I requirements, and ACSIP requirements. To the extent possible, the LRSD uses the language and definitions of ACSIP and ACTAAP to reduce confusion. The School Improvement Plan that you produce will serve also as the Title I plan for the schools involved in that program. In some cases, to satisfy federal and state requirements. Title I schools will also submit some supplemental information to the School Improvement Plan. See p. 68 in the Handbook for Campus Leadership Team for the LRSD planning calendar. Page 65 is a glossary of planning terms that may also be helpful. School Performance Report If you study the ACTAAP document that is included in the back of your Handbook for Campus Leadership Team, you will see references in that paper (p. 10) to the School Performance Report or, as we may call it, the Building-Level Report Card. See also pp. 16-17 in the Handbook in the local section on Collective Responsibility. The School Performance Report, mandated in law in the last legislative session, will be published annually by the ADE, mailed to all parents, and included on the ADE web pages. This report is a part of the overall ACTAAP system and is included in what is required under Public Reporting of results. The indicators on the School Performance Report are the same, in many cases, as the Performance Indicators in ACTAAP, but they include some additional ones as well. It is important for everyone to understand that we have both this Public Reporting document or School Performance Report and the ACTAAP accountability system that includes a separate set of indicators, a reward system, and a sanction system. They are two different things, but there are overlaps in the indicators in some cases. The challenge, then, of the Campus Leadership Team is to develop your School Improvement Plan in ways that will impact not only the Performance Indicators under ACTAPP and the LRSD Quality Indicators, but also the indicators that will be reported on the School Performance Report. The first School Improvement Reports will be published based on the 1999-2000 data, and they are to be available no later than September 15, 2000. You are going to want to show growth in as many of the indicators as possible, of course, so your School Improvement Plan is a vehicle to achieve those improvements. A list of the indicators that ADE will be required by law to report follows: 1Elementary Schools The report for elementary schools shall include three-year trend data and allow parents or guardians to compare the schools performance with state and national averages in areas and shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures: A. B. C. D. School safety Discipline Norm-referenced test results Criterion-referenced test results E. Percentage of students promoted to the next grade level F. Certified staff qualifications G. Total per-pupil spending H. Assessment of the local taxpayer investment in the school district I. Percentage of students eligible to receive free or reduced price meals J. Average salary of staff K. Average attendance rates for students Middle and High Schools The report for middle and high schools shall include three-year trend data and allow parents and guardians to compare the schools performance with state and national averages in areas which include, but not be limited to, the following: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. School safety Discipline Norm-referenced test results Criterion-referenced test results Percentage of students promoted to the next grade level Certified staff qualifications Per-pupil spending Assessment of the local taxpayer investment in the school district Percentage of students eligible to receive free or reduced price meals Average salary of the staff Average attendance rates of students Drop-out rate Graduation or completion rates College remediation rate (for high schools only)
and Collegiate admission test results 2School districts may prepare and distribute supplemental materials concerning the information contained in the school performance reports, and the LRSD will do so. step 1: Review/Revise the School Mission Statement Mission statements are dynamic and should periodically be reviewed to determine whether changes should occur and to keep the school mission aligned with the LRSD Mission. Step 2: Baseline Data
Taking Stock Collecting, Profiling, and Analyzing Data Conduct a comprehensive data collection and analysis of the baseline data for each of the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators for your school. (See reprints of pages for elementary schools, middle schools, or high schools at the end of this document.) Fill in the Your Results column with the baseline data as a first step in this process. You may wish to add pages to include other data, including data to address from the School Performance Report. Your analysis must include a careful disaggregation of the trend and baseline data (by race, gender, socio-economic status, LEP/non-LEP, Sped/non-Sped, etc.) You may wish to group the indicators by subject, program, or grade level to determine the preponderance of evidence about your schools performance for each sub-group. Think of yourselves as detectives at this step of the work. Gather evidence, including evidence revealed from other data you may have availablesuch as grades, portfolio assessments, survey information, other program assessments (i.e., computer lab test results), etc. You should also examine data related to indicators that are not listed in the Quality Indexparent involvement data, for instance, or teacher attendance rates, or percent of students participating in co-/extra-curricula activities, or how high school students are using their electives, etc. These other indicators undoubtedly have implications for some of the broader areas of achievement. Do not indulge in finger-pointing or blaming. Your business is to improve, not to dwell on the past. Stay focused on the kinds of discussions that make a difference in student achievement: curriculum, staff development, supervision, instructional programs, student assessment, action research, program evaluation, instructional budget. 3School School Improvement Plan Year Priority 1 Supporting Data
. Goal(s): One-Year Benchmark(s): 4 School School Improvement Plan Year Intervention: Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget i 1 5 step 3: Selecting Priorities Using your data analysis, make decisions about 3-5 priority areas for your School Improvement Plan. You must include the following two priorities until your school has 100 percent of the students performing at the proficient level or above on the State Benchmark or End-of-Level tests
Improve student achievement in reading and writing literacy. Improve student achievement in mathematics. One priority area may include all the measurements in the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators related to a program area-mathematics, for instance. Some examples of middle school mathematics performance indicators are as follows: Performance on State-Mandated Criterion-Referenced Tests Performance on SAT9 Performance on District-adopted CRT Enrollment in Pre-AP courses Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 Hints You may want to consider as an action an activity related to other Quality Indicatorsespecially those relating to ensuring appropriately licensed teachers or ensuring that all staff participate in 60 hours or more of professional development, as those hours relate to the planned interventions. If your priority area is mathematics, for instance, student learning would undoubtedly be impacted with better trained teachers in mathematics content, instructional strategies, and assessment strategies. In other words, you can address some of the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators without selecting them among your priorities. Be aware that you may also have a priority area that is not explicitly addressed in the Quality Indicatorssuch as Improving parental involvement Improving the teacher attendance rate. Remember, however, to make decisions about priorities based on data, and remember that success has to be determined with data, so start at this step with building an understanding of how success will be measured if there are no stated Quality Indicators that match the selected priority area. 6step 4: Supporting Data Record the data that your have identified as your rationale for selecting each priority area. In other words, show your schools performance in two or more Quality Indicators that indicate your need to focus on that area as your priority. You may (and are encouraged to do so) include disaggregated data in listed your Supporting Data. Examples for a middle school follow: State Benchmark ExamGrade 6 Mathematics: 32% performing at or above the proficient level
80% of those not performing at the proficient level or above are African- Americans, and 70% of those are male. SAT9 Grade 7 Total Mathematics: 23% at or above the SO** percentile
65% of African American males are in the lowest quartile. % enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8: 12%
only 3% are African American males. Note 1
The examples above indicate that the school must include one or more interventions designed to be effective with African American males. The interventions might include some actions related to program enhancements, to special tutoring programs, to more use of cooperative learning instructional strategies, to recruitment of African American male mentors, to an emphasis on parent involvement, or, perhaps, a special professional development program for the staff that would enable you better to understand what the root problems are and what the school can do to impact those problems. Note 2: Title I schools can also use this step to begin identifying students who require targeted assistance to support their achievement of the curriculum standards/benchmarks. Disaggregation of data and then an analysis of those data will enable the school to design more effective interventions. Remember that even if a Title I school decides to be a schoolwide project, the school still has the responsibility to target the lowest achievers for special assistance or programming. Step 5: Setting Goals See the pages above with the tables for elementary, middle, and high schools. In the fourth column of those tables you will see a series of goal definitions from which to select for this section of your plan. Remember that there are three kinds of goals: 7absolute perfoimance goals that include a specific percent of students who are expected within a given period of time to perform at a specific level
trend goals that establish an expected improvement of one cohort of students performance compared to last years cohort at that level (this years fourth grade compared to last years fourth grade, for instance): and improvement goals that establish an expected improvement of the same cohort from a pre-test to a post-test (this years sixth grade as compared to those same students in grade 4). You might also think about these three kinds of goals in this way: Performance goals are long-term goalswhere students are expected to be within five or ten years, for instance. Trend goals are one-year goalsthe typical way that we look at achievement datahow we did this year as compared to how a different cohort did last year. Trend goals set one year at a time become your Benchmarks (see Step 6 below). If you achieve your trend goals consistently over a ten-year period according to the State Indicators, you would achieve the performance goal for those indicators. Again using middle school mathematics as an example, you might choose the following goals: 100% of our schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics on the State Benchmark Examination. 65% of our schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*^ percentile in mathematics on the SAT9. At least 30% of our schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics on the SAT9. 90% of our schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester on the District-adopted CRT. 890% of our schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. Note: The examples above do not include every possible mathematics goal from the Quality Indicators. Your team will choose those which it sees as most important orthose that you believe you can impact in this particular year. Again, if there is an achievement gap that needs to be addressed, then the school may wish to state its goal statements in terms of improvement of achievement for African American males, for instance: At least 50% of African American males who performed at Below Basic and Basic levels in grade 4 shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 mathematics on the State Benchmark Exam. The percent of African American males enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 shall improve from 3% to 20% in 1999-2000. ACSIP Advice in Goal Setting: Critical Questions According to the ACSIP documents, the following are important in the goalsetting process: A goal is directly linked to a priority. A goal narrows the scope of the priority. Two or three goals per priority would be advisable. Goal selection should be guided by the critical questions for Federal Programs, Special Education, and Equity. (See below, plus two additional categories: LEP Students and Parent Involvement) Goals are achievement-driven. The ACSIP Critical Questions follow: Federal Programs Will Title VI be used to support the plan in ways that... Promote equitable quality education for all students? Provide training in support of local school reform efforts? Provide leadership in support of local school reform efforts? Provide for technical assistance of local school reform efforts? Involve parents, teachers, administrators and private schools in the decision-making process? 9Does the plan allow for one or more of the following areas? Supplemental (not required by the State) technology related to the professional development to assist school personnel regarding how to effectively use equipment and software for instructional purposes? Instructional materials programs for the acquisition and use of instructional materials? Programs that include promising education reform components (Effective Schools Research, etc.)? Programs to improve the higher order thinking skills of disadvantaged students and to prevent students from dropping out of school? Provisions for gifted and talented children? Provisions that are consistent with the Goals 2000: Education America Act? Activities authorized under Title I, Sections 1116 and 1117, to give all children the opportunity for high performance, to establish needs assessments to perceive deficient areas, and to implement research-based actions that address deficient areas? Special Education Does the plan provide children with disabilities the appropriate modifications, adaptations, and supplementary aids and services to ensure that they have equitable access to the same curricula content as their nondisabled peers? Will the plan facilitate the improvement of the academic performance of children with disabilities? Does the plan hold an expectation of high achievement based on high standards, and does it hold students, the school, and the district accountable for learning and teaching? Does the plan guarantee educational equity for all children? Does the plan allow for flexibility in providing meaningful instruction closely linked to the general curriculum/ appropriate activities enabling all students to be successful in the real world? Does the plan ensure accountability by providing a mechanism for monitoring lEP modifications within the regular classroom? Does the plan evidence issues and ideas presented in Enhancing Student Success Through Accountability and Leadership, published by the Accountability Task Force on the Individualized Education Program and Program 10Effectiveness Evaluation, Arkansas Department of Education, Special Education (October 1998)? Does the plan address the professional development needs of all district personnel relative to meeting the needs of children with disabilities? Does the plan address the use of technology to assist children with disabilities access to the general curriculum/ appropriate activities enabling all students to be successful in the real world? Equity Are students who are educationally disadvantaged achieving at the same level as the advantaged students? Will there be evidence that teachers have high expectations for every student as a result of the plan? Are resources being provided to assist all students in attaining high levels of achievement? Are all students being challenged? Are all groups of students given opportunities and encouragement to be involved in all school programs? What evidence is there that teachers have high expectations for all students? Are resources provided to assist educationally disadvantaged students in overcoming environmental and other handicaps? What evidence is there that learning deficits of certain groups of students are overcome? Are students enrolled in all programs at the same proportions as their representation in the school population? Are academic goals the same for all groups of students? Are all student groups represented in advanced and intermediate courses? Are all constituencies of the school (teachers, administrators, parents, students, and community representatives) involved in developing school procedures that ensure equity? Parent InvolvementTitle I The Districts application for Title I funds requires us to assure the state that all of our Title I schools have complied with the following mandates for parent involvement. Be sure that you have addressed each obligation. If you are currently out of compliance, then Parent Involvement may necessarily become one of your priorities. 1. The District assures that each Title I school shall jointly develop with and distribute to parents of participating children a written parental involvement policy, agreed upon by the parents that described the means of carrying 11 out the requirements of parent involvement and the shared responsibilities for high student performance. 2. If the parent involvement policy is not agreed upon, the comments of those in disagreement are attached to the District plan. 3. Did each Title I school in the District convene an annual meeting, at a convenient time, to which all parents were invited and encouraged to attend, to inform parents of their schools participation in the Title I program and their right to be involved prior to submitting the District plan? 4. Did each Title I school in the District offer a flexible number of meetings in the development of the plan, such as morning or evening and provide (if funds are available) transportation, child care, or home visits, as such services relate to parental involvement? 5. Did each Title I school in the LEA involve parents in an organized, ongoing, and timely way, in the planning, review, and improvement of programs under this part, including the school parental involvement policy and the join development of the school wide plan for their school? 6. The District assures each Title I school will provide parents of participating children the following: Timely information about programs
School performance profiles and their childs individual student assessment results, including an interpretation of such results
A description and explanation used to measure student progress and proficiency levels that students are expected to meet
Offer opportunities for regular meetings to formulate suggestions, share experiences with other parents, and participate in decisions relating to the education of their children
and Offer timely responses to suggestions made by parents. 7. The District assures that if a schoolwide plan is not satisfactory to the parents of participating children that those parents' comments on the plan will be made available to the Department of Education. School-Parent Compact 8. The District assures that each participating schools has jointly developed with parents of all participating children a school-parent compact as part of its parent involvement policy that outlines how parents, school staff, and students will share responsibility for improving student achievement. 129. The Compact will: Describe responsibilities of schools and parents that enable participating children to meet the states student performance standards. Describe the parents responsibilities for supporting learning such as monitoring attendance, homework completion, TV watching, volunteering in their childs classroom, and positive use of extracurricular time. 9. The District assures that parents will be provided assistance to participating parents in the areas of: Understanding the National Education Goals, State Content and Student Performance Standards, State technical assistance for schoolwide and targeted assistance school components, state and local assessment. Title I parent involvlement requirements, how to monitor student progress, and how to work with educators to improve the childs performance. 10. The District assures that parents will be provided with materials and training and coordinate literacy training to help parents work with their children to improve achievement. 11.The District assures that teachers, pupil service personnel, principals and other staff persons will be educated in the value and use of parent contributions, how to work with parents as equal partners, implement parent programs, and build ties between home and school. 12.The District assures that it will integrate parent involvement programs and activities with other pre-school programs. 13. The District assures that community-based organizations and businesses will be encouraged to form partnerships between schools at all levels. 14. The District will conduct other activities such as a parent resource center and provide opportunities for parents to hear child development and child rearing issues that are designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children. Limited-English-Proficient Students The Office of Civil Rights will expect to see components such as the following in your school plan: Are the needs of LEP students considered in your schools plan (not just in the Newcomer Centers, but in every school where there are LEP students enrolled)? 13Wiaf is.tftaemscimsi' is. teaching English language skite arid itnssdSuiction for LEP students? Are LEP studsints is aligned with the curriculum framewor'^s and iShe,.a^j^jpriate grade-level or course benchmarks? Are critical documents translated i.ritelhe'language of students homes? When "educationally disadvantaged children are discussed and plans made to meet their needs, are LEP students included? What is the professional development plan so that all teachers who serve LEP students participate in training in ESL methodologies, assessment strategies, and cultural sensitivity? step 6: Establishing Benchmarks State Benchmark Examinations For each of your goal statements, you must establish the amount of growth that you intend to achieve this school year. According to the ACTAAP document (in reference to performance on the State Benchmark Examinations or End-of-Level Tests), p. 15, On average, each schools trend goal for annual rate of reduction in the number of students below proficient will be determined by dividing the total percent of students below the proficient level by 10. Remember that a trend goal compares the performance of one cohort of students with anotherthis year's grade 8 students as compared to last years grade 8. Therefore, at least for 1999-2000, you can compute your benchmarks for the State Benchmark Examinations according to the following formula: 100% minus % of your students currently performing at or above the proficient level divided by 10 equals the number of required percentage points to meet your trend goal Assuming that you had in 1998-99 32% of the students performing at or above the proficient level: 100 minus 32 equals 68. 68 divided by 10 equals 7 points of required improvement. Your 1999-2000 benchmarks would, therefore, be as follows: 1432 (1998-99 performance) + 7 points of required improvement = 39% at or above the proficient level Note: It is important here as a part of your work to calculate exactly how many students you are required to move up to get the 7 points of improvement. Look to see how many students are at grade level and calculate how many of them would equal 7 percentage points. State your benchmark in a measurable statement that includes who, what, when, and how much. In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve 7 points so that at least 39% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in grade 8 mathematics. Who
What: When: grade 8 students in the LRSD school State Benchmark Examination in mathematics In 1999-2000 How Much: 7 points improvement (from 32 to 39% at or above proficient level) Then the 2000-01 benchmark would be 39% +7 = 46%. Etc. In 2000-01, at least 46% of the grade 8 students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in mathematics. To Consider: A divisor of 10 indicates that to stay off the States identified list of schools requiring improvement, a school would have 10 years to meet the state goal of 100% of the students performing at or above the proficient level, assuming the school meets the required improvement goal each year. We in Little Rock cannot be satisfied with that time frame since our average performance is at an unacceptable level in many schools. We cannot wait 3-4 years, for instance, for a minimum of 50 percent of our students to meet the state standards. We have to accelerate our grovizth a lot if we are to catch up with other districts and if our kids are to be competitive with their peers not just in Arkansas, but also nationally and globally. Research on restructuring that works in terms of improved student achievement indicates that two variables that are the most powerful are as follows: every students access to a rigorous curriculum (teaching the tested curriculum, in other words, the curriculum standards/benchmarks
alignment of teachers lesson plans with the state curriculum frameworks and district benchmarks) 15developing a true sense of collective responsibility everybody doing whatever it takes in terms of commitment to improve teaching and learning. This variable includes a strong emphasis on professional development and ongoing learning. SAT9 Benchmarks Computing the benchmarks for performance on the SAT9 is done a little differently. If the Quality Indicator you are considering is the one relating to at lOact Rk norAanI __ i_ _ .1 .-^th oc X f -------------------------------------72'-'^'" ly i'j M WI ik
? I c
iain lu lu CJI L performing at or above the 50 percentile, then the calculation is as follows
65/o minus % of your students currently performing at or above the 50 percentile ^ided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing at or above the 50*^ percentile. Assuring that you had in 1998-99 only 22% performing at or above the 50 percentile: 65 minus 22 equals 43 43 divided by 10 equals 5 points of required improvement. (That is not five percentile points, but 5 percent more of the students tested performing at or above the 50* percentile.) Your benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve by 5 percentage points (from 22% to 27%) the percentage of students performing or above the 50 percentile on the grade 10 SAT9 mathematics test. at it is important for you to calculate exactly how many students would constitute 5 percentage points. If you are working on improving the percentage of students in the highest niiartUo thAn _____i_ . . . _ a quartile, then you compute your benchmark as follows: 30% giinus % of your students currently performing in the highest quartile divided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing in the highest quartile. Assuming that you had in 1998-99 only 4% performing in the highest quartile: 30 minus 4 equals 26. 26 divided by 10 equals 3 points of required improvement in the percent of students performing in the highest quartile. 16Calclulate how many students that would be. Benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve at least 3 percentage points (from 4% to 7%) in the percent of students performing at the highest quartile on the grade 5 SAT9 reading test. Most schools badly need to work on moving students from the lowest quartile to the higher levels of performance. The formula for computing the benchmark is as follows: 90% minus % of your students currently performing in quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (above the lowest quartile) divided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing above the lowest quartile. Assuming that you had in 1998-99 57% performing in the lowest quartile and only 43% above the lowest quartile: 90% minus 43% equals 47 47 divided by 10 equals 5 points of required improvement in the percent of students performing above the lowest quartile. Calculate how many students that would be. Benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD will improve at least 5 percentage points (from 43% to 48% in the percent of students performing above the lowest quartile on the grade 7 SATO mathematics test. In General To compute your benchmark, you have to know two things to start with: The performance goal for the performance indicatorsthe percent expected (i.e., 100% will be proficient
65% will be above the 50th percentile
65% will enroll in Pre-AP and AP courses, etc.) Your schools performance last year. Step?: Designing Interventions Now that you have your data analyzed, your priorities determined, your goals selected, and your benchmarks established, you are ready to do the real work of developing the plan for improvement. An intervention is a significant strategy, research-based program, or major initiative designed to solve the problem defined by your selected priority (definition from ACSIP document). 17a Your first School Improvement Plan is both a long-term plan (3-5 years) and a short-term plan (one year). After you have thought through the long-term plan, and if you stay with it, then updating the plan one year at a time is not that difficult. Your annual plan simply deletes what is already accomplished and adds any new action steps required to implement the next years plan or adds some new interventions. Good Campus Leadership Teams are always thinking ahead two to five years, knowing that everything cannot be accomplished in one year, but getting clear about what needs to happen this year in order to take the next steps to reform during the following year. If your school does not have a long-term plan in place with which you are comfortable, then your work must be to design as quickly as possible your 1999- 2000 plan for improvement in spring 2000. There is much that you can do to align your lesson plans with the State Curriculum Frameworks and the District Benchmarks so that all students are exposed to the tested curriculum. There are programs that you can put into place early in the year for maximum impact on student achievement. There are effective teaching strategies that you can use that will enable more students to be effective learners. There are assessment strategies that you can use to check student progress frequently and then to modify and adjust your teaching so that more students are successful. All the faculty can make a commitment to form a professional community now that supports an attitude of collective responsibility for results. But begin now as well to start thinking ahead to your 2000-01 plan. Ideally, the design of effective interventions needs to begin in summer 1999 to include in the 2000-01 plan in order for there to be time for the team to do research, to visit schools where the intervention is being successfully implemented, and to involve staff and parents in ways that ensure buy-in. A part of every schools plan realistically includes a plan to plan for the next year and down the road, always looking ahead to what steps should be phased in for total restructuring. Schools that wait until the plan is almost due to begin the process are not likely to get desired improvements. Planning is ongoing, not an event. An intervention, in general, is something new that your school decides to do that enhances, supplements, or goes beyond the District-established programs so that the performance of targeted students improves. The implementation of ELLA, for instance, is not a school-level intervention. Neither would be the implementation of the new TERCS mathematics programs. Both are already established. You may find the following research-based criteria helpful in selecting appropriate program interventions for your school: f i 1 18What Factors Contribute to Program Effectiveness? (from Show Me the Evidence! By Robert Slavin and Olatokunbo Fashola, Corwin Press, 1998) 1. 2. 3. Effective programs have clear goals, emphasize methods and materials linked to those goals, and constantly assess students' progress toward the goals. There is no magic in educational innovation. Programs that work invariably have a small set of very well-specified goals ..., a clear set of procedures and materials linked to those goals, and frequent assessments that indicate whether or not the students are reaching the goals. Effective programs leave little to chance. They incorporate many elements, such as research-based curricula, instructional methods, classroom management methods, assessments, and means of helping students who are struggling, all of which are tied in a coordinated fashion to the instructional goals. Programs almost always have their strongest impacts on the objectives they emphasize. Effective and replicable programs have well-specified components, materials, and professional development procedures. There is a belief in many quarters that each school staff must develop or codevelop their own reform model, that externally developed programs cannot be successfully replicated in schools that had no hand in developing them. ... In fact, over time evidence has mounted that reform models that ask teachers to develop their own materials and approaches are rarely implemented at all. Studies of alternative programs implemented under similar conditions find that the more highly structured and focused programs that provide specific materials and training are more likely to be implemented and effective than are less-well-specified models. ... Although there are examples of success in models lacking clear structure, the programs with the most consistent positive effects with at-risk students are those that have definite procedures and materials used in all participating schools. Effective programs provide extensive professional development. A characteristic shared by almost all of the effective programs we identified is the provision of extensive professional development and follow-up technical assistance. Few, if any, provide the classic half-day, one-time workshops that constitute the great majority of inservice programs, especially those usually provided with textbook adoptions. On the contrary, most of the successful programs we identified provide many days of inservice followed by in-class technical assistance to give teachers detailed feedback on their program implementations. Typically, teachers work with each other and with peer or expert coaches to discuss, assess, and refine their implementations. The training provided is rarely on generic strategies from which teachers pick a few ideas to add to their bags of tricks. Instead, training focuses on comprehensive strategies that replace, not just supplement, teachers' current strategies. Effective programs are disseminated by organizations that focus on the gualitv of implementation. The programs identified in their review that have been associated with consistent positive effects in many settings tend to be ones that are developed and disseminated by active, well-structured organizations that concentrate efforts on ensuring the gualitv of program implementation in all schools. These organizations, often based in universities, provide training and materials and typically create support networks among program users. 19Some examples of interveritk>.asbs^ffimnitaTj( iisrrgusojea^ no school is limited to these) might include the fclfeKwbg,: Reading Recovery After-School Resfeg Cfejfc tutoring) Accelerated Reader Reading Across the Curriculum Professional development for teachers in one or more of the following areas: reader-response strategies, reciprocal teaching, the writing process, McRat, assessment strategies, ESL methodologies, adaptive strategies for inclusion, etc. Extended-Year Program HOSTS (Helping One Student to Succeed) Junior Great Books Family Literacy program Schoolwide Independent Reading Program Reading Is Fundamental Some examples of interventions in secondary language arts (again, no school is limited to these) are as follows: Project AVID (to improve enrollment and success in Pre-AP and AP courses) Reading Clinic (one-on-one tutoring) Summer enrichment program for rising freshmen Reading in the Content Areas Writing Across the Curriculum Development of a schoolwide language policy Professional development for teachers in one or more of the following areas: reader-response strategies, reciprocal teaching, the writing process, use of learning logs, assessment strategies, ESL methodologies, adaptive strategies for inclusion, etc. Great Books Schoolwide Independent Reading Program Waivers An intervention may also be something that the school decides to do instead of the District program. In that case, however, the Campus Leadership Team must submit and obtain approval of a waiver. See pp. 8-9 in your Handbook for Campus Leadership Team for a copy of the regulations on waivers and pp. 57-60 for a copy of the waiver application. (Call Bonnie Lesleys office for an e-mailed template for convenience.) A waiver application must include research that will predict more success for your students than the District-established program. Examples of when a waiver is required follows: the Districts instructional language arts programs for elementary schools are ELLA and Effective 20Literacyor Success for All. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. The districts phonemic awareness program is Animated Literacy at the kindergarten level. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. The Districts grades 6-8 program for regular-level students is a two-period block of the Reading and Writing Workshop. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. Schoolwide Restructuring or Reform An intervention may include a series of steps to implement a schoolwide project, such as the ones described by Dr. Steve Ross in the July 23 inservice for principals. Some examples of schoolwide change models include Boyer's The Basic School, Slavins Roots and Wings, or Great Expectations for the elementary level. Middle school schoolwide reforms include those outlined in Turning Points, SREBs Middle Grades Initiative, or Levins Accelerated Schools. Some examples of high school reforms include Sizers Coalition of Essential Schools, SREBs High Schools that Work, and the Johns Hopkins models for Talent Development High Schools. These examples are examples only, i ot recommendations for adoption. Each school should consider carefully wliich model for change would be most appropriate forthat school, whether resources are available for implementation, and whether staff and parent support can be built. More information will be provided on the options available for schoolwide change for 2000-01 planning. Title I schoolwide projects are expected to adopt such a model or to design their own, using the CSRD criteria established from research on the variables that are necessary to impact student achievement. Components of Comprehensive School Reform Programs (Obev-Porter) A comprehensive school reform program is one that integrates, in a coherent manner, all nine of the following components: 1. 2. 3. 4. Effective, research-based methods and strategies. A comprehensive school reform program employs innovative strategies and proven methods for student learning, teaching, and school management that are based on reliable research and effective practices, and have been replicated successfully in schools with diverse characteristics. Comprehensive design with aligned components. The program has a comprehensive design for effective school functioning, including instruction, assessment, classroom management, professional development, parental involvement, and school management, that aligns the schools curriculum, technology, and professional development into a schoolwide reform plan designed to enable all studentsincluding children from low-income families, children with limited-English proficiency, and children with disabilitiesto meet challenging State content and performance standards and addresses needs identified through a school needs assessment. Professional development. The program provides high quality and continuous teacher and staff professional development and training. Measurable coals and benchmarks. A comprehensive school reform program has measurable goals for student performance tied to the States challenging content and student performance standards, as those standards are implemented, and benchmarks for meeting the goals. 215. 6. 7, 8. 9. Support within the school. The program is supported by school faculty, administrators, and staff. Parental and community involvement. The program provides for the meaningful involvement of parents and the local community in planning and implementing school improvement activities. External technical support and assistance. A comprehensive reform program utilizes high-quality external support and assistance from a comprehensive school reform entity (which may be a university) with experience or expertise in schoolwide reform and improvement. Evaluation strategies. The program includes a plan for the evaluation of the implementation of school reforms and the student results achieved. Coordination of resources. The program identifies how other resources (federal, state, local, and private) available to the school will be utilized to coordinate services to support and sustain the school reform. Curriculum Mapping An intervention in 1999-2000 (but a part of your data collection and analysis after this first year) that every school should do early in the school year is the curriculum mapping required as a part of the ACSIP process: Calendar-based curriculum mapping is a procedure for collecting a data base of the operational curriculum in a school and/or a district. Each teacher in this initial step completes a map. The format is consistent for each teacher but reflects the individual nature of each classroom. Each teacher reads the entire school map as an editor when all the maps are completed. Places where new information was gained are underlined. Places requiring potential revision are circled. The maps are next used in a planned alignment of the operational curriculum with the Frameworks and criterion- referenced tests. Note: Mona Briggs and Eddie McCoy are members of a team in the new School Improvement Department who will be trained and available to help you train key people in your school to conduct the required curriculum mapping. This activity very important in aligning what it is that is taught with what it is that is tested. Some of the mapping has already been done at the District level. Teachers have received copies (or will in the August Preschool Inservice) of documents that display the relationship of the District grade-level and course benchmarks to the State Curriculum Frameworks, the SAT9 objectives, and to adopted text rnaterials. The step for schools to complete includes mapping teachers lesson plans against these areas and to identify whether critical elements likely to be tested on the benchmark examinations are indeed taught before the dates of the examinations. 22Curriculum Map Content Area/Course Grade Level Page___ of Month Unit Topics/Skills Strand/Content Standard (Framework) Student Learning Expectation Standard (Framework) LRSD Benchmark 23 Alignment (from the ACSIP process): Step 1: All the teachers in the school map the subjects and courses they teach. Step 2: The Curriculum Alignment Document is used to categorize the results of the maps. Step 3: The findings of the Curriculum Alignment Document are summarized (e.g., 4 teachers are introducing
0 teachers are teaching/assessing
0 teachers are reviewing/maintaining
Strand: Patterns, Algebra and Functions, Content Standard 2, Student Learning Expectation: Grades 9-12, PAF.2.1. Use equations, absolute value equations, inequalities, absolute value inequalities, and systems of equations and inequalities to solve mathematical and real-world problems. Step 4: Committees of the faculty organize curricula so that concepts in the frameworks are thoughtfully and systematically introduced, taught and assessed, and reviewed and maintained. This step is part of the schools improvement plan because it is a complex process that requires extensive committee work and faculty consensus. 24Compiling Mapping Results ... Lang. Arts Framework List all strands and student learning expectations for the appropriate grade levels in this column. Not Covered Introduced Taught & Assessed Reviewed/Maintained 25 The ACSIP documents outline the following actions to take in Editing, Auditing, Validating, and Creative Development Tasks: Gain information Avoid repetition Identify gaps Identify potential areas for curriculum integration Match with learner standards/benchmarks Examine for timeliness (taught before the test administration?) Edit for coherence Teachers are further encouraged to Edit for Repetitions: Recognize the difference between repetitions and redundancy. Adopt curriculum spiraling as a goal. To find possible areas for curriculum integration, teachers are encouraged to: Peruse the map and circle areas for integration of content, skills, and assessment. These areas can serve as the springboard for curriculum planning at the teacher/team/school levels. 26Step 8: Actions For each intervention, you need to outline the major steps that the school will take to implement the selected intervention. Remember to include: Steps to provide necessary professional development for successful implementation of the intervention. Include both the initial training, plus the follow-up or peer coaching or networking that are necessary to provide ongoing support of teachers. The plan must clearly show the relationship of any planned professional development to the successful implementation of a selected intervention. Steps to purchase or otherwise secure necessary resources, such as buying instructional materials, recruiting mentors, or soliciting used books appropriate for classroom libraries. Steps to put the intervention in place, such as identifying students to be targeted for special tutoring, consultations with parents, designing necessary forms, planning communications, collaborating with other staff, etc., etc. Steps to conduct formative evaluations (such as action research projects) so that you can modify or adjust quickly, if necessary, the implementation of the plan to ensure greater success. Steps to conduct a summative evaluation to determine the impact of your intervention on your goal(s). The continuous planning cycle includes four basic phases: plan, do, study, act. Then the cycle begins again. Taking a new look at the baseline data (see Step 1 in this planning guide) should be an outgrowth of your summative evaluation of the previous year's plan. complete sentences for each action statement. Begin each sentence with a verb. Some examples follow: 1. 2. 3. Enroll Ms. Jones in training to implement Reading Recovery. Conduct schoolwide parent meeting to update them on progress of implementation. Apply for a grant to purchase Accelerated Reader and ample books for program implementation. 274. Invite Pat Busbea to lirain, oz>wa\7s ttfGttfhe w'hole school can support Reading Recovery, 5. Set up an action research to .Kieasure (eftectv eness of the new Animated Literacy program at the itexe'. Step 9: Person(s) RespomiWe Assign someone at your school the responsib'ifity for each action to ensure that the action step is actually implemented. Distribute leadership responsibilities, and do not assume that the only people involved are those listed. Some action steps will require committees or teams or task forces. The person listed is responsible for convening that group. Remember to include parents, as appropriate, in these groups. Step 10: Timeline Indicate the approximate time that the action is to start and when it should be fully implemented. An agenda item for the Campus Leadership Team is to monitor implementation of the plan and to conduct formative evaluations of the quality of the implementation. Interventions designed to impact the spring test results should, obviously, be in place when school starts for maximum impact. Step 11: Resources Identify the necessary new resources required to implement your intervention. Some examples follow: $14,000 for professional development $10,000 for purchase of classroom libraries 8 volunteers to assist with independent reading program 40 mentors for at-risk students Reassignment of Title I aide to parent liaison responsibilities $3000 for teacher pay to run the after-school Reading Clinic Step 12: Budget Indicate how you plan to pay for any required costs under the appropriate column. You can mix and match your funds as necessary. Examples of a budget to purchase classroom libraries follow: District $500 Title I $8000 APIG $1500 Note 1. The school must total all the entries of the three columns when the plan in complete. 28The District column cannot exceed the amount of money in your school budget for the specified categories of expenditures. The total of all the Title I expenditures must be no greater than your schools Title I allocation. The total of all the entries under APIG must not exceed your APIG grant. If a school has other sources of money to fund its interventions, then a note should be made on the form to indicate the source of the other funds, such as PTA, CSRD grant, etc. Note 2: Title I schools specifically (but recommended for all schools as well) are required to include the following minimums in their budgets: 1 % of the total Title I allocation must be spent on parent involvement 10% of the total Title I allocation must be spent on professional development that is clearly related to the achievement of your school goals and to the planned interventions. step 13: Plan Evaluation Planning how you will evaluate your plan is a critically important step in the planning cycle. You must plan for both formative and summative evaluations. Formative Evaluations Formative evaluations of the quality of your plans implementation should be conducted as a regular part of the business of the Campus Leadership Team. Is implementation occurring according to the planned timelines? Are the people assigned responsibility carrying through? What evidence (surveys, observations, anecdotes, action research, interim student achievement data such as grades, CRT scores, etc.) is there that the intervention is working? Are resources adequate? Do formative data indicate a need for modifications or adjustments to the plan? How well does everyone (teachers, parents, community, students, etc.) understand the intervention? How well are you communicating? What next steps are suggested? What are you learning about change and implementation of other interventions? What additional professional development do you need to be more effective? 29What is the evidence that you will achieve your benchmark goal? Are you doing whatever it takes to get the desired results? (Remember Dr.Terrence Roberts levels of commitment? We cant just think about it, or try, or do what we can. We must do whatever it takes.) Summative Evaluation Summarize your implementation process of each intervention. Outline what concluded to be strengths and weaknesses in the implementation. Give recommendations for next year. you Summarize the impact of each intervention on student achievement. Did you achieve your benchmarks? Is there a preponderance of evidence that you made a difference with your intervention? 30Quality Indicators for Elementary Schools Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1990-00 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 4 4 K-5 K-5 K-5 K-5 4 4 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Performance on State- Mandated Criterion Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Goal (Definition) 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%.__________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually._______ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.___________________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 32 Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 K-5 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Average Daily Attendance Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K-5 1999-00 K-5 Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. ___________________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 1999-00 K-5 School Safety 1999-00 K-5 Other School Selected Indicators Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually.______________________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. _________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. LRSD Elementary School Quality indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 90% of a schools kindergarten students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 1999-00 1 Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test The percent of kindergarten students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. _________ ____________ 90% of a schools grade 1 students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy._______________ 33 Baseline Year 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50'^ percentile in reading._______ The percent of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50' percentile will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students shall perform at or above the SO' percentile in grade 5 mathematics. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 34 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 5 5 5 5 5 2-5 2-5 2-5 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9. the Norm-Referenced Ma^ematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of students performing at or above the 50**' percentile in grade 5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.__________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics.__________________________ The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading each semester._________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._____________ Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 35 Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 mathematics pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 36 Quality Indicators for Middle Schools Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) 1999-00 7-8 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________ _______ School Dropout Goal (Definition) 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in grade 6 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 mathematics. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics. 100% of a schools grade 7 or 8 students who complete Algebra I shall perform at or above the proficient level. 100% of a schools grade 8 students who complete Geometry shall perform at or above the proficient level. 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance________ Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12*^ grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._____________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 37 Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 State Indicators Tier I Professional Development Goal (Definition) Your Results 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development.______________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 State-Mandated Indicators Tier II Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 38 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) State-Mandated Indicators Tier II ___________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Drop-outs 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 6-8 Other School Selected Indicators The percent of students completing Algebra I performing at or above the proficient' level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students completing Geometry performing at or above the "proficient level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Goal (Definition) Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12**^ grade._________________ Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of ."noroved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and jyiolent acts. Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 39 LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Your Results Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50**' percentile in reading._______ The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the SO* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'*' percentile in mathematics. Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 40 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test a Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50^ percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________________________ At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the "proficient level in reading each semester.________________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester._________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.___________ Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1 41 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year.________________________________ _ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8.___________ The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 42 Quality Indicators for High Schools Baseline Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 9-12 9-12 11 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test_______ ________ School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher_________ Professional Development School Safety Goal (Definition) 'P-' 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Reading and Writing Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12** grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually._______ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 43 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 11 State-Mandated Indicators Tier II________________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test_________________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Goal (Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient" level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Drop-outs Goal (Definition) 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development High schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12* grade.________________ Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate.___________________ ____ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 44 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 9-12 I__ . School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) School Safety Other School Selected Indicators L-RSD High School Quality Indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 1998-99 10 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Goal (Definition) Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.___________________________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Goal (Definition) 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50**^ percentile in reading._______ The percent of students performing at or above the 50' percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._____________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 45 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 Grade Levels 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9-11 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*^ percentile in mathematics. The percent of students performing at or above the 50**' percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.___________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics.___________________________ The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient" level in reading each semester. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 46 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 2002-03 2002-03 Grade Levels 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-12 9-12 12 12 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test______________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Honors Seal on High School Diploma Honors Seal on High School Diploma Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.____________________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. _______________________________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a high schools students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year._____________________________ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas.__________________________ The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 47 Baseline Year 1998-99 Grade Levels 11-12 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Taking the ACT 1998-99 1998-99 11-12 11-12 Taking the ACT Performance on the ACT Performance on the ACT 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Taking Advanced Placement Examinations 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above on the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________ 65% of a high schools graduates will take at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________________ 90% of a high schools students taking AP examinations will score a 3 or above. Your Growth Your Score 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements The percent of a high school's students earning a score of 3 or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________________ 100% of a high schools seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony. The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 48 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 February 7, 2000 TO FROM: Everyone r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT
School Improvement If you are on track with your School Improvement Plan, you have gathered all 5?? available data from the first semester to conduct a formative evaluation of your progress. (See Chapter 13 in Guidelines to School Improvement Planning). Its also time to start making decisions about next years plan. The attached ERS publication on School Improvement is a good one to share with your CLT and even the whole faculty. You can use it to measure where you are - and to determine what you may need to do next. r Attachment BAL/rcm 1I School Improvement: Factors Leading to Success or Failure I ss Education leaders in schools across the country are asking: How can we increase the levels of learning for all our students? Many of them are considering externally developed, comprehensive models of school improvement. Others are developing their own schoolwide improvement models. Still others are identifying and addressing needs for improvement in specific subjects or skills. Whatever the approach, and despite the hard work of those involved, school improvement efforts do not always succeed. But research and experience from schools and districts engaged in school improvement provide valuable guidance that can increase the chances of success. f^C^I This ERS Informed Educator discusses the importance of planning and selfstudy in implementing school improvement efforts. It describes several major studies that provide valuable information about what factors lead to the success or failure of school improvement efforts. Knowing about these factors can help you ensure that your school or school districts school improvement efforts achieve their goalhigher student achievement. Developing a Roadmap Stories of successfill school improvement sound a common themi the importance of using data during both planning and implementation. The Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory recommends: collecting, analyzing, and using data to Inform decision making throughout the improvement process
using a variety of research tools and a flexible approach to accommodate different situations and research questions
looking at baseline data, monitoring the improvement process, and studying impacts
and forming a small research team comprising staff, community members, and students, which regularly collects data (Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory 1999). Participants in the school improvement process should use data and information to discuss progress on a regular basis, and should make changes to the original plan as needed. In its report Turning Around Low-Performing Schools, the U.S. Department of Education talks about why it is so important to use data to support school improvement efforts. Specifically, Measuring progress and setting standards and analyzing the information to identify patterns of failure and their causes enables schools and districts to diagnose low performance and attack specific problems with concrete solutions (1998,30). School Readiness for Change Robert Slavin, a long-time researcher on school improvement, cautions schools and districts to consider seriously another element that can have a profound impact on school improvement efforts school readiness for change. Although the staff in some schools maybe ready to effectively engage in their own school improvement efforts -with little assistance, other schools may need substantial and ongoing support to develop and implement their plans successfully. Slavin also identifies a third category of schools those in which even the most heroic attempts at reform are doomed to failure. Schools of this type may have recently lost key staff, may suffer from poor relationships among staff, or may have lost funding. Improvement efforts in these schools 2000 Clarendon Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22201 Phone: (703) 243-2100 Fax: (703) 243-5971 www.ers.org Copyright 1999 Educational Research Service. Reproduced with permission. ILGUCiLiUiicLi ikCiCd-ivix uctviuc S^faddressing the basic problems (1997, ^ftom lini -while a school may need ^Ossendal to take a realistic view of as need. feat Affect the Success of B Implementation ffiy,. major studies conducted in recent a rich source of information about the ^at lead to the success or failure of school efforts. In this section, we summarize jof several of these studies. Many of the blap and reinforce each other. pof the Special Strategies Studies Eand Stringfield, in Ten Promising Pra- ^'Jucating Ail Children, observed that imple- Bbf reform programs varied greatly among ae'fent sites studied in the federally con- peial Strati jies studies. The researchers i^ftat many of these programs can work is jiffice that one or more will work at a speafic i&jrtce Ba particular team of teachers and adminis- ^
None of these programs can be made ^?proof, school-proof, or district-proof The which the program was implemented had aeiil of power to facilitate or impede its Mutation (1997,127-128). on the experiences of the research teams S$tudied, the researchers identified the foists that were key in most successfill school Kht efforts: ffs^c perception of local strengths and areas ^of improvement, combined with clear at were understood and embraced by fpn of persons who would be affected by gsion in selecting the program and mj iout the whole process of implementation, jhess of members of the school, district. immunity to undertake the reforms. ^g access to long-term, program-specific Kal assistance and support from beyond the (that is, from external program developers ^yersity collaborators). act and state commitment to ongoing staff ropment supporting the school Improvement The context in which the program was implemented had a great deal of power to facilitate or impede its implementation. Rebecca Herman and Sam Stringfield, 1997 The schools and districts ability to obtain and maintain sufficient fiscal support. A commitment by district and school administrators to maintain the program through a sometimes turbulent implementation stage and to give the program time to have an impact. This last point was especially critical. The researchers concluded that, while it is important to consider accountability, the focus on outcomes must be balanced with patience for process. When a school or system discontinued one program and substituted another without providing strong evidence of cost savings or program effectiveness, teachers tended to become cynical about investing their energy in new programs (Herman and Stringfield 1997,127-130). Findings of the Study of Effective Schools Programs A 1995 report generated as part of a Congressionally mandated study of Effective Schools programs and other school-based reforms identified features common to schools successfriUy engaged in reform. As part of the study, administrators in a sample of 1,550 districts were asked to respond to a mail survey containing questions about the status of comprehensive school-level improvement efforts. The study design also included Intensive site visits to 32 schools, in which the researchers observed what was really happening in schools that considered themselves involved with comprehensive reform (QueUmalz et al. 1995). The research team used their observations in the 32 schools to develop what they termed key features of successfrd reform strategies. These features provide valuable direction for schools beginning their comprehensive reform efforts, no matter what model they decide to adopt. In general, the successful school-based reforms had three key features
-2-ft: i Challenging learning experiences for all I students. This feature tended to emerge from I four coordinated elements: high teacher I expectations
challenging curricula
exploration of \ a variety of alternative configurations of students L and teachers
and exploration of alternative 5 assessment methods. A school culture that nurtured staff collaboration and participation in decision making. The most successfill school-based reforms took place in schools that created cultures of collegiality by finding ways for staff and the community to work together on significant changes needed in their schools. Equally important to shared decision making was the reformulation of the roles and authority exercised by teachers and administrators. Meaningful opportunities for professional growth. In the successfill schools, teachers set staff development priorities keyed to their vision of the reform goals in their schools. Typically, staff development topics related to technical areas such as curriculum, instruction, and assessment, or to managerial areas such as schoolwide planning or collaborative decision making. In some instances, teacher teams developed strategic plans that allowed sustained, coherent immersion in an area. Forsaking a grab bag of one-session workshops, teachers sought the expertise and time necessary to acquire, implement, and reflect on innovations on an ongoing basis. Study of Six Benchmark Schools In a recent study reporting his observations of six schools that were demonstrating success -with their . school improvement efforts, Gordon Cawelti found that each of the six schools follows a different path: &fheir educational programs and approaches vary greatly. But aU focus on student achievement as an sVend goal (1999, 3). Cawelti identified six additional chaA racteristicz*sf* that provizdn e Tvroa 1l1u1 ao brliel icnsii zgrhritT rftoTr* cscz*hooz"ol leaders involved with school improvement efforts: There is a focus on clear standards and improving results. Teamwork is a way of life and helps ensure ac-u countability. People in these teams meet reguand solve problems. larly to examine assessment results and plan instruction based on these results, to plan cooperative instructional activities, and to communicate n The principal is a strong educational leader. These six schools are led by principals who know that they must focus on the whole system, that they must facilitate the work of others, and that they must solve many problems every day. Staff members are committed to helping all students achieve. These teachers spend e?rtra time working with students and planning to make the school better.n Multiple changes are made to improve the instructional life of students, and these changes are sustained over time. These six schools have not raised achievement by changing just one factor, such as schedule, teaching methods, or technology. Substantial improvement comes when a school is able to undertake several changes in an organized fashion and sustain and perfect them n over a period of at least three to five years (Cawelti 1999,63-65). Suggestions from the Education C ommis-sion of the States: Clear and Continuous Communication Is a Key The Education Commission of the States, in its publication Listen, Discuss, and Act: Parents and Teachers' Views on Education Reform, provides suggestions for schools and districts interested in engaging the entire school community in their efforts to improve student achievement. Three key suggestions include: Communicate well with teachers. The experience of schools and districts across the country clearly shows that if teachers, are not informed and active participants in the process, reform efforts win fail. Teachers who are satisfied with the basic ideas of a reform effort may have enormous frustrations with the way the effort is implemented. Give teachers a voice in the process treat them as partners with the school and district in the reform. Also, let them know up front how much time any changes will involve, what the effect on their work will be, and what they can expect to happen. Be clear about what it means to set high standards for aU students, and what it will take to meet them. Survey and focus group results strongly suggest that parents and teachers are more inclined to support a goal of improving success for all students rather than buying into the notion that all children can learn at high -3- Lducationai Kesearcn dervice Ilevels. They believe the goal of having all stu- ^dents achieve at stellar levels is counterproductive Sand unrealistic. In other words, higher standards Kfor all receive more support than high standards K&r all. Agendas that include setting high stan- fedards also need to spell out clearly who set the Bistandards and what resources (including instruc- Etion, materials, and time) wiU be provided to help c*' 'children meet them. Show how new ideas enhance, rather than re- 1 place, the old ones. This research shows that ^parents and educators are primed for school re- sform, but they worry that the innovations are not B feasible or wiU go too far. They recognize the K peed for students to go beyond the basics and Rjeam more complex skUls, but fear that basics are fe hot being taught adequately. When you are intro- fc during something new, show how it works with ^'what is already there. For instance, There will be portfolios and other demonstrations of stu- fedent work, along with more traditional standard- ^tzed tests. Bridge the gap between peoples expeFA riences and expectations and the changes being ^implemented, then show how the changes im- prove learning for students. ^Applying these guideUnes for communication iSfifig the complex processes of selecting and imple- 's [enbng a comprehensive model for school improveJ I ^t, one that wiU affect teachers, students, and the ^^rnunity at large, should be considered as impor- ^mas what goes on day-to-day at the school site. K -4 f t^-Performing Texas Schools Kh summarizing his observations of schools that ive/experienced success with school improvement, >nnson identifies three broad groups of factors that Khlve a profound impact on a schools efforts, ^e are: ^^ttitudes, expectations, and reasons. Successful - ^programs are characterized by a wiUingness to ^question current practices, chaUenge conven- ^tional wisdom, and explore every opportunity for improving teaching and learning...the focus is on ^improving instruction in every aspect of each ^students school experience. ^Comprehensive, focused, meaningful planning. g^This must include an in-depth assessment of i^sgengths and needs, the estabUshment of chal- ^fenging and measurable goals, and an intensive ^Kearch for options that might lead the school from current levels of performance to the challenging goals articulated in the planning process. Commitment to continuous improvement. This must include a sense of ownership by aU staff in every aspect of the plan, the development of systems for regularly gauging progress, and systems for celebrating success. Successful programs are characterized by a willingness to question current practices, challenge conventional wisdom, and explore every opportunity for improving teaching and learning. Joseph F. Johnson, 1997 In Johnsons view, the manner in which principals, teachers, parents, and other school leaders address these factors may substantially influence whether their schoolwide program wiU bring focus and power to academic reform efforts (1997, online). Examples of Promising School Improvement Efforts The Memphis City Schools Experience Memphis City Schools has, for the past few years, provided a case study of schools in the midst of reform. As of spring 1995,45 of the Memphis schools had begun implementation of New American Schools designs, with six different designs represented. Researchers studying first-year implementation of the programs in these schools concluded that: AU of the restructuring efforts required a great deal of energy, time, and commitment from the teachers, administrators, and school community. Restructuring initiatives that provided classroom materials and guideUnes for instruction generaUy started faster than designs emphasizing teacher- developed materials. Issues of focused leadership and ongoing, focused professional development appeared Ukely to determine substantial parts of the long-term successes of the schools. However, relative to what -4-it 1 t: V, Educational Research Service L might be called reasonable progress, the re- L searchers concluded that the Memphis start-up were successful, with no t, implementations J unresolvable problems (CRESPAR 1997). She Clover Park Experience r The Clover Park School District outside Tacoma, Washington began its journey of change in 1995. "pie district took a careful and comprehensive look at fwhat factors contributed to the success of the effort, information about the role of the school board and lientral office in encouraging, promoting, and sup- ^^orting change at the school level provides valuable ^^guidance to other school districts. These were the guidelines used to direct district-level involvement SB.3 ^and activity: at W' W
I B ?* '^J:- -sj?
' Board members set initial goals and had frequent and significant opportunities to remain informed about the process of implementation and school reform. All staff understood and were committed to beliefs driving the comprehensive reform effort first and foremost that all children can and will learn. Decisions were required to be based on data and research. ' District money was reallocated to support comprehensive reform. A comprehensive needs assessment process that promoted collaboration, focused on data and research, and worked well with district priorities was designed and supported. District structures responsive to the needs of schools were put in place. Hiring and transfer procedures ensured a good match between schools and staff. During the change planning process, district staff got to know principals well and supported them as they helped them to provide strong leadership at their schools. District staff learned to talk the talk of the individual school. Staff development was tailored to individual school needs and the requirements of would not have been as pervasive or as positive (Davis, Sagmiller, and Hagans undated). Hugh Burkette, Clover Park superintendent, talks about some lessons he has learned from the process of supporting implementation of schoolwide improvement in the districts schools. He says: Comprehensive school reform has to be approached in a thoughtful way. We had to use a process that passed the teacher-test of work worth doing. The self-study process they embraced took timeall yearbut it gave us powerful results. Our staffs collected so much data about their schools. They looked at it hard
they identified needs
they did the research about what works, what met the needs of their kids. They didnt skip steps. And when they were done with their process, each staff was ready... to make an organized change. A national model cannot be your whole school reform...You get different parts and have to backfill where the model doesnt address significant school needs. Models dont answer all of the questions, or address all of the needs. They dont fix everything. Our teachers and staff taught me that every school is unique. At the same time, we insist that the models be Implemented as designed. Their success is based on all of the component parts being implemented. Establish structures at the district level that help schools stay focused. All of our schools... have developed comprehensive school plans....Because each goal is followed by a series of concrete strategies with timelines and assessment measures, there is no such thing as the failure of a plan. If one or the other strategy doesnt work, our schools go back and revise the strategies. They try again (1998, 7-11). i the specific reform model. In the view of observers of the Clover Park pro- 1 cess, without clear direction from the board and superintendent, and active support of district staff. W these changes (in student achievement) most likely Anticipating and Dealing with the Impact of Change Change is not easy, even when those involved are committed to making the effort. In Implementing Schoolwide Projects: An Idea Book for Educators, the authors talk of the challenges of change and note: Practitioners confront considerable obstacles as they design and implement more coherent educational services... Success stories do not unfold without false starts, and the routes to improvement are -5-\s/ circuitous (Pechman and Fiester 1994). They go on to identify challenges that persistently confronted schools involved in implementation of schoolwide improvement: Adequate Time to Learn New Roles. The transition to a schoolwide project involves introducing new and expanded roles, academic expectations, and management structures. Even new resources require that long-standing practices be adjusted. These changes can be disconcerting or overwhelming to some members of the school community. Even with broad support, new initiatives can be tricky to coordinate smoothly. Communication and Involvement. Without exception, schoolwide project planners said that project success is direcdy related to the quality of communication among planners and the degree to which teachers are partners in planning and implementation. The biggest pitfail is lack of communication, remarked a principal whose school is in its second project cycle. Adequate Preparation for New Resources. Successfill school-wide projects require extensive training of all teachers in uses of technology, new content and methods, and teaching styles. Including Parents and the Community. Organizers of schoolwdde projects find that it is not enough to improve instruction, curricula, or materials. Success for the project depends on support from parents, businesses, special-interest groups, and fraternal organizations. Awareness of Achievement Variability. Despite the strong academic programs and comprehensive assistance that schoolwide projects offer children, student performance on standardized tests can fluctuate from year to year. Dips in achieve- ment in schoolwide projects that are working well are rarely unexpected. Teachers know when a group of students have confronted difficulties, and the teachers anticipate performance below their goals. However, it is significant that these schools have structures that allow staff to adjust the program as needed. Stabilizing Change. The most consistent threat to schoolwide project success is the change in leadership that occurs all too often and too early in the life of many projects. It is not uncommon for enthusiastic district managers, seeing the success of a creative leader in initiating a schoolwide project, to move that leader into a new administrative slot well before the new initiatives stabilize, sometimes as soon as only one or two years after a project gets under way. (Pechman and Fiester 1994). The Importance of Leadership No discussion of factors that affect school change efforts would be complete wdthout attention to the crucial, yet difficult role that leadership plays. Tony Trujillo, superintendent of the Ysleta School District in Texas, highlights a key component of this role in supporting school improvement: My job is to get ordinary people to do extraordinary things (Ragland et al. 1999,18). How do leaders accomplish this role? In her discussion of leadership characteristics that facilitate school change, Mendez-Morse identifies six characteristics of successful leaders of educational change: vision, specifically that students learning is of primary importance
believing schools are for learning
valuing the professional contributions of staff, relating well to people, and able to foster collaborative relationships
being a skilled communicator and listener, someone who can articulate a vision and communicate that shared vision to all in the school community
acting proactively. Initiating action as well as anticipating and recognizing aspects of the environment that might interfere with efforts to carry out the mission
_ taking risks but not carelessly or thoughtlessly
encouraging others to be risk takers by providing a safe environment (1999). Participants in several U.S. Department of Education focus groups agreed with the importance of vision and v^ues, and identified the school leader as key to maintaining the vision during the often difficult process of school change: These leaders seldom claim to have invented the vision or the underlying values and beliefs
instead, they perceive themselves to be keepers of the dream. They embrace it wholeheartedly and make sure that everyone else does too...Developing and maintaining the vision challenges a leaders ability to determine how well what is happening matches reasonable expectations at a given stage of implementation. In addition, when faced with problems, effective leaders see multiple solutions that preserve the spirit of the vision. They find it important to -6-Lducaiionai x\esearcn Service T study the nature of vision and recognize the stages of its development...Although the details of participants visions varied, each put students squarely in the center (U.S. Department of Education 1996). Hugh Burkette, the Clover Park superintendent, adds one additional responsibility for a leader of change: Leadership means being relentless. Being relentless means being single-minded and purposeful... Of every action and every decision we ask a single question: how does this act support increased student achievement?...! cant emphasize to you enough the power of beUef in providing leadership (1998). Summary In the current climate of change and reform, schools and districts across the nation are engaged in school Improvement efforts. These efforts may be comprehensive and school-wide, or they may be more narrowly aimed at specific areas. It is important to recognize that school improvement is a complex process, and that even a well-designed approach can fail unless school leaders put in place the conditions that support its success. This ERS Informed Educator has provided an overview of factors that can contribute to the success or failure of school improvement, based on research and experience. By incorporating an understanding of these factors into their planning, educators can focus their efforts so that their hard work and collaboration result in significant progress towards the goal of increased learning for aU students. Sources Burkette, Hugh E. 1998. Making Comprehensive School Reform Work. Presentation at Improving Americas Schools Regional Conference (Portland, OR): October 21, 1998. Cawelti, Gordon. 1999. Portraits of Six Benchmark Schools: Diverse Approaches to Improving Student Achievement. Arlington, VA
Educational Research Service. CRESPAR. 1997. Scaling Up: The New American Schools in Memphis. Johns Hopkins University and Howard University: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk. Online. (September 1997). http
//scov.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/septl997page07.html. Davis, Deborah, Kay SagmiUer, and Rex Hagans. Undated. Implementing School Reform Models: The Clover Park Experience. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Online, -www.nwrel.org/csrdp/ clover.html. Education Commission of the States. 1996. Listen, Discuss, and Act: Parents and Teachers Views on Education Reform. Denver, CO: Author. Hetman, Rebecca, and Sam Stringfield. 1997. Ten Promising Programs for EducatingAl! Children: Evidence of Impact. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Johnson, Joseph. E, Jr. Promising Practices: Creating School-wide Programs that Make a Difference. 1997. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana Center, The University of Texas at Austin. Online, http://www.starcenter.org/ptomise/ schppromise.htm. Lake, Robin J., et al. 1999. Making Standards Work: Active Voices, Focused Learning. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education. New American Schools. 1998. Blueprints for School Success: A Guide to New American Schools Designs. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. 1999. Self- Study. Portland, OR
Author. Online, http:// www.nwrel.org/ scpd/natspec/self. html. Mendez-Morse, Sylvia. 1999. Leadership Characteristics that Facilitate School Change. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational development Laboratory. Online, http:// www.sedl.org/change/leadership/welcome.html. Ohio Department of Education. 1999. Transforming Learning Communities: A Research Project on School Change. Columbus, OH: Author. Online, http
// schoolimptovement.ode.ohio.gov/ tic/ default.html. Pechman, E., and L. Fiestet 1994. Implementing Schoolwide Projects: An Idea Book for Educators. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service. Online, http:// www.ed.gov/pubs/SchlProj. Quellmalz, Edys, et al. 1995. School-Based Reform. Lessons from a National Study: A Guide for School Reform Teams. Menlo Park, CA
SRI International. Online. http://'www.ed.gov/pubs/Reform/pt2a.html. Ragland, Mary A. et al. 1999. Urgency, Responsibility, Efficiency: Preliminary Findings of a Study of High-Performing Texas School Districts. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana - Center, The University of Texas at Austin. Richardson, Joan. 1998. Data Provides Answers for Student Learning. Results (October 1998): 1,6-7. Schaffer, Eugene C., Pamela S. Nesselrodt, and Samuel C. Stringfield. 1997. Impediments to Reform: An Analysis of Destabilizing Issues in Ten Promising Programs. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Slavin, Robert E. Undated. Sand, Bricks, and Seeds: School Change Strategies and Readiness for Reform. Baltimore, MD
Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk. Online. www.successforaU/ sandbrickhtm. Talley, Susan. 1999. Perpectives: What Does It Take to Reform a Low-Performing School? From At-Risk to Excellence (Spring 1999): 2-3. U.S. Department of Education. 1996. The Role of Leadership in Sustaining School Reform: Voices from the Field. Online. (July 1996). http://'www.ed.gov/pubs/ Leadership. U.S. Department of Education. 1998. Turning Around Low-Performing schools: A Guide for State and Local Leaders. Washington, DC: Author, 1998. I L -7- to Educational Research Service IO' oi More Information on Factors that Contribute to the Access of School Improvement Efforts info-Files on related topics. The following are just a few of the ER5 Info-Files on topics related to change Wschool improvement. Each ERS Info-File contains 70-100 pages of articles from professional journals. i ^maries of research studies, and related literature concerning th^topic, plus an annotared bibliography that deludes an ERIC-CIJE search. Base price per Info-File: $32.00. ERS Comprehensive subscriber price: $16.00. fo Individual subscriber price
$24.00. To order, contact Educational Research Service, 2000 Clarendon ^iilevard, Arlington, VA 22201. Phone: (800) 791-9308. Fax
(800) 791-9309. Or order online through the ERS ^eb site, wvw.ers.org. Add the greater of $3.50 or 10% of total purchase price for postage and handling. Phone Visa, MasterCard, or American Express. f A ^d Web site orders accepted with purchase order number or School Restructuring (#IE-194). Provides various perspectives on efforts to change education, including examinations of successes and failures in school reform, why reform efforts succeed or fail, school staff opinion about change efforts, and how to facilitate reform. . Strategies for Educational Change (#IE-244). Reviews models for creating change in schools
barriers to change
fostering a culture/climate that facilitates change
roles for school administrators in bringing change to their schools
and sustaining changes in schools. 'About ERS Educational Research Service (ERS) is the nonprofit foundation serving the research and information needs of education leaders and the public. ERS ^^Eprovides objective, accurate, and up-to-date research ' and information for local school and school district decisions. .^ ERS, established in 1973, is sponsored by seven ACnational associations of school administrators: ft American Association of School Administrators American Association of School Personnel Administrators Association of School Business Officials Council of Chief State School Officers National Association of Elementary School Principals National Association of Secondary School Principals National School Public Relations Association. The Informed Educator Series 4^-. Educational Research Serrdee prepares the publica- tions in The Informed Educator series to provide busy education leaders with concise, yet comprehensive overviews of the most current research and informa- V tion on topics of priority concern in education. Each publication in this series is designed to keep education leadersincluding central-office administrators, principals, curriculum specialists, teachers, and othersup to date on a leading or emerging issue in education, enabling them to make the best decisions for the children and youth they serve. Prepared by the ERS staff, publications in The Informed Educator series are intended to provide an objective, comprehensive summary of research and opinion appearing in the current literature. The inclusion of any specific assertion or opinion here is not intended to imply approval or endorsement by Educational Research Service or any ERS sponsoring organization. Other topics in The Informed Educator series include
Helping Students Deal with Conflict and Anger Curriculum Integration Beginning Reading Instruction: Research and Practice Productive Communication with Parents Ability Grouping: Ejfects and Alternatives Integrating Technology into the Curriculum and more! Ordering Information
Stock No. IE-348. Base price per copy
$9.60. Comprehensive subscriber price: $4.80. --------- available.Schooldistrictsmayalsopurchaseacamera- ready reproducible, which includes unlimited reproduction rights within the district. In addition, Individu^ suD- scriptions for standing orders for each new publication in The Informed Educator series are available. For infor- Individual subscriber price: $7.20. Quantity discounts are mation, contact ERS Member Services Information Center, 2000 Clarendon Boulevard, Arlington, VA 222U1. Phone:(800) 791-9308. Fax: (800) 791-9309. E-mail: msic@ers.org. Web site: www.ers.org -8-Analysis of Achievement Level Tests, Spring 2000 Little Rock School District School Badgett Interpretations _____________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 3 to 4 Math higher than District average Grade 3 seems strongest: higher than average gains in all three tests from grade 2 Grade 5 seems weakest: declines in all three tests from grade 4 Scores below LRSD average in all areas #35 in LRSD in Grade 2 Reading, Language, and Math #35 in LRSD in Grade 5 Reading, Language, and Math Average total growth points (76) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 26 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 22 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 28 points Mathematics: Grade 223 points below the national median Grade 310 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 517 points below Language: Grade 220 points below national median Grade 32 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 514 points below Reading: Grade 233 points below national median Grade 32 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 518 points below 1 School Bale Interpretations_________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 4 to 5 Math higher than District average Grade 4 seems weakest: less than average growth in all three areas Scores higher than LRSD averages in Grades 2 and 3 Language and in Grades 2-3 Reading #33 in LRSD in Grade 5 Reading Way below average (62) in total growth points Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 17 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 18 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 27 points Mathematics: Grade 212 points below national median Grade 37 points below Grade 410 points below Grade 510 points below Language: Grade 25 points below national median Grade 3AT the national median Grade 48 points below Grade 511 points below Reading: Grade 211 points below national median Grade 36 points below Grade 49 points below Grade 514 points below 2 School Baseline Success for All Interpretations_________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 4 to 5 Math and Reading above District average growth Scores lower than LRSD in all test areas Grade 3 appears to be strongest. #33 in Grade 4 Reading, #34 in Grade 4 Language, and #33 in Grade 4 Math Below LRSD average in total growth points (73) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 25 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 23 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 25 points Mathematics: Grade 216 points below national median Grade 38 points below Grade 413 points below Grade 514 points below Language: Grade 212 points below national median Grade 35 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 59 points below Reading: Grade 217 points below national median Grade 38 points below Grade 413 points below Grade 512 points below 3 School Booker Arts Magnet Interpretations_______________________________________ Growth from grade 4 to 5 higher than District average in all three test areas Scores higher than District averages in all test areas #10 in Grade 2 Reading, #7 in Math #9 in Grade 3 Reading #9 in Grade 5 Reading, #10 in Math Above District average in total growth points (78) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 24 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 27 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 27 points Mathematics: Grade 27 points below national median Grade 33 points below Grade 43 points below Grade 52 points below Language: Grade 26 points below national median Grade 31 point below Grade 4-AT national median Grade 51 point above national median Reading: Grade 28 points below national median Grade 34 points below Grade 42 points below Grade 54 points below 4 School Brady Success for All Newcomer Center Interpretations___________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 Math, Language, and Reading higher than average District growth Growth from grade 3 to 4 Language and Reading higher than average District growth Grade 3 seems strong Grade 5 seems weak
growth lower than District averages Score in Grade 3 Math equal to District average #33 in Grade 2 Reading, #31 in Math Above District average in total growth points (84) Grade 2 to 3 Reading = 29 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 26 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 29 points Mathematics: Grade 218 points below national median Grade 35 points below Grade 44 points below Grade 511 points below Language: Grade 215 points below national median Grade 34 points below Grade 43 points below Grade 59 points below Reading: Grade 220 points below national median Grade 39 points below Grade 44 points below Grade 513 points below 5 School Carver Science Magnet Interpretations__________________________________________ Growth from grade 3 to 4 in all three test areas higher than District average, Growth from grade 4 to 5 Reading higher than District average Grade 3 seems weak
lower than average growth #3 in Grade 2 Reading, #2 in Language, #3 in Math #6 in Grade 3 Reading, #6 in Language, #6
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.