Program Evaluations for the Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02

Program Evaluations for the received DEC 1 1 2002 desegregation monitoring Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA) 1998-99,1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02 Funded by the National Science Foundation Presented to the Board of Education for Approval December 19, 2002 Division of Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 www.lrsd.org 501/447-3320Table of Contents CPMSA Strategic Plan for 1998-1999 CPMSA Program Evaluation for 1998-1999 May 20,1999, Feedback from NSF Site Visit Team July 16,1999, Presentation Handouts for Reverse Site Visit to NSF 1999-2000 CPMSA Strategic Plan CPMSA Program Evaluation for 1999-2000 January 24,2000, Feedback from NSF Site Visit Team September 2000February 2002 CPMSA Strategic Plan CPMSA Program Evaluation for 2000-2001 January 16, 2001 Feedback from NSF Site Visit Team March 15, 2001 Feedback from Mid-Point Review (Reverse Site Visit to NSF) April 11, 2001 Revised CPMSA Strategic Plan September 1,2001February 28, 2002, CMPSA Strategic Plan CPMSA Program Evaluation for 2001-2002 May 7, 2002, Feedback from Reverse Site Visit to NSF September 2002August 2003 Strategic PlanLITTLE ROCK PARTNERSHIPS FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE (LRPMSA) Management Plan Year One 1998-99 Strategy 1. Implement a plan to improve the achievement of all students Action Step 1. Form vertical teams involving all 5 high schools, all 8 junior high schools and representative elementary schools Drivers 6 C y Indicators List of team members Timeline September, 1998 Responsibility' Vanessa Cleaver Principals 2. Send representatives to College Board Vertical Teams (VT) Conference List of conference participants February, 1999 3. Train representative to facilitate group meeting Phyllis Caruth participated in College Boards train the trainer workshop Februry, 1999 Vanessa Cleaver Phyllis Caruth 4. VT to meet on a quarterly level Agenda and sign-in sheets Spring, 1999 Ongoing 12. Ensure the developed policies for mathematics and science education for all students will continue to be implemented 3. Add policies to strengthen the course offerings for mathematics and science 1. 2. 3. 1. Include matli/science improvement component in individual school improvement plans (SIP) Assess progress of schools in following or meeting their plan Review and revise middle and high school Curriculum Catalog Develop K-12 talent development plan to improve G/T, honors, and AP student enrollment and success 2 2 sips submitted and reviewed Annual principal evaluation conference Published High School Curriculum Catalog, 1999- 2000 K-12 Talent Development Committee established Eliminated the honors/enriched layer of courses between the regular level and the Pre-AP/AP level at grades 6-12 for 1999-2000 school year October, 1998 Spring, 1999 December, 1998 November, 1998 Sadie Mitchell Frances Cawihon Marian I acey Dennis Glasgow Sadie Mitchell Frances CawtF.on Marian Lacey Dr. Bonnie Lesley Dr. Bonnie Lesley Talent Development Committee Dr. Lesley I 22. Construct curriculum maps ofLRSD standards/benchm arks with Arkansas standards, SAT9 testing objectives (plus other tests as appropriate), and instructional materials K-12 Curriculum maps for science and mathematics January, 1999 Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff 4. Implement a standards-based curriculum 1. Pilot standards- based programs at District schools, monitor schools to determine level of implementation 1 List of schools/teachers who are piloting programs Spring, 1998 Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff Principals 2. Provide training for teachers who pilot programs Training dates, agendas and participants Fall, 1997 3. Provide training for 6"' grade mathematics teachers who implement Connected Mathematics__ Training dates, agendas, participants Spring, 1999 Ongoing (4 34. 5. 6. J 7. Project (CMP) Provide training for 9"' grade teachers who will implement Active Physics Provide training for 6"' grade science teachers who will implement Science and Technology for Children (STC) Provide training for 4'' and 5' th grade teachers who will implement Investigations in Number, Data and Space Implement STC U Classroom observation Spring, 1999 (6 66 August, 1999 Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff 4Principals 8. Implement CMP 4 Classroom observation August, 1999 9. Implement Investigations 10. Implement Active Physics Classroom observation Classroom observation August, 1999 August, 1999 5. Increase level of support for science and math education among all relevant stakeholders 6. Ensure all relevant stakeholders understand systemic change as a strategy for improving mathematics and science education 1. 1. 2. 3. Implement Family Math and Science program in six schools Present to Christian Ministerial Alliance Present to Volunteers in Public Schools (VIPS) Board Present to the Little Rock Parent 4 5 Schedule and participants Agenda Agenda Agenda Spring, 1999 November, 1998 March, 1999 April, 1999 Principals Family Math and Science Coordinators Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver 5Jeacher Association Council 4. Design a dissemination brochure for key stakeholders about the LRPMSA 5 Brochure June, 1999 Vanessa Cleaver Suellen Vann 7. Develop plan to improve students interest in pursuing mathematics, science and engineering 8. Develop a plan to assure success tor all students in Algebra 1 1. Expand VITAI. LINK to include more businesses that have careers with math/science focus 2. Expand and monitor SECME programs 1. Coordinate the establishment of a two-week, halfday Algebra 1 program - Summer Mathematics Advanced 3 1 Math/science additions to VITAL LINK Phase-in schedule for SECME at District schools Schedule for SMART April, 1999 Spring, 1999 August, 1999 Vanessa Cleaver Debbie Milam Vanessa Cleaver Jo Evelyn Elston Vanessa Clea\ er SMART Committee 6Readiness Ifaining (SMART) 99 9. Io increase the coordination among existing funding sources in support of sj stemic reform in mathematics and science 10. Plan professional development 1. Develop plan to fund (Title I, NSF) the new positions of lead teachers for mathematics and science standards-based curriculum implementation 3 Lead teachers hired August, 1999 Dr. Bonnie Leslej Dennis Glasgow Leon Adams Vanessa Cleaver 1. Provide ongoing training for new and first year secondary mathematics and science teachers 1 Agendas for inservices for new/first-year teachers Fall, 1998 Ongoing Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Project Staff Principals ! i ___ I 7J I L I I I I I / r Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for il I I ! i i i Mathematics and Science Achievement Haas. # / 'V i ! I II I I Aimual Progress Report 1998-1999 1 i % I ) I LITTLE ROCK COMPREHENSIVE PARTNERSHIPS FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT (LR CPMSA) The Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LR CPMSA) is a major effort to promote a higher standard of learning and performance in mathematics and science in all students in the Little Rock School District (LRSD). OVERVIEW OF THE SYSTEM There are fifty-one schools in the LRSD, serving approximately 25, 000 students: TOTAL 35 8 5 1 1 L 51 elementary schools middle schools high schools vocational technical school Alternative Learning Center Accelerated Learning Center (high school) There are 919 K-12 mathematics and science teachers in the LRSD. More specifically, 735 are elementary teachers, 94 secondary science teachers, and 90 secondary mathematics teachers. The following list describes the District's student demographics by race/ethnicity: Afidcan American 67% Hispanic, Asian, and other minorities 3%, White 30% The LR CPMSA is a comprehensive program designed to focus on all K-12 mathematics and science programs through a variety of components addressing the needs of students, educators, and parents. The primary program components include: 1. 2. 3. 4. Implementation of standards-based curricula Development of district-wide policy and practice changes Resource convergence Paitnerships Small scale implementation of some of the curricula occurred during the 1998-1999 school year, the first year of planning/implementation of the LR CPMSA, for the purpose of developing training and trainers for the programs and reforming the curriculum. A very comprehensive professional 1998-1999 Annual ReportT development program was then launched to prepare nearly 800 mathematics and science teachers for the first phase of implementing high quality standards-based curricula, effective instructional practices, and effective student assessment. Professional development occurred during the first year in preparation for implementation of standards-based curricula for all students in the following grade and subject levels during the 1999-2000 school year: 4* and 5* grade mathematics teachers 6* grade mathematics teachers 6* grade science teachers 9* grade science teachers 1 -5* grade science teachers (1 kit) SI INFLUENCE ON THE SYSTEM I Standards-Based Curricula/Instruction The mathematics and science curricula that are being phased-in over a period of four years are national curricula that were developed with fimding from the National Science Foundation: Mathematics Investigations in Number, Data, and Space Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) Elementary (K-5) Middle School (6-8) Heath McDougal-Littell High School (11-12) I Pacesetter Pre-calculus Through Modeling High School Science Science and Technology for Children (STC) Elementary - 6* grade Science and Life Issues (SALI) grade Science Education for Public Understanding Project (SEPUP) 8* grade Active Physics 9* grade Mathematics and science vertical teams were formed to align local mathematics and science standards and benchmarks to the national standards. These standards and benchmarks were used to I' 1998-1999 Annual Report 2 I I Ihelp select McDougal-Littel for the high school mathematics courses because it is well aligned with the national standards. Standards-based textbook programs are currently used as resources for biology, chemistry, and earth science. The textbook-based programs are used to support the districts science standards and frameworks that are based on the national standards in science. Additional resources are used by teachers as necessary to flesh-out the standards-based program. The implementation schedule for the standards-based curricula is detailed in the following chart- Standards-Based Mathematics and Science Implementation Schedule Grade Level Kindergarten r* Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4*^ Grade 5 Grade 6'" Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9" Grade 10-12' Grades IB" 1999-00 2000-01 > 1 STC kit > 1 STC kit > 1 STC kit > 1 STC kit > All 4 modules of INV > 1 STC kit > All 4 modules of INV > All 5 modules of CMP > All 4 STC kits > 2 modules of CMP > 2 modules of CMP > All Active Physics modules > Continue 1 STC kit > Continue 1 STC kit > All 4 modules of INV > Continue 1 STC kit > All 4 modules of INV > All 4 STC kits 2001-02 > All 4 modules of INV > All 4 modules of INV > All 4 STC kits > All 4 STC kits > All 4 STC kits 2002-03 > All 4 STC kits > All 5 modules of CMP > All SALI kits > 3 modules of CMP > All 5 modules of CMP > All SEPUP Modules Secondary mathematics and science curricula will align with National Standards and textbooks will be used along with supplementary resources to support those standards. Pacesetter Pre-Calculus will be available at the high school level. INV - Investigations (Grades K-5 Math) CMP - Connected Math Project (Grades 6-8 Math) STC - Science and Technology for Children (Grades 1-6 Science) SALI - Science and Life Issues (Grade 7 Science) SEPUP - Science Education for Public Understanding Project (Grade 8 Science) Active Physics - (Grade 9 physics) All students in the identified grade-levels in grades K-8 will participate in the standards-based curricula according to the schedule. In grades 9-12 all students will be taught a curriculum that 1998-1999 Annual Report 3Tl aligns with the national standards. Not all students, however, will participate in the same program. Ninth grade physics students, for example, may take Active Physics or Pre-AP Physics, a theorybased course. Also, Pre-calculus Through Modeling is an elective course for students. Students may elect trigonometry as their pre-calculus course. I Assessment System (1998-1999) The assessment program consists of a menu of assessments that included the following: Standford Achievement Test (SAT-9) Arkansas Benchmark Exams EXPLORE and PLAN (Pre-ACT tests) Local Criterion-Referenced Test (CRT) ACT (optional) Advanced Placement Exams (optional) Grades 3,5, 7, 8,10 (mathematics and science) Grades 4, 8 (Literacy and math) Grades 8, 10 (math and science reasoning) Grades 2-6 (math and literacy) High school (math and science reasoning) AP students (math and science) These assessments are aligned with the curriculum. The closest alignment is obtained through the state benchmark exams and local CRTs. The EXPLORE, PLAN, ACT and AP exams are also closely aligned with the curriculum. The SAT-9, EXPLORE, PLAN, state benchmark exams and local CRTs were used with all (some exemptions allowed for special education and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students) students at the identified grade levels. The ACT and AP exams were elected by a smaller group of students. 1998-1999 Annual Report 4 I I I,Professional Development Extensive professional development was provided for the standards-based curricula being implemented by the district. The professional development for the 1998-99 school year was as follows: STANDARDS-BASED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (List each activity conducted during the 98-99 project year.) Activity 12/10/98 03/10/99 03/11/99 03/24/99 03/16/99 03/17/99 04/06/99 04/07/99 04/08/99 04/17/99 04/20/99 04/22/99 04/27/99 04/28/99 04/29/99 05/04/99 05/05/99 1 Year Math/Science Teacher Training 1' Year Math/Science Teacher Training 1' Year Math/Science Teacher Training Extended Year Algebra I Planning 4* Grade STC Training 4' Grade STC Training s' Grade CMP Training S*** Grade CMP Training s' Grade CMP Training 6' Grade CMP Training 4* Grade STC Training 4 Grade STC Training 5 Grade TERC Training 5*' Grade TERC Training s' Grade TERC Training 5*' Grade TERC Training s Grade TERC Training 05/06/99 5* Grade TERC Training 05/11/99 s Grade TERC Training 05/12/99 s' Grade TERC Training 05/13/99 S* Grade TERC Training 05/13/99 Math Vertical Teams 05/18/99 STC Training of Trainers 05/18/99 Math Vertical Tearns 05/19/99 STC Training of Trainers 05/19/99 S* Grade STC Training 06/02/99 Kindergarten UMS Math Training 06/02/99 4' Grade TERC Training 06/02/99 1'Grade STC Training 06/02/99 3"* Grade STC Training 06/03/99 1' Grade UMS Math Training 06/03/99 4"'Grade TERC Training 06/03/99 2* Grade STC Training 06/03/99 5' Grade STC Training 06/04/99 2"^ Grade UMS Math Training 06/04/99 4"' Grade TERC Training 06/02/99 - 06/15/99 Active Physics Training 06/15/99 SMART Training (Algebra) 06/28/99 - 07/02/99 Math Solutions Training 07/06/99 - 07/16/99 Conceptual Physics Training 07/12/99 - 07/30/99 Summer Science Institute 08/12/99 9-12 Grade Math Training 08/12/99 9-12 Grade Science Vertical Tearns 08/12/99 Geology and Space Science Training 1998-1999 Annual Report Number of Participants For Mathematics Elem M/S 5 5 4 3 15 16 16 16 Sec. 1 1 1 4 Number of Participants For Science Elem. M/S 12 12 12 Sec. 3 4 3 16 17 21 23 Number of Hours Trained 22 22 22 24 24 24 27 29 29 2 1 5 9 6 13 6 22 105 121 120 121 111 121 19 3 6 2 54 135 132 128 98 18 19 10 46 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 6 1 6 6 3 6 6 6 3 6 6 6 6 6 60 3 30 60 105 6 6 6(List each activity conducted during the 98-99 project year.) Number of Participants For Mathematics Number of Participants For Science Number of Hours Trained Activity 08/13/99 9-12 Grade Math Training 08/13/99 - 08/13/99 08/13/99 08/13/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/17/99 08/17/99 08/17/99 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/02/99 09/02/99 09/08/99 09/08/99 09/10/99 09/14/99 09/20/99 09/21/99 09/21/99 09/22/99 09/23/99 09/24/99 09/28/99 09/29/99 09/30/99 Physics Training Earth Science Training Chemistry - SEPUP Training Biology - Project Life Training 3"* Grade TERC Training 5**' Grade TERC Training 6'*' Grade CMP Training T'W Grade Math Training 8" Grade Algebra Training 9-12 Grade Math Training 6*" Grade Project Life Training 7'" Grade Project Life Training Grade SEPUP Training Physics Training Chemistry Training Biology - Project Life Training 3^ Grade TERC Training 5' Grade TERC Training 6* Grade CMP Training 4* Grade STC Training s' Grade STC Training 5'*' Grade STC Training 6*^ Grade STC Training 4* Grade TERC Training 5"' Grade TERC Training s' Grade TERC Training 4* Grade TERC Training 1' Grade STC Training Math Vertical Teams 2"^ Grade STC Training 3^ Grade STC Training 4" Grade TERC Training 4" Grade TERC Training 6*" Grade CMP Training Physics Training Physics Training 1998-1999 Annual Report Elem M/S Sec. 51 Elem M/S Sec. 104 89 20 6 10 17 96 89 21 33 31 21 30 29 6 19 25 11 16 4 16 51 14 37 19 13 12 6 17 19 15 4 7 17 10 20 19 19 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 I I I I 1': jiThe total number of teachers and administrators who participated in professional development during the 1998-99 school year is as follows: Professional Development Totals List the total number of participants in each of the following categories: (non-duplicate count) A. Teachers B. Preservice teachers C. Administrators/Supervisors 40 D. Other school staff 13L Total W List the number of participants who were: A. Male 131 B. Female 838 List the number of participants who were: A. White, non-Hispanic B. Black, non-Hispanic C. Hispanic D. Asian, Pacific Islander 333 2 1 E. American Indian/Alaskan Native Most of the professional development undertaken during the 1998-99 school year was initial formal training on the standards-based curriculum that the teachers were targeted to implement. All teachers who are implementing standards-based curricula are provided professional development. Principals, counselors, and lead teachers are also provided with professional development to assist 1998-1999 Annual Report 7them in understanding the standards-based curricula and the systemic change initiative being undertaken in the Little Rock School District. Once implementation began in the 1999-2000 school year, follow-up training has occuned, both at a district level and at the individual classroom level. Lead teachers in math/science provide individual teachers with in-classroom coaching, demonstration lessons, team teaching, and technical assistance. Policy Changes The policies for mathematics and science education are part of the systemic reform in all core curriculum areas in the Little Rock School District. For the past year, the District has been involved in a comprehensive process to review and revise the Board of Educations policy manual, resulting in an almost totally new set of policies in the section on Instruction. Those most relevant to Driver 2 are listed in the table below: The policies that "indicate a coherent vision that encompasses all students " are as follows: NEPNCode Ta IQ, IG-R IGA IGBA IGE, IGE-RI IHBB IHBEA. IHBEA-R IHCC IKE __________________Title_____________ Academic Content Standards/Benchmarks Curriculum Development, Adoption, and Review Curriculum Program Alignment and Coherence Grant-funded Projects Purpose Establishes academic content standards/benchmarks that high school graduates will possess Requires that all curricula be standards-based Curriculum Guides Gifted and Talented Education English as a Second Language Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement Courses General Education Graduation Requirements, Effective For the Graduating Class of2002 Requires that all special curricula and programs be aligned with the District's Strategic Plan Requires that grant-funded programs be tightly aligned with the District's Strategic Plan Requires that curriculum guides be aligned with state and national standards Establishes definition of giftedness and requires that all students have an opportunity to participate in gifted programs Requires that appropriate and equitable programs and services be provided for ESL students to ensure achievement of the standards and benchmarks Provides for pre-AP and AP courses in grades 6-12 and ensures that there are no barriers to participate in these programs Establishes graduation requirements that include 3 units of math to include Algebra I, Algebra II and Geometry and 3 units of science to include physics, biology and chemistry The Little Rock School District is committed to standards-based educational programs that ensure i! jl that all students will be appropriately challenged. The policies listed above address the components of a standards-based curriculum and ensure that all students are enrolled in high quality and I I 1 I i i I N I I I 3 I 1998-1999 Annual Report 8 111rigorous programs. By policy, all Little Rock School District students must enroll in and successfully complete Algebra I-II and Geometry and Physics I, Biology I, and Chemistry Ias minimums. The Recommended Curriculum includes a fourth year in both mathematics and science and a second year of technology applications. Recruiting high quality mathematics and science teachers is one of the priorities of the Little Rock School District. We continually work in partnerships with area colleges and universities to identify potential teachers in these priority areas, and we are currently working on a grant application with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) on a preservice program related to mathematics and science. The issue of providing adequate time for ongoing professional development of mathematics and science teachers has been a challenging one in the Little Rock School District due to our emphasis on keeping teachers in the classroom for the highest possible quality of instruction and on the shortage of qualified substitutes that would free teachers for professional development activities. A Cabinet-level retreat will be held to initiate a plan for a total infrastructure in support of a high quality professional development program for the District. Alignment The following policies and regulations address the requirement of a tight alignment among curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development: IG-R: IGA: IGBA: IGE: IGE-RI: Curriculum Development, Adoption, and Review Curriculum Program Alignment and Coherence Grant-Funded Projects Curriculum Guides Curriculum Guide Development Policies on professional development alignment are still under development. Currently, policies addressing assurance of adequate financial and administrative support for the ongoing professional development of mathematics and science teachers are still under development. However, the current practice is to support the development of mathematics and science teachers through as many funding sources as are available - such as the local budget. 1998-1999 Annual Report 9'r I Eisenhower funds, Class-size reduction funds, other grants, etc. (See Resource Convergence for further details). Six elementary math/science teachers, one middle school science teacher, one middle school math teacher, and one high school math teacher currently serve as teacher leaders in the implementation of new standards-based curriculum and instruction. These teachers were selected based on the demonstration of outstanding work in implementing standards-based instruction in the classroom. They serve as professional developers, coaches/mentors, and role models for other teachers in the District. Their new roles are one of the ways that the District recognizes and rewards our outstanding teachers. Teachers are encouraged to participate in all national, regional, and state recognition programs, and Little Rock mathematics and science teachers are frequently among the winners in such recognition programs. The Districts accountability system includes rewards and recognition for schools that meet the challenging trend and improvement goals established by the State and by the District. Each school is then encouraged to recognize and reward its outstanding teachers and students. Dr. Leslie Gamine, superintendent of the Little Rock School District, serves as principal investigator of the LR CPMSA. Dr. Camine has provided support and guidance for the LR CPMSA since his arrival in 1998. Dr. Camine has provided visibility for the LR CPMSA with the School Board, community members, administrators, and teachers in the district. An Advisory Committee was identified and met monthly to review the CPMSA project activities and to focus discussion on the progress in meeting the objectives. Members of the Advisory Committee include representatives from the programs primary partners and the six senior LRSD personnel. Additional committee members include school administrators, counselors. teachers, parents, business and community leaders, and professionals in areas of mathematics and science. Another layer of support, during the 1998-1999 school year, was the Management Team. The Management Team consists of senior administrators including the superintendent, associate and I 1998-1999 Annual Report 10 Iassistant superintendents. The following list identifies the departments of the other district personnel represented on the management team: > > > > > > > > > Mathematics and Science Planning, Research and Evaluation Gifted and Talented Staff Development Early Childhood Pupil Services Volunteers in Public Schools/Partners In Education Communications Business Office The management team met monthly to identify and address issues that impacted or impeded the progress of the CPMSA. Such issues include the following: > Current district policies/practices a Attendance Grades G/T - Talent Development Graduation > Endorsement of proj ect activities The Little Rock School District instituted a policy to establish campus leadership teams at each school to improve performance of all student populations in support of the Districts commitment of sustained school improvement. The campus team consists of school administrators, staff (both school and central office), students, parents, and business/community patrons. The work of the campus teams is organized around the basic components of the Little Rock School District Student Success Model: > > > > > > Skills and Knowledge Continuum Personalized Education Programs Staff Development Community Support Assessment Communication 1998-1999 Annual Report 11Resource Convergence There are four main funding sources that are leveraged in support of improving mathematics and science education: Dwight D. Eisenhower Fund, State Textbook (Math) Fund, Local District .f Budget and the Districts Title I Fund. During the 1998-99 school year, approximately 93% of the Eisenhower budget was used to support mathematics and science education in the Little Rock School District. More specifically, approximately $98,000 was used to fimd the positions of two teacher specialists who, collectively, provide demonstration lessons, team teaching, joint plaiming, school level and district-wide inservice directed at hands-on math and science instruction and the integration of social studies and language arts with science and mathematics. In addition. approximately $58,000 of the Eisenhower Funds were used for training on new mathematics and science standards-based programs as well as other professional development opportunities for mathematics and science teachers (workshops, conferences, consultant fees, materials, etc.). Approximately 95% of the local district budget for mathematics and science were leveraged for inkind services provided by the co-principal investigator, an elementary mathematics specialist and a middle school science specialist. In addition, the local budget (for mathematics and science) was I used to purchase curriculum materials, equipment and office supplies. Other uses of the local budget for mathematics and science include training expenses, and local travel (mileage). The local I district budget was used to match one-half of the Program Evaluators salary and for in-kind services provided by the principal investigator. Lead teachers were hired to help facilitate the implementation of standards-based mathematics and science curricula in the classroom. The lead teachers are funded in the following maimer: 2 - Class-Size Reduction Allocation 1 - Title VI Funds 4 - LR CPMSA 2 - District budget A key resource during the 1998-99 school year was provided by the district budget after securing a waiver from the Arkansas Department of Education to provide three paid days of 1998-1999 Annual Report 12 'Iadditional training for teachers in the implementation of new standards-based curricula and campus leadership planning. The Little Rock Center of Excellence for Research, Teaching and Learning (CERTL) is designed to provide standards-based teacher training and student laboratory experiences in math and science in support of the LR CPMSA. The Little Rock CERTL operates through area institutions of higher education. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) and Philander Smith College (PSC) serve as sponsoring institutions for CERTL. UALR and PSC provided the following services for CERTL: Lab School for Teachers/Summer Institute for Students UALR Training provided for pre-service and inservice teachers one week prior to the two- week institute for rising 5''' and 6'^ grade students. Once the institute began, master teachers mentored participating teachers as they applied their learning in a real-life environment by instructing students using standards-basedpedagogy. Summer Algebra Readiness Training PSC A summer institute designed to prepare a group of capable but underachieving rising 9^ grade students for success in Algebra I. The institute was led by a PSC faculty site facilitator and master middle/high school mathematics teachers who were assisted by undergraduate PSC students who served as mentors. Active Physics LRSD Resources provided to pay consultant fees for Active Physics professor from Wisconsin. Eighteen teachers completed coursework that qualified them to receive four hours of graduate physics credit. Leveraging of resources made this training possible for teachers. The Eisenhower Professional Development grant paid stipends to teachers for participating in the course
the District provided tuition reimbursement for teachers and supplies/materials for the course
and, UALR provided the mechanism for teachers to get college credit for training. Additional funding resources were provided by the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (AS SI) to provide mini-grants to two LRSD schools for implementation of the Family Math/Science Program. State funds provided under the Advanced Placement Incentive Program, Act 929 of 1997 were allocated for teachers to attend one-day and/or two-day conferences (registration fees only) for Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement teachers. During 1998-99, thirty-one (31) mathematics teachers, grades 6-12, attended College Boards two-day Mathematics Vertical Teams Conference in Little Rock. In addition, twenty-six (26) science teachers, grades 6-12, attended 1998-1999 Annual Repon 13UALRs Vertical Teams Conference for science teachers. A total of $9,525 in state funds was allocated for LRSD mathematics and science teachers. SECME is a premiere pre-college program that prepares and motivates students for engineering and other technical fields. LRSD received $22,000 from SECME to implement the SECME program in thirteen elementary and secondary schools. SECMEs goal, which is tightly aligned with the LR CPMSA goals, is to increase the pool of minorities who are prepared to enter and complete post secondary studies in engineering, mathematics, and science. The Little Rock School District SECME program works in partnerships with faculty from the school of engineering at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR). The faculty provides in-kind contributions to deliver technical assistance to school teams. LR CPMSA funds were used to support the SECME program in five additional schools. The use of technology and telecommunications is expanding in the District with the programs and opportunities available: 1. 2. 3. Compressed Video - Available at three schools (two elementary schools and one middle school). The compressed video is the virtual classroom project that connects the sites with each other and with the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS). Professors from UAMS will provide learning experiences for students that will promote their competency in biology and other sciences. EAST (Environmental and Spatial Technology) Labs - Located at Central High and McClellan High Schools. Students have access to a project-based curriculum that integrates advanced software applications ranging form architectural and design engineering systems to global positioning systems and geographical information system software. The focus of this program is on the integration of the tools as aids to the learning process. Cisco Academy - Available at Hall High School. This program prepares students for jobs in network administration. The program involves a partnership with Cisco Systems as well as Pulaski Technical College, a Cisco regional academy that will provide teacher training and program monitoring. I I I In addition to the aforementioned programs, all school sites have access to the Internet. Most I J ' access areas are presently in the media centers although many schools are adding computers to the classroom as funds permit the purchases of the equipment. Internet is being used in a variety of I ways: using the web for searching local and distant libraries, databases, educational sites. I collaborating on projects and creating web sites. 1998-1999 Annual Report 14 aPartnerships During the 1998-99 school year, the initial year of the LR CPMSA, presentations about the goals of the LR CPMSA were developed and delivered to the following organizations: 1. 2. 3. 4. Little Rock PTA Council Volunteers in Public Schools Board Christian Ministerial Alliance Vital Link Business Partners In addition, a dissemination brochure was developed to describe the goals and objectives of the Little Rock CPMSA. During 1998, the District entered into a partnership with the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) called the Urban Professional Development Initiative. This initiative enabled District staff to develop an improved plan for delivering professional development to support implementation of new initiatives including those in mathematics and science. A partnership with the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) provided Family Math and Science Programs in five additional elementary and middle schools. Currently, 58% of the Districts elementary and middle schools have implemented the Family Math and Science Program (up from 46.5%). An effort to promote understanding and acceptance among stakeholders about the systematic change necessary for improving mathematics and science education was through the Vital Link partnership. Vital Link is a system that is designed to give middle school students a behind-the- scenes look at the world of work. Seventy-three (73) businesses hosted nearly 400 rising 7* grade students for one week providing first-hand knowledge of the connection between skills learned in the classroom and those needed for success in the workplace. During the Vital Link Business Orientation, business representatives received an overview of the Little Rock CPMSA goals and objectives. The businesses along with the participating teachers were asked to provide more experiences in the work place that would allow students to see and understand the relationship between school and the work place. Of the nearly 400 students who went through the program. 1998-1999 Annual Report 15 J 42% indicated an interest in mathematics and 48% indicated an interest in science. Students participating in Vital Link recorded their experiences daily in a journal. Outputs and Outcomes of the System via SI Influence The following chart presents an itemized summary of the stated goals for the LR CPMSA project as of the 1998-1999 school year. Additionally, imder the heading entitled, Key Performance Indicators, is information indicating the extent to which each of the goals has been achieved. Three codes are used in the colunm entitled. Status: TARGET MET (target has been fully met)
ON TARGET (work is progressing as scheduled towards target)
and NOT YET (indicating that work is not progressing as district expects and is thus identified for review by the CPMSA project staff). Note: August, 1999 - The LRSD board of directors adopted a comprehensive assessment program (for students in grades 3-11) that would allow student growth to he measured from the beginning of the year to the end of the year through CRTs aligned with the curriculum standards. Utemized Summary of Project Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Status 1. To enact policies and practices that will result in an increase by 2% the composite scores of underrepresented minority students in grades 2-11 on the Stanford Achievement Test
I a. SA T-9 complete battery for all students Decrease in the percent of 5 grade students scoring above the 50' percentile from 40% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 37% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET Decrease in the percent of 7'* grade students scoring above the 50' percentile from 40% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 37% during the 1998-1999 school year
I Increase in the percent of 10'* grade students scoring above the 50"' percentile from 37% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 39% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET ON TARGET I I I j b. SA 1-9 complete battery for underrepresented minority students Decrease in the percent of S* grade students scoring above the 50'' percentile from 25% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 23% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET I I 1 I I I I 1998-1999 Annual Report 16 I I I k ilc. Project Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseiine 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Decrease in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 26% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 24% during the 1998-1999 school year
Decrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 25% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 23% during the 1998-1999 school year Status NOT YET NOT YET SAT-9 mathematics sub-test for all students grades 5, 7, 10 Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50th percentile on the SAT-9 (mathematics) from 33% to 31% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET No change in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile on the SAT-9 (mathematics) - 35% (1997-1998 and 1998-1999) NOT YET Decrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50th percentile on the SAT-9 (mathematics) from 42% during the 1997-1998 school year to 41% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET d. SAT-9 mathematics sub-test for underrepresented minority students Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 20% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 24% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET Increase in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 18% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 21% during the 1998-1999 school year
ON TARGET Decrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 30% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 27% during the 1998-1999 school year NOT YET e. SA T-9 science sub-test for all students grades 5, 7, 10 Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 38% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 33% during the 1998-1999 school year
NOT YET / SA T-9 science sub-test for underrepresented minority students 1998-1999 Annual Report Decrease in the number of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 40% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 39% during the 1998-1999 school year
Decrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50th percentile from 42% dining the 1997- 1998 school year to 40% during the 1998-1999 school year
Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 22% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 19% during the 1998-1999 school year
17 NOT YET NOT YET NOT YET JProject Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Status 1998-1999 Annual Report Decrease in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50"' percentile from 27% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 26% during the 1998-1999 school year
Decrease in the percent of lO"' grade students scoring above the 50'*' percentile from 29% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 25% during the 1998-1999 school year State Benchmark Exam Decrease in the number of 4* grade students scoring at the Proficient and Advanced Proficient levels on the mathematics exam from 26.3% during the 1997-1998 school year to 22.1/% during the 1998-1999 school year. A decrease of 4.2%
Grade 8 EXPLORE EXPLORE is acts 8^ grade program that assesses students academic progress and helps students begin to explore and plan for the wide range of educational and career options open to them. Increase in the local mean score on the EXPLORE (mathematics) for S* grade students from 11.9 during the 1997-1998 school year to 14.6 during the 1998-1999 school year - 23% increase. The mean score for African American students increased from 11.7 during the 1997-1998 school year to 13 during the 1998-1999 school year on the EXPLORE (mathematics) - 11% increase. Increase in the local mean score on the science portion of the EXPLORE for all 8" grade students from 11.3 during the 1997-1998 school year to 13.7 during the 1998-1999 school year - 21% increase. Increase in the local mean score for African American students on the science portion of the EXPLORE increased from 11.2 during the 1997-1998 school year to 12.1 during the 1998-1999 school year - 8% increase. PLAN PLAN is acts 1 (f'' grade program that provides a midpoint review of students progress toward their educational and career goals. Increase in the local mean score for 10*^ grade students on the math portion of the PLAN from 14.9 during the 1997-1998 school year to 15.6 during the 1998-1999 school year - 5% increase. A slight decrease in the mean score for African American students on the math portion of the PLAN from 13.8 during thel997-1998 school year to 13.7 18 NOT YET NOT YET NOT YET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET I I I I I I I' 1 J2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Project To implement policies and practices that will enroll all district 8^ and/or 9"' graders in Algebra I by 2003
To increase the algebra success rates for all students by 2%
To increase the number of students who eruoll in geometry and trigonometry by 2%
To increase the student success rates in geometry and trigonometry by 2%
To increase the student success rates in biology by 2%
To increase the student success rates in chemistry from 62% in Year 1 to 75% in year V of the agreement
To increase the enrollment in physics from 17% to 30% by year V
1998-1999 Annual Report Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 during the 1998-1999 school year - ,7% decrease. Increase in the local mean score for 10'*' grade students on the science reasoning portion of the PLAN from 16.2 during the 1997-1998 school year to 16.7 during the 1998-1999 school year - 3% increase. An increase in the mean score for African American students on the science reasoning portion of the PLAN from 15.4 during the 1997-1998 school year to 15.5 during the 1998-1999 school year - .7% increase. LRSD Quality Indicator - 90% of a middle school's student will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 - practice implemented during the 1998-1999 school year. Increase in the number of students who were successful in Algebra I from 57% during the 1997-1998 school year to 59% during the 1998-1999 school year. Increase in the number of students who enrolled in trigonometry from 497 during the 1997-1998 school year to 548 during the 1998-1999 school year resulting in a 10% increase
A decrease in the number of students who enrolled in geometry from 1843 during the 1997-1998 school year to 1442 during the 1998-1999 school year- 22% decrease. An increase in the number of students who successfully completed geometry from 44% during the 1997-1998 school year to 57% during the 1998-1999 school year - 13% increase A decrease in the number of students successfully completing trigonometry from 80% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 75% during the 1998-1999 school year - 4% decrease An increase in the number of students who successfully completed biology from 56% during the 1997-1998 school year to 60% during the 1998-1999 school year - 4% increase. An increase in the number of students successfully completing chemistry from 66% during the 1997-1998 school year to 76% during the 1998-1999 school year. Increase in the number of students enrolling in physics from 136 during the 1997-1998 school year to 151 19 Status ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET TARGET MET TARGET MET NOT YET TARGET MET NOT YET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET JProject Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Status during the 1998-1999 school year - A 11% increase. 9. The CPMSA school district shall implement an articulated, standards- based curriculum, instructional, and assessment program that has been field tested by NSF or recommended by entities such as professional science educational organizations, and/or jurisdictions like the state where the CPMSA school district is located. The CPMSA school district shall also design and implement standards-based professional development for teachers, staff development for counselors and administrators, and student enrichment activities that support this articulated, standards-based program. Professional development began for implementation of standards-based mathematics and science program for all teachers at identified grade levels
Professional development also provided for principals and counselors during the 1998-1999 school year ON TARGET Summary Nearly 700 professional development hours were designated to prepare teachers to implement high- quality standards-based mathematics and science curricula. The LR CPMSA is moving in the right directions towards achieving its outcomes and goals. In August 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted a comprehensive assessment program for students in grades 3-11. This program will allow student growth to be measured from beginning of the year to the end of the year through criterion-referenced tests that are tightly aligned with curriculum standards. Results of these assessments will provide a catalyst for determining professional development and student academic enrichment needs in mathematics and science. Services provided by institutions of higher learning and other partners, for teachers and/or students. will also be driven by student achievement data. Modifications will be made in the following areas to further address student achievement in mathematics and science: 1 1998-1999 Annual Report 20 I I I, !Science curriculum A need exists to accelerate the science curriculum along with mathematics to ensure that all students receive high-quality standards-based instruction. The project staff is working closely with the superintendent to modify this program. High School Plan Standards and benchmarks aligned with national standards were developed for K-12 mathematics and science. Vertical teams will continue to be utilized to ensure a smooth transition in mathematics and science for all students through grade 12. The project staff will review high school models (for mathematics and science) that will provide a comprehensive high-quality education. Partners The primary partners, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Philander Smith College, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, and the Museum of Discovery, continue to provide professional development for teachers and enrichment programs for students that are aligned with the goals of the LR CPMSA. These programs include the Summer Science Institute, Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training, Summer Algebra Readiness Program, and the After-School Science Clubs. These programs, which provide important support, will be scaled up to reach more students and teachers. 1998-1999 Annual Report 21 I' NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 4201 WILSON BOULEVARD ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22230 May 20,1999 Dr. Leslie Carnine Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine: On behalf of the National Science Foundations (NSF), Division of Educational System Reform, 1 wish to express our gratefulness to the Little Rock School D/sfricf personnel, including teachers, principals, and students for their effective participation and warm hospitality during the site visit held on April 27-29 1999 _ The purpose of this site visit was to assess the progress made by the Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement Program (LRCPMSA) to date. One of the key findings of the site visit was the notable progress made by the Little Rock School District in some of the areas relative to K-12 systemic reform in mathematics and science education. Piloting and implementing standards- based curriculum programs is, unequivocally, a Year 1 accomplishment w ic will lead the Initiative to further progress in this critical area. Likewise the establishment of new policies and measures, particularly programmatic is definitely an aspect of the District that favors the achievement of the Initiative s vision. While working with educational systems in the transformation and renewal of K- 12 mathematics and science education using systemic reform as a strategy, it this multifactorial enterprise, standards-based becomes apparent that among this multifactorial enterprise, curriculum implementation, professional development, an p measured bv reliable standards-based assessment systems are the three most S and cVrSequential elements. Therefore, the LRCPMSA is encouraged to ensure the quality of these essential variables, their alignment correspondence through effective, research-baset^ strategies^h patolar, the LRCPMSA is urged to revisit its profess,ona development com^ne make it consistent with the Initiatives purpose and concern to NSF-in order to make it consisteni wnn me - scope of work. Professional development is, consequent y. to be prioritized in the immediate future. fDr. Lelslie Camine 2. The major concern raised, as a direct result of this visit was the lack of substantive evidence to support the value added of the CPMSA Program in Little Rock to the Districts reform agenda in science and mathematics. The absence of an action plan to guide the work in Year 1 and the fact that approximately 62% of NSF funds are still unused are some of the factors contributing to this situation. There are fundamental areas that the LRCPMSA needs to focus in the immediate future. These areas include: (1) Convergence of the usage of all resources that are designed for or that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education fiscal, intellectual, material, curricular, and extra-curricular- into a focused and unitary program to constantly upgrade, renew, and improve the educational program in mathematics and science for all students. (2) Broad-based support from parents, policymakers, institutions of higher education, business and industry, foundations, and other segments of the community for the goals and collective values of the program, based on rich presentations of the ideas behind the program. (3) Accumulation of a broad and deep array of evidence that the program is enhancing all students achievement, through a set of indices (e.g., achievement test scores, higher level courses passed, advanced placement tests taken, college admission rates, college majors, portfolio assessment, research experiences, ratings from summer employers). (4) Improvement in the achievement of all students, including those historically underserved. The LRCPMSA is requested to attend a reverse site visit at NSF in July 1999. The purpose of this visit is to assess the progress made by the initiative in its first year of implementation and the specific plans for the immediate future, particularly Year 2. Furthermore, assessment of the impact and value added of the CPMSA Program to the Districts science and mathematics education agenda will be the primary focus of the reverse site visit. The evaluation of the progress made by the CPMSA in Little Rock conveyed during this reverse site visit, including a detailed analysis of the 1997 and 1998 mathematics and science student performance data by grade level, will be used by NSF to determine the level of funding for the LRCPMSAs second year of funding. It is important to underscore that per the extant cooperative agreement,Dr. Leslie Carnine 3. the level of continued NSF support will depend upon an annual review of achievement, the level of support from other sources, and the availability of funds. Likewise, the LRCPMSA is reminded that based on this annual progress report, the Foundation will determine whether full support to the CPMSA will continue or if funding to phase-out this effort will occur. The following set of dates are suggested for this purpose: July 9,16, or 23, 1999. The LRCPMSA is expected to select one of these dates or suggest a different option to NSF. The Initiatives key leadership should attend the reverse site visit, including the Principal Investigator, the co-Principal Investigators, and the Project Director. Attached is a copy of the site visit report. It includes major findings, concerns, and recommendations. Please share it with the LRCPMSAs staff and Districts representatives. Please call me at (703) 306-1685, extension 5836, should you have questions or comments regarding the content of this report. May I wish you success in achieving high standards of excellence in science and mathematics education for all students in the Little Rock Independent School District. Sincerely, I JuHo E. Ldpez-Ferrao Program Director Division of Educational System Reform cc: Luther S. Williams Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources Division of Educational System Reform Urban Systemic Program Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRCPMSA) Program Site Visit Report April 27-29,1999 Introduction The Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA) Program The Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA) Program strives to improve the quality and quantity of science and mathematics education delivered by entire school districts or systems. Recognizing that currently only a small percentage of precollege students ultimately pursue undergraduate studies in science and mathematics fields, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has encouraged the development of activities that focus on students who have not previously shown much interest in science, but who might become involved and successful if properly motivated to do so. Thus, the primary goal of the CPMSA Program is to develop systemic approaches to increase the number of students enrolling in and successfully completing precollege courses which will prepare them to pursue undergraduate programs in the sciences, engineering, and mathematics. Building on NSFs strategy of forging alliances and partnerships for systemic reform, eligible city school systems were required to link to institutions of higher education, business and industry, professional organizations, community-based organizations, and other educational organizations to facilitate the attainment of the following objectives: Develop or revise courses and other enrichment activities in the elementary and secondary schools with a substantial number of students enrolled to improve the quality of precollege science and mathematics education. Develop and strengthen the capacity to deliver standards-based quality instruction in school science and mathematics education for students that will result in a significant increase in the number of them becoming high school graduates who are academically prepared to enter college and major in the sciences, mathematics, or engineering. Develop and sustain district-wide policies that will significantly increase student enrollments and successful completion of gatekeeping courses, such as algebra in the eighth and ninth grades. Substantially decrease or eliminate academic tracking, improve academic counseling, and facilitate the successful transitions of students from elementary to middle school, from middle school to high school, and from high school into undergraduate programs in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Stimulate efforts among secondary schools and colleges and universities, as well as relevant informal science organizations (e.g., museums, aquaria, etc.) in the region to develop summer enrichment activities. Stimulate efforts among professional organizations, business and industry to become involved in mentorship programs for precollege students to motivate them to succeed in challenging science and mathematics courses
and coordinate the partners involved in the various NSF-supported programs, as well as precollege programs supported by other Federal agencies and private sector organizations, to avoid duplication, and to share resources to maximize the available funding. Develop outreach programs to involve parents and guardians of students, especially those students who are not currently high achievers in the system. Function in a complementary and collaborative way with other related NSF-funded educational activities within the region, such as the Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSI) and the Alliances for Minority Participation (AMP). Effective FY 1999, the CPMSA Program, along with the Urban Systemic Initiative (USI) Program, were merged into the new Urban Systemic Programa K-12- based program through which NSF seeks to stimulate interest, increase participation, improve achievement, and accelerate career advancement and success of all students of the participating school districts. The Little Rock School District The Little Rock School District serves a total of 24,886 students for the 1998-99 school year. The District operates 50 school buildings, including 35 elementary schools, 8 junior-high schools, 5 senior-high schools, one vocational-technical- high school, and one alternative school. Since 1982, a federal court order and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals have guided Districts efforts for the 2desegregation of schools. School assignment is based on attendance zones, and predominantly minority neighborhoods are served by schools with high minority student enrollment. Minority students comprise 71% of the total student body: 67% African American
29% White
and 4% Hispanic, Asian, and other minorities. There are 2,191 teachers of whom 919 teach science and mathematics: 735 science and mathematics elementary teachers, 94 secondary science teachers, and 90 secondary mathematics teachers. The CPMSA Program in Little Rock keystaff includes a Director of Mathematics and Science, a Project Director, a Science Specialist, a Mathematics Specialist, and two Science and Mathematics Specialists. The Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRCPMSA) Program The Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRCPMSA) Program is a collaborative effort for systemic reform of public education aimed at impacting all students. Its overall mission is to develop educational systemic change approaches to produce significant increases in the number of students who are prepared to pursue undergraduate study in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. The LRCPMSA goals include: (i) Prepare 100% of graduates to successfully complete Algebra
(ii) Increase the number of students who successfully complete upper-level mathematics and science courses
(iii) Adopt a Board policy to require that students in Advanced Placement (AP) courses take the AP examination
(iv) Revise the mathematics curriculum to limit the number of topics for each grade level and subject and to increase the depth at which each topic is taught
(v) Implement standards-based pedagogy in all classrooms
(vi) Provide support programs for students in upper level mathematics and science courses
(vi) Increase the knowledge and involvement of parents in the mathematics and science programs
and (vii) Provide targeted staff development to assist staff in facilitating the above stated objectives. To accomplish these goals, the Little Rock School District plans to build a partnership effort among leading institutions in the central Arkansas area, including higher education institutions (e.g., the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Philander Smith College, and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences: the Arkansas Museum of Science and History
municipal agencies, such as the City of Little Rock and the Little Rock Housing Authority
the Central Arkansas Library System
and the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools. LRCPMSAs monitoring and oversight will be done by the Governing Board
the Districts Mathematics and Science Director, the Project Director, and the Science and Mathematics Specialists. 3The NSFs Site Visit Julio E. Lopez-Ferrao, cognizant NSF Program Director, visited the LRCPMSA, on April 27-29,1999. The purpose of the visit was to assess the progress made by the CPMSA Program in Little Rock to date. The visit consisted of an introductory meeting on April 27 with the Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction, the Director of Mathematics and Science, the Project Director, the Mathematics and Science Specialists, teachers and other Districts representatives in which an overview of the District and the Initiative was provided. A meeting on April 28 with key project-related personnel who are contributing to the achievement of the CPMSA goals and objectives followed this activity. Information on curriculum, professional development, assessment, policies, tracking, partnerships, student support programs, and finance was provided. School visits were made on April 28 and 29 to Romaine Elementary School, Forest Heights Junior High School, and Central High School. Findings, Concerns, and Recommendations Curriculum: The Little Rock School District currently requires three units of science and three units in mathematics for graduation. It has developed K-12 standards and benchmarks for science and mathematics correlated with the state frameworks, the state assessment system {Stanford Achievement Test, 9 Edition or SAT 9), local assessments, and textbooks and instructional materials. A new K-12 curriculum scope and sequence for science encompasses the use of Science and Technology for Children (STC) from first through seventh grade
Science Education for Public Understanding (SEPUP) at the eighth grade
Active Physics for the ninth grade
BiologyA Community Context for the 10 grade
and ChemCom for the 11* grade, followed by one year for an elective course. The mathematics sequence includes Investigations in Number, Data, and Space from Kindergarten through fifth grade
the Connected Mathematics Project for sixth through eighth grade
Math Connections for ninth and tenth grades, and two years of elective courses. The District has initiated the implementation of mathematics and science standards-based curriculum at different levels by piloting various instructional materials with approximately 3.3% of its mathematics and science teachers to date. This activity is viewed as an advance in this area, since it is evident that the Little Rock School District has decided what to be taught and how to teach it by establishing the new standards and benchmarks. Furthermore, it has begun to assist teachers in the appropriate use of effective mathernatics and science curricula. Nevertheless, it needs to be underscored that while the new curriculum sequence for mathematics is being piloted/implemented through the 4use of full and complete instructional programs with a larger number of teachers and classrooms, the science approach to the implementation of standards-based curricula has been through the use of a limited number of kits, units or modules in a reduced number of schools, which appears to be a slower pace approach. In addition, the official K-12 curriculum sequence pursued by the District is still unclear, since the information provided during the site visit does not identify the entire curriculum continuum being currently considered and promoted (e.g.. How do AP and Pre-AP courses fit into the promoted curriculum K-12 sequences for both science and mathematics?). The CPMSA leadership is encouraged to clarify urgently this important component of its science and mathematics reform agenda. Overall, the District appears to have made some progress in the implementation of standards-based curriculum. However, a major concern and an unacceptable condition to NSF remains regarding the pace of the K-12 science standards- based implementation process and results and the lack of a scale-up strategy to be used in order to ensure the participation of a significant number of schools by the end of the five-year implementation process. Likewise, the role of the four existing science and mathematics specialists in this process seems to be ambiguous. Thus, it is recommended that the LRCPMSA consider the use of additional human resources (e.g., lead teachers by regions) districtwide in the immediate future to address this critical aspect of systemic reform as well as the development and implementation of a comprehensive scale-up plan. Professional Development: It is apparent that the Little Rock School District has made efforts to implement standards-based science and mathematics curricula through professional development activities. Similarly, it seems that the CPMSA Program has provided professional development experiences for first year mathematics and science teachers, vertical teams, counselors, and school principals. New and first-year secondary mathematics and science teachers participated in a series of four workshops related to implementation of the mathematics and science curriculum, classroom management, learning styles, use of manipulative materials, cooperative learning, and the use of technology. Inservice programs have begun for all 4*', 5*, and 6' grade mathematics and science teachers for the fall 1999 implementation of new standards-based programs. Analysis of the information provided on mathematics and science inservice programs through August, 1999 indicates that the average duration of the experiences offered to teachers is 2.2 days and that they are essentially focused at assisting teachers with the implementation of new programs, such as STC, Investigations, and Active Physics. Nonetheless, these efforts seem to be fragmented and insufficient that will not lead the Initiative to the districtwide effective implementation of K-12 high-quality curricula as explicitly stated by one of the Initiatives goals. Therefore, the LRCPMSA is encouraged to design a research-based K-12 mathematics and science professional development master 5program for its 919 science and mathematics teachers to be implemented throughout the duration of the project. This program should be aimed at helping the Districts teachers to use high-quality, standards-based curricula at every grade level. Student Performance Assessment: Analysis of the information on student performance assessment (comparison between second semester 1997-1998 and first semester 1998-1999) provided during the site visit reflects an increase in the percent of students graded C or above in courses such as Algebra 1 (+5 /o). Algebra 11 (+6%), Geometry (+3%), Chemistry (+12%), Statistics (+14%), PreCalculus (+7%), AP Calculus (+4%), AP Physics (+1%), and AP Chemistry (+10%). Decreases are shown in Physics (-1%). Biology (-2%), Trigonometry (-1%), and AP Environmental Science (-10%). The Little Rock School District administers the SAT 9 since it is a state mandated test. However, data on this test's results were not provided during the visit. It is recommended that the CPMSA Program in Little Rock design a strategy to gather, interpret, and use student achievement data in order to effectively inform its programmatic decisions in the immediate future. Policies: The Little Rock School District has established a significant number of policies and measures that influence and support K-12 science and mathematics education. Some of these policies include the following
Establishment of K-12 academic content standards and benchmarks in mathematics and science. Promotion of mathematics and science standards-based curricula. Increase in graduation requirements in 1998 (three units of science and three units of science are required currently). A recommended common core and career focus. Class of 2003, includes four units o science and four units of mathematics. Use of three additional days for professional development through a state waiver. Elimination of low-level courses effective FY 1999. Various measures and regulations related to AP courses. The Little Rock School District has, unequivocally, a comprehensive set of policies in place that will benefit and advance the CPMSA Programs expectations in the future. 6Elimination of Tracking: It appears that the Little Rock School District has made particular efforts to meet the individual needs of the student population. The elimination of all lower-level courses constitutes evidence in support of the eradication of academic tracking, which is one of the CPMSAs objectives. Similarly, the inclusion of advanced courses and the various curriculum measures will probably contribute to the successful transition of students from one level to another. Summer Enrichment Activities: The LRCPMSA plans to provide summer enrichment activities for students and teachers through the Southeastern Consortium for Minorities in Engineering (SECME), Joint Recruiting and Teaching for Effecting Aspiring Minorities in Science (J-R TEAMS), and VITAL LINK. SECME is a program offered through a consortium of southeastern universities that motivates minorities to excel in mathematics and science through a club format that includes local and national competitions. JR-TEAMS is a two-week multidisciplinary pre-college science and engineering program that will be offered through a partnership with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock aimed at increasing the number of minority students pursuing degrees in science and engineering. VITAL LINK is a summer work site experience that acquaints students with job requirements and responsibilities in a variety of careers. Furthermore, the Extended Year Algebra I Programa two-week summer institute to serve rising 9^* graders who need additional assistance to be successful in Algebra Iwill be implemented as well. Although the CPMSA Program in Little Rock has clear plans to provide student support through summer experiences, it needs to ensure that each of the programs to be implemented represent an extended learning experience for the students that enhances their classroom learning. A thorough evaluation of the outcomes of the upcoming summer programs is highly recommended. Mentorship Programs for Precollege Students: The University of Arkansas at Little Rock will offer Saturday research for students from 7"11*** grades who will receive assistance in selecting appropriate research topics, setting up a research design, and carrying on the research. Likewise, the Philander Smith College will offer the Summer Algebra Readiness Institute for 9^-grade students who will enroll in Algebra I during the 1999-2000 school year. The program will target students from Central High School located in the surroundings of Philander Smith College. This innovative program will include a follow-up component through which college students will mentor participating students eight times during the school year. The LRCPMSA is encouraged to increase the number of mentorship programs in partnership with local and state organizations and higher education institutions. Parents and Community: The LRCPMSAs parent and community component includes the use of Family Science and Family Math as the main program. Five 7principals identified two teachers per school to participate in a training program designed to guide the implementation of Family Math and Family Science nights. Each school received small grants to hold three night events. Besides, the LRCPMSA plans to inform parents about standards-based mathematics and science via parent-teachers associations meetings, publications, and media coverage. Presentation have been made before the Volunteers in Public Schools Board and the Little Rock Parent and Teacher Association Council to provide information about the Initiative and changes that will take place. Although still in its first year of implementation, the Initiatives activities related to community outreach and parent involvement seem to be exceedingly restricted. The CPMSA Program in Little Rock is urged to design and implement an aggressive community involvement plan to ensure the effective participation of parents, industry, business, and the private sector in general. Building community support, as clearly expressed by the 1998-99 Work Plan forLRSD Priorities is, indeed, an area to which the LRCPMSA can make a significant contribution. As part of the recommended plan, the LRCPMSA is suggested the production of a brochure aimed at communicating to the public is objectives and main accomplishments. Collaboration with Other Related NSF-funded Educational Activities: It is evident that the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (AR SSI) has influenced the trajectory of the Little Rock School District, particularly in programmatic areas, such as standards-based curriculum implementation and professional development. Currently, the University of Arkansas at Little Rock is engaged in several partnerships with the District, including SECME, and the implementation of the AR SSI K-4, Math and Science Crusades. Likewise, the Museum of Discovery will implement a system of science clubs to be located at various community centers and after-school programs in Little Rock. Additional Findings Related to the Objective of the Site Visit Cooperative Agreement The analysis of Cooperative Agreement No. HRD-9801615 between NSF and the Little Rock School District (September 1,1998 through August 31,2003) revealed the following major issues and concerns: Deliverables: The LRCPMSA showed no significant data or evidenced a process in place to collect the data needed to document each one of the agreed upon deliverables specified under Section 111 A 7, CPMSA Participant and Systemic Change Goals, pages 4-5 of the cooperative agreement. The Initiative does not seem to have a mechanism to gather the information needed and make it available to teachers, principals at. Furthermore, there does not seem to be a strategy by which the CPMSA leadership become aware of the current 8programmatic problems and situations that may be impeding the achievement of the aforementioned targets. Increasing K-12 science and mathematics student achievement and enrollment, as stated in the cooperative agreement, demands specific programmatic actions as well as a specific data collection system in placenone of which were evident during the site visit. Governing Board: Section III A9, page 9, reads as follows: The CPMSA shall have a governing board as specified in the proposal. The board shall have sanctioned authority and responsibility for oversight of the programmatic components of the CPMSA. The governing board is expected to oversee the development of the goals, the implementation of the activities and the assessment of the outcomes. The board, in concert with the Principal Investigator, shall recommend to the school district the achievement of project goals and objectives. No evidence was presented during the site visit of the governing boards membership or its intervention in the Initiatives operation. Thus, the role of the aforementioned governing board is unclear at this moment. Funding and Funding Schedule: Section III B, FUNDING AND FUNDING SCHEDULE, page 6 of the cooperative agreement, reads as follows: 1. It is the intent of the Foundation to provide up to $3,228,022 to support the CPMSA over the next 5 years. Funds in the amount of $960, 578 are hereby provided to support the CPMSA for the period September 1, 1999 to August 31, 2000, in accordance with the revised budget dated April 9, 1998. 2. The level of continued NSF support will be negotiated with the Awardee annually and will depend upon an annual review of achievement, the level of support from other sources, and the availability of funds. 3. The Foundation will evaluate annually the CPMSA to determine whether the Foundation will continue to support full activities, or will provide decreased funding to phase out Foundation support of the CPMSA. There was a misinterpretation about NSFs approved budgets for Years 1 and 2. In order to ensure an adequate understanding and the appropriate 9use of NSFs funds, the following amounts reflected in two separate (signed) budgets, were identified as those officially approved: Year 1 Year 2 $198,533 $752,045 The CPMSAs leadership was encouraged to submit a certified financial report of Year 1 expenditures and obligations. Similarly, the leadership was suggested to rebudget Year 1 in order to address some of the major needs identified during the site visit. Year 2 funds will be negotiated after the completion of Year 1. For this purpose, the LRCPMSA leadership will make a presentation of the Initiatives major accomplishments in Year 1 during a reverse site visit to be held by July 31,1999 at the Foundations headquarters. Evaluation: Section III A, item 12, page 6 of the cooperative agreement reads as follows: The Awardee shall use the evaluation component found in the proposal ora modified version approved by NSF. There was no evidence of an evaluation plan being used by the LRCPMSA during the site visit. Thus, the Initiative is not in compliance with this inherent component of the agreed statement of work. It is urged to revisit its evaluation strategy and develop a comprehensive evaluation plan that: (i) specifies the strategies to gather, interpret, and use relevant data, (ii) addresses each of the Initiatives components, and (iii) informs the CPMSA leadership in its decision-making process and allows it to readjust plans. Summary One of the key findings of the April 27-29,1999 site visit was the notable progress made by the Little Rock School District in some of the areas relative to K-12 systemic reform in mathematics and science education. Piloting and implementing standards-based curriculum programs is, unequivocally, a Year 1 accomplishment, which will lead the Initiative to further progress in this critica area. Likewise, the establishment of new policies and measures, particular y programmatic policies, is definitely an aspect of the District that favors the achievement of the Initiatives vision. While working with educational systems in the transformation and renewal of K- itiiiiv vir\iiiy vvivii uvwuwi i-> x x *. 12 mathematics and science education using systemic reform as a strategy, it becomes apparent that among this multifactorial enterprise, standards-based curriculum implementation, professional development, and student performance 10 measured by reliable, standards-based assessment systems are the three most critical and consequential elements. Therefore, the LRCPMSA is encouraged to ensure the quality of these essential variables and their alignment and correspondence through effective, research-based strategies. In particular, the LRCPMSA is urged to revisit its professional development componenta concern to NSFin order to make it consistent with the Initiatives purpose and scope of work. Professional development is, consequently, a domain that needs to be prioritized in the immediate future. The major concern raised, as a direct result of this visit was the lack of substantive evidence to support the value added of the CPMSA Program in Little Rock to the Districts reform agenda in science and mathematics. The absence of an action plan to guide the work in Year 1 and the fact that approximately 62 /o of NSF funds are still unused are some of the factors contributing to this situation. There are fundamental areas of concern that the LRCPMSA needs to address in the immediate future. These areas include: (1) Convergence of the usage of all resources that are designed for or that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education fiscal, intellectual, material, curricular, and extra-curricular into a focused and unitary program to constantly upgrade, renew, and improve the educational program in mathematics and science for all students. (2) Broad-based support from parents, policymakers, institutions of higher education, business and industry, foundations, and other segments of the community for the goals and collective values of the program, based on rich presentations of the ideas behind the program. (3) Accumulation of a broad and deep array of evidence that the program is enhancing all students achievement, through a set of indices (e.g., achievement test scores, higher level courses passed, advanced placement tests taken, college admission rates, college majors, portfolio assessment, research experiences, ratings from summer employers). (4) Improvement in the achievement of all students, including those historically underserved. Reverse Site Visit The LRCPMSA is requested to attend a reverse site visit at NSF in July 1999. The purpose of this visit is to assess the progress made by the Initiative in its first year of implementation and the specific plans for the immediate future, particularly Year 2. Furthermore, assessment of the impact and value added of 11 the CPMSA Program to the Districts science and mathematics education agenda will be the primary focus of the reverse site visit. The evaluation of the progress made by the CPMSA in Little Rock conveyed during this reverse site visit, including a detailed analysis by grade level of the 1997 and 1998 mathematics and science student performance data, will be used by NSF to determine the level of funding for the LRCPMSA second year of funding. It is important to underscore that per the extant cooperative agreement, the level of continued NSF support will depend upon an annual review of achievement, the level of support from other sources, and the availability of funds. Likewise, the LRCPMSA is reminded that based on this annual progress report, the Foundation will determine whether full support to the CPMSA will continue or if funding to phase-out this effort will occur. The following set of dates are suggested for this purpose
July 9,16, or 23, 1999. The LRCPMSA is expected to select one of these or suggest a different option to NSF. The Initiatives key leadership should attend the reverse site visit, including the Principal Investigator, the co-Principal Investigators, and the Project Director. 12Reverse Site Visit NSF Friday, July 16,1999 Presentation > Value added by CPMSA > Year One Accomplishments > Data > Year Two Plan > Question and Answer SessionVALUE ADDED BY CPMSA Plan and Process Alignment for improved Student Achievement Little Rock School District Process Data Analysis Campus Plan Process Interventions Professional Development Standards Assessment Accountability Parent Involvement SP X X X X X X RDEP X X X X X X Title I X X X X X X X X ACSIP X X X X X X X X ACTAAP X X X X X X UPDI X X X X X NSF X X X X X X CLP X X X X X X X X SP RDEP Title I ACSIP ACTAAP UPDI NSF CLP strategic Plan Revised Desergregation and Education Plan Title I Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Planning Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program Urban Professional Development Initiative National Science Foundation Campus Leadership PlanRelationship of CPMSA Goals and LRSD Quality Indicators _____________________ CPMSA Goals_________________________ (a) LRSD agrees to enact policies and practices that will result in an increase by 2% after Year I of the agreement the composite scores of underrepresented minority students in grades 2-11 on the SAT9. For each subsequent year of the agreement, the LRSD agrees to enact policies and practices that will result in a 5% increase of the composite scores of underrepresented minority students on the SAT9. Nofe: LRSD will no longer administer the SAT9 at grades 2-1 J. Rather, students in grades 2-11 will take each semester a new District-adopted CRT that is aligned with the currictdum standards and benchmarks. LRSD Quality Indicators 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender at grades 5, 7, and 10 shall perform at or above the 50* percentile in SAT9 mathematics. The percent of students in every sub-woup of race and gender at grades 5, 7, and 10 performing at or above the 50 percentile in SAT9 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend or improvement goals each year. 100% of a schools students in grades 4, 6, and 8 shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the Arkansas criterion-referenced test The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the grades 4, 6, and 8 Arkansas criterion-referenced tests 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 mathematics each semester on the District CRT. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester on the District CRT. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year on the District CRT. (b) The LRSD agrees to implement policies and practices that will enroll all district eighth and/or ninth grade students in Algebra I by the Year 2003. 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._____________________________________________________________________CPMSA Goals________________ (c) The LRSD agrees to increase the algebra success rates for all district students by 2% after Year I of the agreement
5% after Year II of the agreement
5% after Year III of the agreement
5% after Year IV of the agreement
and 5% after Year V of the agreement. (d) The LRSD agrees to increase the numbers of students who enroll in geometry and trigonometry by 2% in Year 1 of the agreement
5% in Year II of the agreement
5% in Year III of the agreement
5% in Year IV of the agreement, and 5% in Year V of the agreement.___________________________ (e) The LRSD agrees to increase the student success rates in geometry and trigonometry by 2% after Year I of the agreement
5% after Year II of the agreement
5% after Year III of the agreement
5% after Year IV of the agreement
and 5% in Year V of the agreement. (f) The LRSD agrees to increase the student enrollment rates and student success rates in biology by 2% in Year I of the agreement
5% in Year II of the agreement
5% in Year III of the agreement
5% in Year IV of the agreement
and 5% in Year V of the agreement.____________________________________ (g) The LRSD agrees to increase the student success rates in biology by 2% after Year I of the agreement
5% after Year II of the agreement
5% after Year III of the agreement
5% after Year IV of the agreement
and 5% after Year V of the agreement.____________________________________________________ (h) The LRSD agrees to increase the student success rates in chemistry from 62% in Year I of the agreement to 75% in Year V of the agreement.__________ (i) The LRSD agrees to increase the student enrollment in physics from 17% to 30% by Year V of the agreement. LRSD Quality Indicators 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra I. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Note: The success rate will also be determined by grades. Note: Geometry is required of all LRSD students for graduation. 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Note: The success rates in Geometry and Trigonometry will also be determined by grades._________________________________________ Note: All LRSD students are required to take Biology Ifor graduation. Note: The success rate in Biology I will be determined by grades Note: The success rate in Chemistry I will be determined by grades. Note: Effective fall 1999, all LRSD students must take Physics I in order to graduate.CPMSA Goals LRSP Quality Indicators (j) The LRSD agrees to increase the numbers of students who graduate with SEM proficiency from 40% to 70% by Year V of the agreement. 65% of middle and high school 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. 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 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. Note: Four years of mathematics and science are required. The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. (k) The CPMSA school district shall implement an articulated, standards- based curriculum, instructional, and assessment program that has been field tested by NSF or recommended by entities such as professional science educational organizations, and/or jurisdictions like the state where the CPMSA school district is located. The CPMSA school district shall also design and implement standards-based professional development for teachers, staff development for counselors and administrators, and student enrichment activities that support this articulated, standards-based program. _________ (I) The LRSD shall implement practices to recruit qualified minority science and mathematics professionals with the goal of increasing minority faculty by 10% by Year V of the agreement. ________________________________ (m) The CPMSA school district shall submit a written program management plan to the cognizant NSF program officer, annually, no later than two months after notification of the award (in year 1) and after notification of continuation of the award in years 2, 3, 4, and 5. ----------------------------------------------------- See Year Two Plan. Success will be determined by numbers of newly certified science and mathematics teachers. See annual Management Plan.CPMSA Goals :h (n) The following quantitative goals for student enrollment and successful completion rates for specific award year are minimal and should be exceeded: &e data report LRSD Qoality Indicators 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 10% of the projected increase from the baseline 30% of the projected increase from the baseline 50% of the projected increase from the baseline 70% of the projected increase from the baseline 100% of the projected increase from the baselineLRCPMSA YEAR ONE ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1992^-1999 POLICY #1 - Standards-Based Curriculum, instruction, and Assessment Developed content standards and benchmarks in mathematics and science for grades K-12 Developed curriculum maps that correlate standards/benchmarks to SAT-9 test, State Mathematics and Science Frameworks, local resources, and assessment strategies SMART 99 (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training), an extended year Algebra I program, July 26-August 6, 1999 - Program designed to serve 60 ninth grade students. This program will focus on strengthening skills needed before entering Algebra I by providing opportunities for students to solve real life problems by reasoning, modeling, verbalizing and generalizing patterns and relationships. The graphing calculator will be one of the many tools that students will have access to at all times. SARP (Summer Algebra Readiness Program), a CERTL activity provided by Philander Smith College, designed to serve 75 ninth grade students beginning July 19, 1999 and concluding August 6, 1999. (Focus of this program is the same as SMART 99). Summer Science Institute - A CERTL activity provided by UALR, designed to serve 135 fourth and fifth grade students, July 19-30, 1999. The program will focus on hands-on science learning experiences for students that support the newly adopted LRSD Science Curriculum Standards. Piloted Investigations in two schools: Romine Elementary School - AH teachers(K-5) in all classrooms implemented Jefferson Elementary School - All 4** grade teachers in all classrooms implemented Piloted Science and Technology for Children (STC) in 4 schools
Chicot Elementary School - All 4 kits in all 5** grade classrooms Rockefeller Elementary School - 2 kits in all 1* 2", and 3^^ grade classrooms Wakefield Elementary School - 2 kits in all 2", 4* and S* grade classrooms Franklin Elementary School - 2 kits in all 1-5 grade classrooms Piloted one module of Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) in all 6 and 7* grade classrooms. Proposal submitted, pending approval, by UALR for GEAR-UP grant to implement AVID for all 7*^ grade students in 4 middle schoolsDRIVER #2 - Policies and Procedures The Division of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment (CIA) developed a work plan that identified 52 priorities including the activities of the CPMSA for the 1998-99 school year. One of the major tasks of the work plan was to review and recommend revisions of the Boards Instruction policies. Policies submitted to the Board addressed the following: Increase in graduation requirements Requirements for Pre-AP/AP Courses Recommendation to eliminate low level courses All students required to take Physics Quality Index for Schools to improve students achievement Increase the number of students who are successful in upper level courses Increase the number of students who are enrolled in upper level courses Plan for 1999-2000 Review and revise grading policy Review and revise attendance policyDRIVER #3 - District Leadership, Governance and Management Developed and operationalized Campus Leadership Teams Management team met monthly to address administrative or policy issues effecting the CPMSA Governing Board (Advisory Committee) met monthly to review data, program implementation schedules, and to address any corrections needed Proposal submitted to improve infrastructure for mathematics and scienceDRIVER #4 - Convergence of Resources Teacher training/research provided by UALR Local district funds. Eisenhower funds, Title VI, Class Size Reduction funds leveraged with NSF funds to improve infrastructure for mathematics and science Mini grants provided by Arkansas SSI to two LRSD schools for Family Math and Science Program Local district budget used to help achieve CPMSA objectives Stipend for SMART mentors Stipend for SECME participants Training for Active Physics Professional development for math and science specialist - National conferences I t state textbook funds used for standards based curriculum materials State funds allocated for teachers to attend AP/Pre-AP training (Science & Mathematics Vertical Teams Workshop)DRIVER #5 - Professional Development Principals and other building administrators participated in hands-on activities in mathematics and science. Discussed the differences between standards- based instruction and traditional instruction New and first year secondary mathematics and science teachers participated in a series of four workshops related to the implementation of the mathematics or science curriculum, classroom management, learning styles, use of manipulative materials, cooperative learning and use of technology Training provided to teachers for the Fall, 1999 implementation of new standards-based programs
Investigations - All 4* and 5* grade teachers in all schools (full implementation) STC - All 6* grade science teachers in all schools CMP - All 6** grade mathematics teachers in all schools Active Physics -17 science teachers representing all five high schools Junior High School Mathematics Vertical Teams met monthly Sept. 98- Jan. 99 teachers grades 6-12 attended College Boards 31 mathematics Mathematics Vertical Teams (MVT) Conference in Little Rock - Feb. 99 MVT Steering committee formed and met twice (following MVT Conference) to set short and long term goals for the LRSD
explored ways to involve more teachers 26 science teachers grades 6-12 attended UALRs Vertical Teams Conference for science teachersDRIVER #6 - Partnerships, Parental Involvement, Public Awareness Expanded Family Math and Science program to 5 new schools. Currently 25/43 elementary and middle schools have participated in the Family Math and Science Program CPMSA Presentation made to the following organizations: Little Rock PTA Council Volunteers in Public Schools (VIPS) Chrisitan Ministerial Alliance Vital Link Business Partners Presented an annual update to the LRSD Board of Directors Designed dissemination brochure (draft) SMART 99 parent meetingAssessment Practices and Data Utilization Administered quarterly CRTs to all students in grades 2-6 Administered SAT-9 to grades 5, 7. and 10 as mandated by the Arkansas State Dept, of Education (ADE) Administered State Benchmark Exams to all students in grades 4, 8, and 11 Data gathered quarterly (and by semester) to determine number of students who are successfully completing the mathematics and science courses listed below: Algebra I Chemistry Pre-Calculus AP Biology AP Physics Algebra 11 Geometry Statistics AP Calculus AP Statistics Biology Physics T rigonometry AP Environmental Science AP Chemistry Data gathered quarterly (and by semester) to determine number of students who are enrolled in the courses listed below: Geometry Physics Trigonometry Biology All data disagregated by race, gender and schoolI I I i i I I LRPMSA YEAR ONE DATA 1998^-1999 I Ii SAT-9 Scaled Scores Test Date: September 14, 1998 Test Date for End of Year 1 is September 15, 1999 Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase Black Students Problem Math Solving Procedures Total Math Science 5th Grade Male Female Total 612 616 615 609 618 613 611 616 614 610 613 612 7th Grade Male Female Total 641 641 641 639 644 641 640 642 641 635 635 635 10th Grade Male Female Total n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 676 678 677 663 666 665 12nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal
2% increase Number Percent of 2nd Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Miove "C or Above Semester with 'C or 98-99 Above 'C' or Above Black Male Black Male Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 569 409 15 17 3 1 2 3 618 338 595 16 10 19 109 244 154 13 13 1 1 1 2 249 177 166 8 9 10 74 43% 38% 87% 76% 33% 100% 50% 67% 40% 52% 28% 50% 90% 53% 68% 572 398 19 21 10 6 0 3 485 297 451 31 20 11 120 259 183 14 17 8 3 0 2 230 199 192 19 14 9 72 45% 46% 74% 81% 80% 50% 0% 67% 47% 67% 43% 61% 70% 82% 60% % Change 2% 8% -13% 4% 47% -50% -50% 0% 7% 15% 15% 11% -20% 29% -8% 1Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal
2% increase Number Percent of 2ncl Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above "C or Above 2nd Semester 98-99 Number Percent of with 'C or Above "C or Above Black Female Black Female 1 Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 591 526 37 38 10 1 0 5 654 455 666 29 12 22 134 343 277 34 28 8 1 0 4 386 303 262 21 12 21 86 58% 53% 92% 74% 80% 100% 0% 80% 59% 67% 39% 72% 100% 95% 64% % 588 494 31 34 11 9 0 7 579 393 522 32 17 27 173 335 286 23 27 10 5 0 7 341 307 273 22 14 24 129 57% 58% 74% 79% 91% 56% 0% 100% 59% 78% 52% 69% 82% 89% 75% Change -1% 5% -18% 6% 11% -44% 0% 20% 0% 12% 13% -4% -18% -7% 10% 22nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal
22% increase First Year Goal
2% increase Number Percent of 2nc/ Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Maove "C or Above Semester with 'C or 98-99 Above "C or Above Total Black Total Black % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 1160 935 52 55 13 2 2 8 1272 793 1261 45 22 41 243 587 431 47 41 9 2 1 6 635 480 428 29 21 31 160 51% 46% 90% 75% 69% 100% 50% 75% 50% 61% 34% 64% 95% 76% 66% 1160 892 50 55 21 15 0 10 1064 690 973 63 37 38 293 594 469 37 44 18 8 0 9 571 506 465 41 28 33 201 51% 53% 74% 80% 86% 53% 0% 51% 54% 73% 48% 65% 76% 87% 69% 1% 6% -16% 5% 16% -47% -50% -24% 4% 13% 14% 1% -20% 11% 3% 32nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal
2% increase Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above "C or Above 2nd Semester 98-99 Number Percent of with 'C or Above "C or Above Non-Black Male Non-Black Male % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 274 240 31 75 23 4 24 18 252 198 249 50 6 7 110 163 156 31 64 20 3 22 18 160 139 142 41 5 2 101 59% 65% 100% 85% 87% 75% 92% 100% 63% 70% 57% 82% 83% 29% 92% 270 228 35 47 29 19 10 17 238 163 215 49 9 10 109 197 160 29 38 26 16 10 17 159 128 147 42 7 9 89 73% 70% 83% 81% 90% 84% 100% 100% 67% 79% 68% 86% 78% 90% 82% 13% 5% -17% -4% 3% 9% 8% 0% 3% 8% 11% 4% -6% 61% -10% 42nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal
22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above "C or Above 2nc/ Semster 99 Number Percent of 98 with 'C or Above "C or Above Non-Black Female Non-Black Female % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 275 287 42 61 27 3 11 32 292 249 333 41 5 14 144 224 213 34 54 24 3 11 31 225 196 245 36 5 13 135 81% 74% 81% 89% 89% 100% 100% 97% 77% 79% 74% 88% 100% 93% 94% 271 305 46 57 24 24 9 27 297 217 254 39 9 9 146 213 245 40 49 24 20 7 26 234 182 212 36 8 7 122 79% 80% 87% 86% 100% 83% 78% 96% 79% 84% 83% 92% 89% 78% 84% -3% 6% 6% -3% 11% -17% -22% -1% 2% 5% 10% 5% -11% -15% -10% 52nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above "C or Above 2nd Semester 99 Number Percent of 98 with 'C or Above "C or Above Total Non-Black Total Non-Black % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 549 527 73 136 50 7 35 50 544 447 582 91 11 21 254 387 369 65 118 44 6 33 49 385 335 387 77 10 15 236 70% 70% 89% 87% 88% 86% 94% 98% 71% 75% 66% 85% 91% 71% 93% 541 533 81 104 53 43 19 44 535 380 469 88 18 19 255 410 405 69 87 50 36 17 43 393 310 359 78 15 16 211 76% 76% 85% 84% 94% 84% 89% 98% 73% 82% 77% 89% 83% 84% 83% 5% 6% -4% -3% 6% -2% -5% 0% s3% '7% 10% 4% -8% 13% -10% Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environme*' AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-CalcL. I noo- 6Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal
22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase 2nd Semester 97 98 Number Percent of with 'C or Above "C or Above 2nd Semester 98 99 Number with 'C or Above Percent of "C or Above All Students All Students % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 1709 1462 125 191 63 9 37 58 1816 1240 1843 136 33 62 497 974 800 112 159 53 8 34 55 1020 815 815 106 31 46 396 57% 55% 90% 83% 84% 89% 92% 95% 56% 66% 44% 78% 94% 74% 80% 1701 1425 131 159 74 58 19 54 1599 1070 1442 151 55 57 548 1004 874 106 131 68 44 17 52 964 816 824 119 43 49 412 59% 61% 81% 82% 92% 76% 89% 96% 60% 76% 57% 79% 78% 86% 75% 2% 7% -9% -1% 8% -13% -2% 1% 4% 11% 13% 1% -16% 12% -4% 7District Enrollment by Grade Percent 1997-1998 1998-1999 Change 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 1800 1783 1742 1923 1738 1477 1755 1763 1676 1913 1681 1492 -3% -1% -4% -1% -3% 1% Total 10463 10280 -2% Proportion of Students Enrolled to Total District Enrollment, Grades 7th - 12th Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry Number enrolled in 1997-98 1709 1462 125 191 63 9 37 58 1816 1240 1843 136 33 62 497 1998 16.33% 13.97% 1.19% 1.83% 0.60% 0.09% 0.35% 0.55% 17.36% 11.85% 17.61% 1.30% 0.32% 0.59% 4.75% Number enrolled in 1998-99 1701 1425 131 159 74 58 19 54 1599 1070 1442 151 55 57 548 1999 16.55% 13.86% 1.27% 1.55% 0.72% 0.56% 0.18% 0.53% 15.55% 10.41% 14.03% 1.47% 0.54% 0.55% 5.33% Difference Between 97 & 98 0.21% -0.11% 0.08% -0.28% 0.12% 0.48% -0.17% -0.03% -1.80% -1.44% -3.59% 0.17% 0.22% -0.04% 0.58% 1student Enrollment in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal
22% increase First Year Goal
2% increase 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 Black Male Black Female Total Black Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 569 409 15 17 3 1 2 3 618 338 595 16 10 19 109 572 398 19 21 10 6 0 3 485 297 451 31 20 11 120 % Change 1% -3% 27% 24% 233% 500% -100% 0% -22% -12% -24% 94% 100% -42% 10% 591 526 37 38 10 1 0 5 654 455 666 29 12 22 134 588 494 31 34 11 9 0 7 579 393 522 32 17 27 173 % Change -1% -6% -16% -11% 10% 800% 0% 40% -11% -14% -22% 10% 42% 23% 29% 1160 935 52 55 13 2 2 8 1272 793 1261 45 22 41 243 1160 892 50 55 21 15 0 10 1064 690 973 63 37 38 293 % Change 0% -5% -4% 0% 62% 650% -100% 25% -16% -13% -23% 40% 68% -7% 21% 1student Enrollment in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 Non-Black Male Non-Black Female Total NonBlack Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 274 240 31 75 23 4 24 18 252 198 249 50 6 7 110 270 228 35 47 29 19 10 17 238 163 215 49 9 10 109 % Change -1% -5% 13% -37% 26% 375% -58% -6% -6% -18% -14% -2% 50% 43% -1% 275 287 42 61 27 3 11 32 292 249 333 41 5 14 144 271 305 46 57 24 24 9 27 297 217 254 39 9 9 146 % Change ^i% 6% 10% -7% -11% 700% -18% -16% 2% -13% -24% -5% 80% -36% 1% 549 527 73 136 50 7 35 50 544 447 582 91 11 21 254 541 533 81 104 53 43 19 44 535 380 469 88 18 19 255 % Change -1% 1% 11% -24% 6% 514% -46% -12% -2% -15% -19% -3% 64% -10% 0% 22nd student Enrollment in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal
2% increase 2nd Semester Semester 97-98 98-99 All Students Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 1709 1462 125 191 63 9 37 58 1816 1240 1843 136 33 62 497 1701 1425 131 159 74 58 19 54 1599 1070 1442 151 55 57 548 % Change 0% -3% 5% -17% 17% 544% -49% -7% -12% -14% -22% 11% 67% -8% 10% 3 JLRPMSA YEAR TWO PLAN 1999-2000 LITTLE ROCK CPMSA YEAR TWO ACTIVITIES 1999-2000 PERSONNEL The Project Director remains on full time status. BUDGET: $51,000 A full time secretary will be continued to manage office activities and perform clerical duties. BUDGET: $18,360 a The Program Evaluator will move from 25% FTE to 100% FTE with approximately one half salary provided by NSF and one half by the district: BUDGET: $24,000 Ten lead teachers will be utilized to improve the infrastructure for mathematics and science in the districts 50 schools. These lead teachers will provide professional development and classroom level support for the mathematics and science teachers in their cluster. NSF will fund the salaries of four of those lead teachers. BUDGET: $160,000 A full time Instructional Aide will be employed to assist with the implementation of standards based curriculum modules and materials. BUDGET: $10,000 TRAVEL a Travel to NSF Meetings. BUDGET: $5,000 STANDARDS BASED CURRICULA a Implement Investigations in grades 4 and 5 with all teachers in all schools Implement Science and Technology for Children (STC) in grade 6 with all teachers in all schools Implement 1 STC kit in grades 1-5 with all teachers in all schools Implement Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) in 6** grade with all teachers in all middle schools Implement 2 modules of CMP in 7^ and 8* grade with all teachers in all schools Implement Active Physics in all high schools for o" grade students PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT a a New secondary mathematics and science teachers will attend 4 workshops per year. Substitutes will be provided and paid approximately $44/day. BUDGET: 24 substitutes x 4 days x $44/day = $4224 Inservice on new curriculum standards provided for all science and mathematics teachers Training to begin Spring, 2000 for the following teachers
Investigations - all 2"^ and 3' grade teachers in all schools - all 4 modules 1 STC - all K-5 teachers in all schools - 2" kit CMP - All 7^ grade teachers in all schools - all CMP modules All teachers implementing new standards based curriculum programs in mathematics and science will receive approximately 20 hours of follow-up that includes classroom visits and support by a lead teacher, and district-level follow-up training. Approximately 50% of districts 919 K-12 mathematics and science teachers will receive training on alternative assessment Mathematics and science vertical teams to meet monthly Subcontract with UALR to provide Laboratory School for Teacher Enhancement ACADEMIC SUPPORT PROGRAMS a a a Conduct 8 follow-up sessions during the school year for 135 summer extended year Algebra I participants. Twelve high school mentors plus 10 college student mentors will conduct sessions. Dr. Frank James, Philander Smith College will facilitate (CERTL). BUDGET: $25/day x 8 days x 12 mentors = $2400 Conduct Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training (SMART) for 240 rising 9* grade students. BUDGET: $100/suppiies x 240 students = $24,000 1 site facilitator x $102/day x 12 days = $1,224 16 teachers x $82/day x 12 days = $15,744 48 student mentors x $40 day x 10 days = $19,200 TOTAL BUDGET $38,568 Continue to Provide tutoring for students in advanced mathematics and science courses Conduct extended year program in science - SUBCONTRACT WITH UALR BUDGET: $50,220 Implement SECME program in 5 new schools during the 1999-2000 school year Continue to increase SECME program with the addition of 9 new schools for the 2000-2001 school year. Two teachers per school to attend summer institute for SECME training (Summer, 2000). BUDGET: $2200 (includes registration, meals, lodging, graduate tuition, and airfare) x 18 teachers = $39,600 Continue to expand VITAL LINK by increasing the number of students participating who are underrepresented and underserved. BUDGET: $6,300 Subcontract with UALR to provide JR-TEAMS Program BUDGET: $24,670 Subcontract with Museum of Discovery to provide Community Based Science Clubs. BUDGET: $40,000 Train students to use the technology component that is embedded in adopted curriculum Train students to use the internet for research purposes and exchange of information 2PARENT/FAMILY/COMIVIUNiTY INVOLVEMENT a Increase the number of schools participating in the Family Math & Science program. BUDGET: $2,916 Print and disseminate brochure about CPMSA. BUDGET: $1,200 Develop presentation about standards based curricula for Campus Leadership teams, PTA meetings, churches, businesses (brown bag lunch sessions) Develop and produce a video to be aired on LRSD Access Channel about the CPMSA GOVERNANCE a a Plan a r/2 -day retreat for the CPMSA Governing Board. A consultant will be obtained to guide the group through team building activities and strategic planning. The governing board will form subgroups that will concentrate on certain aspects of the CPMSA. BUDGET: $1,000 Governing board will meet quarterly to review data and discuss mid-term corrections - subcommittees will meet monthly. Management team will meet quarterly to assist with administrative matters concerning the implementation of the project activities. Project Staff will meet weekly to provide feedback on CPMSA activities ASSESSMENT PRACTICES & DATA UTILIZATION a a a Administer quarterly CRTs in grades 3-11 Administer SAT-9 to grades 5, 7, and 10 as mandated by the State Administer State Benchmark exams to grades 4, 6, 8 and end-of-course (Algebra I and Geometry) TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR YEAR TWO - $479,458 (Not including fringe benefits) 3 ILITTLE ROCK PARTNERSHIPS FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT (LRPMSA) Strategic Plan, 1999-00 Strategies Action Steps Person(s) Responsible Timeline Measurable Outcomes Driver 1: Implementation of comprehensive, standards-based curricula and/or instructional materials that are aligned with instruction and assessment available to every student served by the system and its partners. 1.1 Provide appropriate interventions for students who are at risk of not meeting or exceeding the mathematics and science standards 1.2 Implement a standards-based curriculum 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 Conduct extended year Algebra I programs Provide tutoring for students in advanced mathematics and science courses Conduct extended year programs in science ELEMENTARY MATHEMATICS 1.2.11 Implement Investigations in Number, Data, & Space in grades 4 and 5 at all schools and with all teachers MIDDLE SCHOOL MATHEMATICS 1.2.21 Implement Connected Math Project (CMP) in 6' grade in all schools with all teachers 1.2.22 Implement 2 modules of CMP in 7th gth gj.2(Jgg jjj 3JI schools with all teachers HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS 1.2.31 Use content standards and benchmarks to provide standards- based instruction ELEMENTARY SCIENCE 1.2.41 Implement STC Kit in grades 1-5 in all schools with all teachers MIDDLE SCHOOL SCIENCE Vanessa Cleaver Principals Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff Principals August, 2000 September, 1999 August, 2000 Fall, 1999 Fall, 1999 Implementation of SMART '00 List of participants Assessment of Pre/Post test Tutoring plans of participating high schools Number of students participating Classroom observations Feedback/analysis given ongoing in grade level, campus, math dept. It n tlj .2.51 Implement all 4 kits of STC in 6*' I grade in all schools with all teachers 1.2.6 HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE Fall, 1999 1.3 Implement alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a students actual functioning level in math and science so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate ability tracking______ 1.4 Train students to use cunent technology to access, evaluate, and apply information and to increase competencies in problem solving, specific content areas and critical thinking skills 1.3.1 1.4.1 1.2.61 Implement Active Physics in all high schools for 9 grade students 1.2.62 Utilize content standards and benchmarks to implement standards-based instruction______ Provide training for mathematics and science teachers on alternative assessment 1.3.11 Implement alternative assessment Train students to use technology component that is embedded in adopted curriculum 1.4.2 Train students to use the Internet for research purposes and exchange of information Dennis Glasgow Marion Woods Vanessa Cleaver Teachers December, 1999 1999-00 Ongoing Classroom observations feedback/analysis given ongoing in grade level, campus, math department 50% of all mathematics and science teachers receive and implement training samples ol alternative assessments Number of students trained H 21.5 Establish an infrastructure to support systemic change in mathematics and science 1.6 Implement vertical teams in mathematics and science 1.5.1 1.5.2 1.5.3 1.6.1 Hire lead teachers Divide elementary schools into 6 clusters and create a middle school cluster, assign a math/science lead teacher for each of the elementary clusters and a math and a science lead teacher for both the middle schools and high schools clusters Provide training for lead teachers Form and implement science vertical teams 1.6.11 1.6.12 Generate list of skills students need before entering next course Meet regularly to develop consistency among science teachers at the middle school and high school levels 1.6.2 Implement math vertical teams 1.6.21 1.6.22 1.6.23 Continue to train teachers to use vertical teams toolkit Meet in horizontal teams to outline lesson plans for the year Develop quarterly assessments for secondary math courses Dennis Glasgow Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Rene' Carson Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver Phyllis Caruth Teachers hired List of Clusters Ongoing September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 Ongoing August, 1999 Ongoing August, 1999 August, 1999 Sign-in sheet, agenda List of participants Sign-in sheets List of skills Meeting dates Agendas Sign-in sheets Training/meeting dates Lesson plan outlines Assessment instruments 3j 1.7 Plan professional development rm Conduct needs assessment for mathematics and science teachers I Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow I September, 1999 Needs assessment evaluated and analyzed 1.7.2 Implement professional development plan Project Staff Ongoing Number of teachers participating in professional development 1.7.3 1.7.4 Provide math & science staff with opportunity to pursue educational endeavors that will promote high educational standards within the District Provide follow-up training for teachers using standard-based curricula Dennis Glasgow Project Staff Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Lead teachers 1.7.5 1.7.6 Train principals, assistant principals, and central administrative staff on the systemic reform in math and science Provide training for "Brokers" of each school on math and science reform Vanessa Cleaver Sadie Mitchell October, 1999 August, 1999 Ongoing July, 1999 Number of teachers selected to participate in educational endeavors All teachers using standards- based curricula will receive at least 20 hours of follow-up training Dates of training Sign-in sheets 4r DTh^FITD^oTmcnT^f a coherent, consistent set of policies that snpVorts provisions of broad-based reform in mathematics and science at the K-12 level. 2.1 Implement pro- grams, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure that the district hires, assigns, utilizes and promotes qualified African Americans in a fair and equitable manner in such a way to maintain a teaching staff which is approximately third African American one- 2.2 Implement Administrative regulations to support a Board Policy that requires the development of a coherent, articulated set of K-12 academic standards and benchmarks in 2.1.1 Implement LRSD Minority Recruitment Plan 2.1.2 Provide tuition reimbursement to 2.1.3 support teachers, especially minority teachers, to gain certification endorsement in critical math or science areas Support teachers on a district level with a stipend to participate in 8 graduate hours of physics to obtain physics certification endorsement 2.2.1 Train principals, and teachers about the academic content standards 2.2.2 Develop a brochure that informs parents about the standards Robert Robinson Principals Richard Hurley Principals Dennis Glasgow Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Math/Science Staff Bonnie Lesley September, 1999 Ongoing September, 1999 Ongoing September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 Number of African American teachers hired Percentage of African American teachers by school, by district, and by subject Number of newly certified math and science teachers by race, gender, and subject area Number of teachers supported by tuition reimbursement by race, gender and subject area Number of teachers paid a stipend to complete graduate physics hours Published standards and benchmarks in math and science, K-12 Number of principals and teachers who received training Completed brochure for parents 5mathematics and science 2.3 Implement administrative regulations to support a Board Policy that all curricula be standards-based and to define what students should know or be able to do at the conclusion of each grade level or course 2.4 Implement administrative regulations to support a Board Policy that guarantees that all students have an opportunity to participate in gifted programs, pre-AP and AP programs 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 Develop delivery standards to complement the content standards Approve a Board Policy that requires that the curriculum at all levels reflects the academic standards Ensure by policy that all special curriculum and instruction programs be aligned with the Strategic Plan, the revised desegregation plan and the regular education program 2.3.1 Develop administrative regulations to ensure that all curricula are standards- based 2.3.2 Develop benchmarks for each grade level and course that will move students toward the standards 2.4.1 Develop administrative regulations to help guarantee that all children have an opportunity to participate in gifted, pre- Ap and AP programs 2.4.2 Provide training for teachers and counselors about strategies for increasing the rate of participation and success of Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Mable Donaldson Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow January, 2000 September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 January, 1999 Completed and approved delivery standards Board policy approved including this language Board policy approved including this language Written and approved administrative regulations to support the Board Policy 100% of curriculum documents referenced to th
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.

<dcterms_creator>Little Rock School District</dcterms_creator>