{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_290","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, 65-72","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, 65-72"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/290"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\ni Data prep: Teams. LI230-90 LeadershipCampus Leadership Team Certified/Non-Certified Input Districtwide Activity 1. Use strategies and operate team activities that improve effectiveness. Maintain Activity 718 58.7% Increase Activity 421 34.4% Change Decrease Eliminate Activity 45 3.7% Activity 17 1.4% Activity 22 1.8% 2. Reach decisions through consensus building rather than voting. 684 55.1% 361 29.1% 102 8.2% 39 3.1% 56 4.5% 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Advise the principal in the area of planning, budgeting, and school oroganization. Provide opportunites for faculty and staff to be involved in soliciting, collecting, analyzing, and distributing feedback on data-related goals to be included in the School Improvement Plan. Promote the active contribution of parent and community CLT members on goals to be included in the School Improvement Plan. Identify specific strategies for measuring progress toward achieving school improvement goals. Coordinate staff development with school improvement goals. Utilize District leadership and support of campus initiatives to improve student achievement. Inform staff about decisions and plans made at meeting using a written and verbal system of communication. 10, Improve customer satisfaction through increased parent involvement. 786 63.1% 395 31.7% 36 2.9% 17 1.4% 12 1.0% 744 59.7% 402 32.3% 40 3.2% 39 3.1% 21 1.7% 657 52.9% 524 42.2% 35 2.8% 14 1.1% 11 0.9% 657 55.6% 685 54.6% 657 52.8% 635 50.6% 557 45.0% 452 38.2% 489 39.0% 503 40.4% 572 45.6% 620 50.1% 48 4.1% 45 3.6% 51 4.1% 26 2.1% 39 3.2% 15 1.3% 25 2.0% 15 1.2% 13 1.0% 9 0.7% 10 0.8% 11 0.9% 19 1.5% 8 0.6% 12 1.0% Campus Leadership Team Team Member Self-Assessment DISTRICTWIDE 1. 2. 3. 4. Activity Maintain Activity Agendas and Minutes Use an agenda format that will promote efficient meeting flow and maintain the focus of members. Use an efficient process for including items on the agenda. Organize an efficeint process for keeping, copying, and distributing minutes. Focus on CLT's primary purpose/function: Improve performance of all student populations. 329 88.7% 296 80.4% 270 72.6% 255 68.9% Meeting Conduct Increase Activity 41 11.1% 69 18.8% 89 23.9% 108 29.2% Change Decrease Eliminate Activity Activity Activity 5. Convey overall motivation to participate and actively express positivism. 255 70.2% 101 27.8% 6. Focus on each agenda item and actively contribute to the dialogue to address the item throughly before moving on to the next. 255 79.4% 53 16.5% 7. Address complex problems with extra effort to produce creative team-generated solutions. 249 67.7% 106 28.8% 8. Appropriately reinforce other team members for their contributions. 260 70.7% 100 27.2% 9. Accept responsibility for quickly postponing or eliminating specific agenda items as needed. 285 79.2% 65 18.1% 10. Periodically summarize progress. 259 70.2% 93 25.2% Problem Solving 11. Honor the obligation to be adequately informed on issues and problems by asking questions or seeking outside information. 262 70.6% 99 26.7% 12. Help generate a list of alternatives and evaluate each thoroughly until members are fully prepared to select a solution or make a decision. 252 68.3% 108 29.3% 13. Specify precisely who, when, and how a decision will be carried out or a solution implemented and how outcomes will be monitored. 244 65.6% 119 32.0% 14. Periodically review monitoring of outcomes from previous decision making and evaluate the need to intervene. 238 64.2% 120 32.3% Friday. May 11. 2001 1 0.3% 3 0.8% 10 2.7% 4 1.1% 3 0.8% 3 0.9% 4 1.1% 5 1.4% 9 2.5% 5 1.4% 4 1.1% 4 1.1% 4 1.1% 9 2.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.5% 2 0.5% 1 0.3% 7 2.2% 4 1.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% 5 1.4% 3 0.8% 4 0.3% 1 0.3% 2 0.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% 1 0.3% 3 0.8% 3 0.9% 5 1.4% 3 0.8% 0 0.0% 7 1.9% 3 0.8% 4 1.1% 4 1.1% 2 0.5% Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 :hool c^trAt- .high.schqql. Signature of Princip! L L CTFoT\" TEAM MEMBER CQRTTNFX BALDWIN KATHERINE Barbara Position . TF.AP.HFP________ SUPPORT STAFF EUEdTEDlAPPOlNTEEl rAc^ ibENDER (chei*) X (shsci) X 44. W XF EWIS--------- HALL BETSY GARQLU SUPPORT. .STAFF TEACHER HOLLADAY KATO HOWARD RUDOLPH TEACHER CO^CHAIR/PRTNGTHAl HUNT SAM TEA^IIgR X X X_ W . JiU -B-Xi F F Ji K '\u0026lt;1 V i LITTLE NASH CAROL. ANGEL RORERTR RHODES SAVIERS SEWARD joaa. DEDE VICKI DARRELL STAFFORD BARBARA STEADMAN ANNICE WATSON BILLY WILLIAMSON MARGARET COBB BEGGS BROWN TANDY MELINDA KARYN OLONEL ROBERTSON. MAYS GRACIfi COLBURN MELISSA teacher TEACHER SUPPORT. STAFF SUPPORT STAFF CQMMUMTTY TSACSER. TEACHER TEACHER TEACHER TEACHER TEACHER TEACHER JEACflER TFAGHFR JXACHG\u0026amp;. TEACHER X XX X X X X X X XX i X T 44- w-w JIL 44- W  W . B X_ 44- W X AL-for example: 1l flraae iwcner. algebra leachor. 3Brin9 oommittee etialr, support staff, etc. - list all positions held r p J X JU. F F M X X X X-M X X Ui /LU Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School SignaUjre of Principal J. A- Fair High School rame ~ team MEMBER Anne Magee Judith Pickering Martha Nahlen Lucy Willis Jerry Cookus Robert Palmer Martha Rains_____ _ Evelyn Callaway Sharon Jackson Danny Brown Marsha Vault_______ _ Lee Willingham Trish Killingsworth Rev. Larry Ott_____ 'POSrflON Spanish Teacher English Teacher Business Teacher Art Teacher [English Teacher~ History Teacher Science Teacher Home Ec. Teacher Drama Teacher Partner In Educ. Parent__________ President, PTSA Broker Parent EUEdTED IAPPOInVed RACe seniS^r (check) X ii X Ji Ji -X. X X X (Qfi^ck) W . W w B , W  B W , B B F F F F  M M F F F I b X i. X X X. W B - B , W  W  'tor enempte: 1I orade tescher. algebra (tscher, swthng committee ehatr, support staff. Wc. - 1st all poeWons held M F M F M 04/04/2000 15:13 5016716207 HALL HIGH PAGE 02 -If I \u0026lt;91 f  ill' ii u Campus Lssdsrship Tsam Verification Perm Iddd'SCOO I School Hall High School SignatursofPilndpal. NAMEOF TEAM MEMBER Best, Joan Brant.PPennis Maddison, Sue ~~ Runshanq, Mary Sanders, Kitty Walker, EHa______ Walton, Georgia Watson, Pat_______ Watson, Gladystine Paulson, Terri Cyr, Betty Tnotnas, Sarah Burks, Karen_____ gostic, Kelvin Garner, Susan Graves, Ken ^ys, Sherrie Shells, Byron Zink, Judy________ Moore, Kgn Vibhakar, Diane Gamos. Ann_____ Burks, Roy________ Lease, Kathy______ Marilyn, Brewster FOSITION Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Parent Teacher Parent Parent Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher,, Teacher Asst. Prin-i' Teacher Parent Parent ,. Parent_______ Parent Asst. Prin. i sssrasr ___ 2___ XX X X X X __X____ X Afi^lNKt X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Race U w Ji__ w_ JL_ _L_ _B__ W JL- _iL_ W M-JB_ B w JL B _iL_ w iT\" w OEWOER -E____ ja____ _h____ F____ F____ _E____ _E___ E------ _E____ F F _E____ _E____ _JI___ F .1!___ F____ M___ JJ____ F F___ N F____ F____ N ------ F I ' i ItftMInfitt-. 1* sad* toehir, !\u0026amp;( MMh',9Ur\u0026lt;A0oaaunMMeir, tuppad MR. ate. - M Id poMItm tMW A i 1 u.' i Campus Leadership Tam Verification Form 1999-2000 Signaiure Gf PrinfioJT^ii ' t SchoottlQellan /\u0026gt; ! NAMfeOF TEAMMEMBSR POSTTiON tet aUhrey Chriatie CcJjaiBn Steve \u0026amp;urln Barfcaca toy David Gum ,Stella Loya Ajeal Wtllians_____ Orolyn Carter_____ Vsra Broailee Ralph Kwe Steve Neely \\ Whiter Rktiard ATpela Gaippll  Gtendaterts Janey lawscn_______ Murrie ^ths-. Shudi^ Ftersjgcn Stepbanifi Stallwtfa Betty'Eujlde______ I^t HjTiicutt Sandra Aithmy_ Et. ^trice Read Timifeynie Carol Oooper JcdLe I. Carter Tteacher IfeadEc Ifeacfier Iteacher Iteacher Daadiec.. _____ Tteadier_________ Qaanmlty Camnte------- Cananily--------- SeogitY Offijgec MlfegXeaaeec. ^Baneot_______ Harem .flSES^._________ __________ Bacient nHinFm_______ BtBineaa Baaineaa_______ EUsanass R.Kdrefa JGlllflS--------- ErJnrijRl____. eCected U. X X X i i i  APPOINTBtJ U_ Y Y___ JU. Ji____ JL- U_ X JU JU i- ji__ X- X  X X RACE Ji-i- i___ JB___ JU- ja____ .fl JO------ .a__- .K_ B . .u_ x.-_ Ji. K u E_^_ JixZ B ' B OeiOER j:_ lU. JEJU. F M JU  JU ..BLU- JU JU JU X-:* T F F  -F_ F - JU F F ' JU F  M I f  i I {  fcif wampte\n1 ** e\u0026lt;lt tapoher, toocnet. (fina cown* \u0026lt;**i Upport Uff, ate. \u0026gt; IM all posJUona hldCAMPUS LEADERSHIP TEAM VERIFICATION FORft^i 1999-2000  I I Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Name of Team Member Brown, Dr. Linda Biggs, LaGail Position(a) Elected Appointed Race Gendet 11c me Brown, Debbi Carr, David Fuller. Danny Hampton, Vannessa Henry, Sarah Hobbs, Pam Jackson. Christy Johnson, Nancy Lee, Chris Lusk, Jennifer McNeal, Marie Mitchell, Derrick Picard, Dick Randolph, Myra Thomas, Dr. Billy Thompson. Carol Principal,Chairperson Communications Teacher, Student Teacher Supv._________ PTSA President________ Community/Twin Lake Assoc. Rep. Science Depl. Chair Math Dept. Chair. Math Vertical Team Steering Committee Member______ E nglish Teacher__________ Journalism Teacher. ACT Coordinator Math Teacher. Student Teacher Supv., Math Vertical Team Steering Committee Member______ Guidance Secretary______ Science Teacher_____ German Teacher, SAP Coordinator, Pupil Services______________ Broker___________________ Junior Class President Science Teacher Community Rep., Parent Community Rcp./UAMS Senior Class Rep._______ X X X X X X ......X x\" X X X X X X 'X X X X w B F F\n227-j\ni 834-1: I 56W 3247 Work Phone 226-3000 228-3000 W-' B  w-  B B  V\\1 . W . W W W B B B S W ' F tfessTssgs M M 'f' F F F F M F F M M F M F ! a i/J 0\n!224- 5085 247-6391 224-5085 '27 \u0026gt;Q2- g25' 758 604- I 4690 ri9'54 4371 6141 7498 127 0995 7731 224^4713 ^435|2996 |6a6|6598 19324150 738)5737 221|3322 223|8919 I I I I I I I li 228-3000 228-3000 228-3000 228-3006 228-3000 '228-3000 228-3000 228-3000' 324-0511 228-3000 835-4399 296-1397I ix'on Cloverdale Academy Uto a HAGE 01 Campus Leadership Team William Andnsss Sarah Shutte Andrew Bennctt Kenneth Fishe- Michael Jeffers Sharon Harris David Patterson Carolyn Lamb Karen Greenlee Ann Firestone Mona Briggs Frank Adcock Pamela Adcock 6300 Hinkson Road Phhno Campus LeadershfpTeamVenfic^ 1999-2000 Signature of PrtncSpel. polltan Career \u0026amp; Technical Center ... NAfZS'Sp team member Laurie Prather Carl Grummer_____ Mitchell Perry Bill Nolem Janey Lawson Chris Ames Stacy Blacknall .. POSITION Teacher Teacher Teacher Bus. Partner Parent________ Appt. Coor. -gpTupt S.nec. ELEdtED (ohaok) X X X appointed (ablotO RACE A L X X V B V B W GENDER ________ M M F, M ________ for exatapl*\n1\" gad# leather, algebr* teacher, slasrlng oommlnee ehalf. support slaft, eto, - list all positions hsW11/03/1399 10:23 3242032 LRSD PAi3E 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Signature of Principal C^li. hKi. ^^0 ID.L^ .aj^2 i NAME OF team MEMBER*- hICUT. 4 H JIRaj- -U.u.\u0026lt;rn i_i POSITION l-.ou:i. iC -QtxH'ki e.3 Prinripryg Cinytc-Lr ... _ ELECTED (check) APPOINTED (check) / RACE GENDER LiC'iijvc Po LLi i I CfiYVMYMmitc LsnJi/- y / J 10 IkL l_ A J^4v'e/-lc.T3a r.Q^. V^On-^rrv Hr\\\u0026gt; Kj I icmiA ADn-Ce.i4i-Fieri idi inm'i SiuebK-k ' L Jibf^n ^urq-g ^ rr-^ L Ca r r XtQ ncu j\u0026amp;n fnaoi KflAW-/k rntinTG^ -AHbirr nil\nilin TrygciCjifyB s^^-fuJieo-Chciir ^brl  use k ^nc-ini,Al^ -L^vtin J'lVl IJ .1-- k^lii^K. AV-f- Cwt r'lf uOuivA cy J. \u0026lt;1 (I tl (I b () I) \u0026gt;1 II I -4- -ki- I-A-^ i: Lukin lo fe -^. r___ -E___ JE___ _E___ JL__ m__ J3Q__ JL__ ___ jn___ F___ -in__ -in__ JOi__ -E___ J___ -E___ rn__ I IjJ. - F Tor example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee cnsir. support staff, etc, - list all positions heldCampus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Signature of Principal J NAME OF TEAM MEMBE.R 'POSITION Id ELECTED (check) APPOINTED! RACE (check) GENDER 2 Id M. Id Ld Bixkt A/L^\u0026amp; f- \\ /O -5 itkt fb iJd. -i id id ~/5 Id Id P P F p F F rd F F P P P far example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, Steering committee chair, suppo,! staff, etc. - list all positions held Henderson Health Sciences Magnet Middle School CAMPUS LEADERSHIP TEAM VERIFICATION FORM School Hsnderson HSM Middle School 1999-2000 School Year Name of Team Member Larry Buck (WM) Sue Stowers (WF) Judith Murray (WF) Carolyn Slater (BF)~ Teretha Kelly (BF) Vicki ElUs (BF) Kathy Tatum ( BF) Melanie Smith (BF) Mary Whitlow (WF) Barbara Hannahs (WF) Louie Lewis (BM) Annita Paul (WF) Jackie Moore (BF) Mike Ciowers (WM) Leta Anthony (BF) Mike Thrasher (BM) Sherry Daughtery (BF) Position Chairman Teacher/Certified T eacher/Certlfied Teacher/Certified Teacher/Certified Teacher/ Certified Teacher/Certified Teacher/Certified Teacher/Certified Teacher/Certified Teacher/Certified Central Office Parent ~~ Parent______ Business Business Non-Certifled Elected Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes  Yes Yes Yes Yes Appointed Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Signature (Pri^tsfpal) rs___ Campus Leadership Team 1999-2000 Name of Team Member Green, Connie_______ Moseley, Fran________ Peoples, Linda_______ Boykin, Patricia_______ Picker, Diane________ Fullerton, Jim________ Cameron, Stella______ Longinotti, Joe_______ Swinney, Joyce______ Gullett, Randy________ Betton, Sherry_______ Milligan, Jennifer_____ Ellington, Jeff________- Dorris, Shannon_____ Wallace, Pam________ Hudson, Valerie______ Thompson, Lauren Lowe, Kenyon________ Campbell, Heidi_______ Cleveland, Ellean_____ Booth, Virginia Position Teacher Teacher Teacher Administrator Community Administrator P.I.E. Rep. Parent Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Broker Student Student Teacher Administrator Teacher Elected X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Appointed X X X X XCampus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Horace Mann Arts/Sclence Middle School *1, Signature of Principal Dr. Brenda JameW, Principal NAME OF TEAM MEMBER * Baker, Frank Briggs, Demetria Bumpers, Bonnie Duerr, Donna Fleming, Linda Fletcher, Danny Gilbert-Wise, Barbara Harper, Drew Hayes, Stella Henry, Vai Holt, Dee Ann Jasper, Thelma Johnson, Lorraine Penn-Norman, Kathy Redmond, Wendell Weatherford, Tory James, Brenda 'POSITION ELECTED (check) Teacher Parent Teacher. Administrator Teacher Teacher Teacher Community Teacher ' Community Teacher Parent Teacher Coordinator - Teacher Student Administrator X X X X X X X X 504 X appointed race (check) X X X X X X X X 02 01 01 02 01 02 02 01 01 02 02 01 02 01 02 for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, stipport staff, etc. - list all positions held GENDER M F F F7 M F M F M F F F F M F /I I Signature of Principal a J 0 NAME OF TEAM MEMBER POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER (check) (check) Nancy Rousseau Ann Blaylock Elizabeth Lucker Kathy Jarrett Calvin Smith Peggy Hawthorne Bryan Hall Carolyn Williams Jean Givens Libby Thalheimer Margaret Lewis Laura Doramus Jim Metzger Renee Dickins Lee Thompson Betty Mitchell Beth Munson Sammy Grandy Lynn Cardin Janet Buford LB Easter Rick Woole Renee Bennett principal assistant principal broker non-certifiedZregistrar non-certified/custodian counselor student council president parent parent/PTA co-president parent/PTA co-president parent parent_____________ business' representative community representative science teacher - 6th fecial needs teacher English teacher - 7th math teacher - 7th English teacher - Sth social studies - Sth art teacher 6-8th math teacher - Sth business teacher 6-8th X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X W W W B \\N W B B B W W W B W W B for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, ^c. - list all positions held F F F F M F M F F F F F M F M F F M F F M M F Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 19992000 Signature of Principal School Southwest Middle,School NAME OF TEAM MEMBER'. Mark Clarlc Mahle Collins Cathy Dillon Regina Ezell Stephanie Jones Carolyn Jennings Sandra Pearson Walter Rowe Claudia Smith Cliristopher Kline Gloria Owens Betty Larry Versie Burgess________ Dr. Scotty Glaaco Elizabeth Willingham Pl 1T1ON ELECTED' (check) Math Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher J-S\u0026amp;SllgL Teacher  ___ ____ ^Tgacher Teacher ' Teacher Parent Parent JUU Conimunitv X ___ 2. .X_____ .X. i 25. .X.___ A__ APPOliTrffl RACE . (check) X X ...-X I I  P-GENDER I T----- W A i. i JI Ji. ....ja__ JI .K 44. .... M jE. _E. JE Jd. X___ p X X ------.... ( I ..J. m,nittee chair. support staff, e-,c, _ list jn positions held I I I .J 11/03/1333 11:18 3242032 LRSD PAGE 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Signature of Principal NAME OF - TEAM MSXBER J ~J POSITION Lt2l ELECTED lAPPOINTEi RACE GENDER (check) )(-cJ rk \u0026gt; enf' }\\(^f V 'UL Yh I^QC kr (check) CO hk 7a eh r^o-' /ji-rrn TaliXirm' rka (\u0026gt;7 V- b.nc.ei-^. ICA E tr U2 Ccn a'i e l/on( jn (?5anc T^zn ^....jh 'i. Pen-h A ix\nLl2 U '7df\\o(er ('Yom' I (J! 5(yr.5 akY nJ J aC h '?q1 ^,i..____' \u0026lt;J .f^Aina Yam ,g^ryimiOTi ^Tx lOcV'y'h /Kraih Tt hk ( iec{dx?f'. ~reac K(- K E 'ler example: Is) grade teacher, algebra tsachsr, stsehna coirmittse chair, support staff, etc. - list all poslSons held f- k 'h I \"T F f=^- IpT..  little rock school DISTRICT Baseline Elementary School fosition Number Title Race Gender Eleanor Cox, Principal 1 Chairman B F Certified Teacher Primary Brenda Thomas Marilyn James. 2 Elected Elected Elected W B F P Certified Teacher Intermediate Brooklyn Grimm Rebekah Martin Elected Elected W W F F Certified Specialist Teacher Phontonia Belin Elected B F Central Office Eddie McCoy Appointed U F Parent Rev, Roosvclt Bowman Kelli MePhearson Appointed Appointed B B M F ! Business Wal-Mart Randy Ilarryman Appointed W M Comniiiiiity James Killion Appointed B M 3623 Bassllno Road Phone 570-4150 Little Rock. Arkansas 72209 04/83/2000 14:10 3242100 BOOKER PAGE 02 '4 Campus Uadarship T am Varificertion Form 1999-2000 School Booker Arts M\u0026lt;wn*t Signature of Principal NAME OF TEAM MEMBER Rita Bledsoe POSr ION Cheryl A. Carson Susan Coif ord Yolanda Pavia Ernie Dotson Janie Fletcher Moggie Hawkins Dorrell Hayden 6ail Hester Tanony Higdon Atoyrean Johnson Mary McMoiron Patsy Middleton Darryl Powell Tammy Sexton Tracy Tucker Joyce Willingham Mualc/Or .hestro Sped list Print ggl___ s* Srade regehar 1 nide reacher Business Aember, EMt BA_______ For nt______ Communih Member, 21** 5 reet Neighbarl xtd Alert Cei- 'er ___ _ A*** grade Teacher ______ Bn. r_______ 2\"grad Teacher 5* 6rmt Teacher Resourca Teacher Technok jy Center Ass itant _______ Po gnt Klndergor en Teacher 3'* grod\nTeacher Assistar r Principal ELECTED (check) X appointed (check) RACE GENOER is- X X X X )(. X X X X X X X X X B F W W B 8 W B B W B B W yfi/ 3 \"forexomple\n1** grade te -cher, algebra teacher, steering committee choir, s^jpart staff, etc. - Ils f all positions held F F F P F F M F F F F F M p F F lA\n4 ?? \"I Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Brady Elementary Signature of Principal NAME OF 'POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER TEAM MEMBER (check) (check) Collette Bell Christiann Daniel Teacher Counselor X W XF Linda Rose Teacher W F Cheri Washburn SFA Coordinator w F JoAnn White Parent F Mary Wood Beth Boyd Xaflchs.r______ Community PTE X X W F Lynda Elledge Parent X W F Becky Dugan X W F Morlin McCoy Ada Keown Teacher Broker Principal X X B XF for example: 1 st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. - list all positions held 11/03/19'33 10:43 3242032 LRSD PAGE 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School ')' i\nSignature of Principal Ui NAMEOPy TEAM MEMBER Res OSITION Elected (check) APPOINTED RACE GENDER K, (check) Raak-C. pthhl-e- lab landra l^el lb i (n $i/m~i~H4 Re.^Q\u0026gt;^\u0026lt;r(jL-'t7Jar, KifTisfi^, TcM R7hK, /^'hb R, fl-' gj ,  -|o 'kC gf^palA-^^, iriah. \\a/ saL ysL o J )) 11 F M. P for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committsa chair, support staff, etc. - list ail positions heldCampus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School: Cloverdale Elementary School Signature of PrincipaL\u0026gt;^\n^^^zxZ Name T. Dockett-Wilson C. Lacy K. Daneshmandi C. Langston D. White B. Banks K. Shuffield F. Fields L. Taylor J. Williams L. Young T. Brown C. Johnson Position Music Teacher Counselor Title I Inst. Aide ALC Teacher 5* Gr. Teacher Gr. Teacher Principal Asst. Principal Community Rep Parent Parent Community Rep Elected X X X X X X 'X X X Appointed X X X Race B B W B B B W B W B B B B Gender F F F M M F F M M F F F MDodd Elementary School TogBthsr building 3 bsttGr tomorrow, one child 3t 3 tims CAMPUS LEADERSHIP TEAM 1999-2000 VALERIE HARE SHERRY CHAMBERS ALICIA RANKIN CINDY PRICE MARTHA LOWE PAM MOORE JO CARSON SALLY MCGOWAN DIANE VIEBOCHER REGGIE MORRISON ELNA HASBERRY BARB KENNEDY BF WF WF WF WF BF BF WF WF BM BF WF KTEACHER 1ST GR 4 GR RESOURCE COUNSELOR 2 YRS NEW (1 YR) 2 YRS 2 YRS. 2 YRS. INSTRUCTIONAL AIDE APPOINTED MEMBER-AT-LARGE PARENT PARENT COMMUNITY BUSINESS BROKER MEDIA SPEC. APPOINTED APPOINTED APPOINTED APPOINTED LRSD APPOINTED FAITH DONOVAN WF PRINCIPAL DODD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION APPOINTED TO SERVE WITH ROTATING REPRESENTATION ON THE CLT. 6423 Stagecoach Road Phone 455-7430 I ittio Rnr'k 7oonzi PAGE 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 Signature of Principal School Fair Park Elementary ' NAME OF-team member Samuel Branch______ Tina Poacher_____ Boyce Pearson Rosie Powell Opal Rice Fred Chilcote Lucille.Montgomery Nadine Fitzpa tri c,)t Loretta Alexander Ben Jones ^dSffldN ELECTED (appointed RACS IgENDST (chsck) Erincipal Teacher -Teacher  Teac-her Teacher (check) X X XX X X Paraprofesgicnal Business Perf.nr r business Partner Patron X X X 02  01 112_ Q2 01 01 02 02___ 02__ 01 .. M . F M F F M F _E_ F M 'foe example: i t grade teacher, aigebni teacher, steering eommlnae cnalr, cvpport staff, etc. - Mt all positions (laid Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School FOREST PARK ELEMENTARY Signature of Principal JU. NAME OF team member THERESA KETCHER'. ELEANOR COLEMAN MARY BOYCE PAIGE WESTBROOK BARBARA MCBRIDE LAURA DORAMUS  ALLEN BULLARD Betty ann buliard SUSAN BAUMAN JENNIFER BALLARD *i^osiTroN PRINCIPAL________ counselor_______ media SPECIALIST THIRD GRADE TEA, SPEECH THERAPIST PARENT COMMUNITY_________ COMMUNITY SECOND GRAPE TEA fifth grade' tea. ELECTED (check) X X X X S^POINT^DJ Ra6e (checic) X___ X X 'Sender w W R w w ____ V! . W- . for oxompla.' 1t grade [eacher, algeto taacfier, sieeiing commlttae chair. uppons(a, etc. - uat all positions held F F F 1. F M JE. F F I ZflLRSD PA' 02/02 Campua Leadership Team Verification Form ie9$-2000 School ___________(L/fyy'Ay Marcy Signaiurt of Principal  ~\"NXue'5F'~- ,.. TE^ MEMBER C^elL^unhfir POSITION jUfin IVlby. ,_,_.. ELECTED \u0026lt;!*e0 APPOINTED lwW 'I r 1^., I ^yyaii//er ___UA^ur.. ^fdry/u)' ----------------- V y- ... far eiampie: 1* gad* tachf, tigabra laiehar, aieerina cammiif** chair, *ut\u0026gt;prt ataff, *to - Hat iK peaitjona hid RACE -A- ML. MM A- JiL. M. L JiL QFNDER __ ..^A__ _ JL___ A....._. .E..... F_____ ML___ F M.___Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School FULBRIGHT ELEMENTARY Signature of Principal NAME OF TEAM MEMBER Almond, Greg Carter, Karen Chucoski, Sharon Gaddie Olivia POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER (check) Community Administrator PTA (check) X W W , M F X W F Griffith, LeeAnn Hall, Carolyn Hilburn, Karla Kriz, John Kurrus, Virginia Mitchell, Deborah Pittman, Charlotte Robinson, Steve Sanders, Belinda Smith, Rhonda______ Williams, Irish Wilson, Brenda Sth Gr Teacher Speech Therapist Title I Community Parent Parent Administrator Instructional Aide 5th Gr Teacher Parent Counselor Sth Gr Teacher Parent X X X X i -X X X X X X W W W W ' W - B - B B B-B'^ for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. - list all positiens held F F F E M  F F M F ZF F Campus Verification of Development of a Campus Leadership Plan Campus GARLAND ACajJSMY Date OCTOBER 15, 199S Enter below the dates the following action occurred: Announced public meeting(s) of proposed Campus Leadership Team and review of policy establishing same. District review and / or adoption of Campus Leadership Team Composition. Attach evidence or broad based communications to all campus staff and to the general campus community regarding the campus team composition and related procedures for a campus leadership team. Affix the following signatures to indicate support and involvement of the principal, and members of the campus collaborative committee who assisted the principal in the design of the campus team composition which is consistent with district guidelines. Principal ____Parent Rep.  __ Teacher Community Rep. ' I The campus collaborative committee may be smaller or larger at the discretion of the campus principal. Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 a '3 Signature of Principal School Geyer Springs Elementary School ' 3 ' c, { NAME OF ________ TEAM MEMBER Hall, Donna Bohra, Becky Stubblefield, Evelyn Dumas, Jo Parker, Linda Graves, MicheUe Gilbert, Jean Frazier, Raymond Eaton, Doug Dickerson, Cameshia Humphreys, Joa (Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association) Crawford, Maria (Little Rock Water Works)_______________ *POSITION ELECTED (check) APPOINTED (check) RACE GENDER Principal 3\"* Grade Teacher 5* Grade Teacher Reading Specialist Counselor Media Specialist Resource Specialist Paraprofessional Broker Parent Community Community X X X X X X X X X X X *for example: 1** grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc.  list all positions held B O B t B B -V B W B B ' F F F F F F F M M F F F .-1 Campus Leadership Team Verification } Form 1999-2000 f: 1 t Signature of Princi name of Team ___ Member Altheimer, Donald Branch, Susan Dickson, Dr, Betty Gray, Alvin Gulden, Carla Hedges, Jon Huffman, Kelty Johnson, Jill Luzzi, Pat Parkhurst, Liz Skarda, Toni Vena, Sera Rynders, Diane School Gibbs Magnet School Position Elected (check) Parent Teacher Community Parent Parent Parent Teacher Teacher Teacher Parent Teacher Parent Broker Appointed (check) X Race Gender X X. y X X ~~X ~X X X X 'x B b \"b^ \"B-w 'w~ 'w~ M V 'V M ~F~ 'y v y y y Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Jefferson School ! i Signature of Principal NAME OF TEAM MEMBER  Su.san Beard Lucy Rhodes______ Brenda Dorman Becky Ramsey Meg Lankford Kristin Compton -Cheryl Crntckpr Annie Roas Karin McAtee_____ Valerie Jones_ Claudia Courtway Linda Smith Xan-Tii ght_______ -V.aJies.sa -Jackson -Ji.nt Ingram______ Ronnie Stone Rene Kovach positionT ELECTED (check) APPOINTEi RACE GENDER (check) Pri nci p.a.1. Counselor X-inHerg teache'~ lst.gr. teacher 2nd gr. teache 3ra-Xr^- teacher ird ...jjx 4 th gr teache teache-\nETC teacher Parapro./Parent PTA Pres. PTA Pres._______ Cnmmiin-ity Rep Parent_________ Parent________ Sp.Ed. teacher Di St Rap X X X X X X X X X X X X F i X X X X X L_ w . W . - X VI w B - VI isL ja. K vr Jii- for example: is\ngrade teacher, algebra teacher, stoorihg commItTae chair, suppoh Stan. etc. - list ar pojiiiors held X F F z X X F F F X X K M -11/03/1999 11:13 3'242032 LRSD PAGE 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School KING MAGNET i Signature of Principal' -A NAME OP - TEAM MEMBER Tyrone Harris___ Mary Lou Kahler Virginia Johnson Ann Gregory Mary Zies_______ Beverly Hines Monica Norwood Candi VanPatter Kiffany Pride Greg Harris Minnie Washington Cheryl Wilburn Chris Cerrato____ Scott Allen______ Dr. Rex Horne Evan Lee________ Ira Betton Joyclyn Davis 'POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER (check) (check) Principal Asst. Prineinal Broker Counselor_____ Music Spec. PK  Teacher 2nd - Teacher 4th  Teacher 5th Teacher 3rd  Teaciier Paraprofessiona Parent Parent PIE Community Student Title I Parent X i X X 11 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B Jj. W W B w .B_ B B B - W w IL. SL. B \"for example: 1st grads teacher, algebra teacher, aieering committee chair, support staff, etc. list all positions held u. _X F __ E _X __ E JL M Z F JI Jt -tL Jd. X X 11/03/1999 ,11:07 I I I 3242032 LRSD Campus Leadership Team Verification Foirm 1999*2000 School Mv(xhel\\fal c, Signature Of Pnndipel nam?'5f TEAM MEMBER POSITION I: PAGE 01/01 ij r, F-G ELECTED (check) APP\u0026lt; lit:\u0026gt; INTO' tck) GENb^f \\Dto _ dn C.li.7.-Li Tdnnrxfi GiiA^e-nS ______ /_'i r\\Ar^ CAtAujf ll .dn. -} .ri nr. j...pod. dXrLcKejC ^Tjefi.Vh-g.ic_ A enc Vhe-r \"TgOLcJiey 1 -r. (I 'SiiA/ika ( G/j picr\\6 n Tdci/f ~Wh KiiAdi-s^ \\/6hn5txn..- .' f*/! r V -g r P I g -cot I* w w w w _J2l 1 X X i i I F F F F F F F I 4 iI J. i i t 1 i at ximpls- lat smde teacher, algebra teacher, iiL Ing committee chair. support start, etc. - list all positions heW :1 FROM\nMCDERMOTT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL id! PHONE NO. : 501 2283104 Nov. 04 1999 03:30PM P2 Ui/Wl Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 Signature of Principal nam of TEAM MEMBER Ashley. Virginia R Kemp,. LangJte . Mounger, Anita McCarther. Gerri Washington, Marv Ann Hbvt, Lori Rdyij , .'Vefa .Jaui'tlii, Eiffilifa James. Suzie O'Neal. Erica Dial, Darlene Swatv, Nancy Kitchen, Eton, School Mr.npT-mnt-t POSITION ELECTED (eh*cK) APPOINTEI (check) RACE GENDER n Admim* gtrahrn- Admin-i ^ttrAhor Teacher TearbAr______ Teacher_______ Jearher_______ Jle^cher P^T-Pnt ______ Brnkej:_______ _ Parent .Teacher_______ Teacher Teacher_______ Siirpert Staff X X I ) X X XX X X X-JU. :iL-  R lU R.. X_ W ' _ for cxampia\ntsi grade teacher, algeora teacher, siaeriHg commlitae chair, support Starr, etc. -nat an positions held XX  X . x_ F _ _ _ _ M 11/03/1399 113:49 3242032 LRSD PAGE 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Signature of Principal uXWMntuan*! NAME OF POSITION TEAM MEMBER ELECTED (check) APPOINTED RACE (check) GENDER 7\u0026lt;sU:r/L _ 3^L^.. .Jj. J2:\u0026gt;ahhxl. .J\u0026amp;rrjLie^______ Par/. P^re'?t\np ____!(d_ nt _ \u0026lt; _ M. 0/  _______ M. M M. r for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering commIttaB chair, support staff, etc. - list all oo,sitions haW FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO,\nNov. 05 1999 11:21AM P2 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Hi-j-cLell AcqJ signature of Principel NAME OF TEAM MEMBER POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE ^SNibER uP (check) (check) DcciCio Smif-k Riclpey 3a citron Keicq Sml+K Soe VJatts Connie P r I ncj p a! P\u0026lt;Xr\u0026lt;:n+ /pTft Pres, B 6 fA M Fr-ed Sn I'+K ftlice B\u0026lt;'Q4ber! P^ir-en-V S'+udef^+ C\u0026lt;arnrmrtfi'Y Re, lie P- \"Teacher TtA^-or 4 61a^y$ CoiemaA \"TRAlma 4eQ\u0026lt;c-ln. F +AcJne\u0026gt;- J B 6 6  F F F F Susan Lofsbcn-t fAar^f'e+ Dcloris IverjHon 4-^o.g-lner Eiiuc +ea.cFe{- S\u0026gt;\u0026gt;ppor-+ S+i^pf B } B , VJ. 6 N\\ F r F \"ter example: 1st jrade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. - list an positions helduampus Leaaersnip leam veritication horm Otter Creek Elementary Signature of Principal NAMS OF'^ TEAM MEMBER School POSITION ELECTED (check) APPO' \"CE / GENDER Re.becca'TCesBinger Vickye Mitchell Beverly Kinneman Ettatricia Clark Shana Young Zeornee\" Hert.s Greg Stutts Denise Nunnlev Tommy Hodges Truman Ball______ Sarah Cole Title I Teacher First Grade Teacher Gifted/Taiented / XX J JA Vi Kindergarten TeacIer X Counselor Broker Parent Parent_____________ ComrmmityZBusinea Communitv/Business Student (Grade 5) X X X X. X V, F M B W W W far example' 1st grads teacher, algsbre teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. - list all positions held F M-M F CAMPUS LEADERSHIP TEAM VERIFICATION FORM SCHOOL: PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 1999-2000 Signature of Principal Name of Team Member Lillie Carter Jamie Lou Neal Yvette Peterson Eva Maeweather Terrie Davis Position Principal K-Teacher 1 Grade Teacher 2\"* Grade Teacher Grade Teacher Elected Appointed Race/Gender B/F W/F B/F B/F B/F V-- X X X X / t s i i Pat Yates d\"*\" Grade Teacher X W/F , Sandra Fountain Carol Blann Mary Gillespie Laura Beth Arnold Toni White Stacy Pittman Paul Fisher Robin Borne' Tony Woodell Marion Woods 5* Grade Teacher Resource Teacher Media Specialist E.T.C. Teacher Instructional Aide Parent Parent Business Community Broker X X X X X X X X X X W/F W/F W/F W/F B/F W/F B/M W/M, W/M B/F1/03/1999 11:00 3242032 LRSD PAGE 01/01 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Rightsell Academy Signature of Principal Sharon A. Brooks .^/\\\u0026lt;5r- 1 . 2 , 3 . 4. 5 . NAME OF POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER TEAM MEMBER Sharon A. Brooks Mac Huffman Principal Broker (check) (check) X B F W M Stephanie Neal Sharon Faiilkenhe Title I 5th Gr. Teacher X, X B W F F Frenzella Dodson K Teacher X B F 6 . Barbara Fincher 2nd Gr. Teacher X W F 1 . 8. 9. JLaafl-.ELittake.r------ Margaret Williams Pat Holder Curriculum Spec. Counselor X X B B F F Parent X B Z TO. Beverly Jones 11. Charles Ruth 12. Lucious Powell 13. Dladra Lindsey 14. Chasity Rosby Parent X B Z Community Rep. Business Rep. Non-Certified X X B B Student X z B K JI F F far example\n1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. ~ list all positions held Campus Leadership Team Verification Form School: Rockefeller 1999 -2000 Name of Team Member _(Please Type) Position Elected | Appointed (Choose One) Race Gender Anne Mangan Eloise Booth Principal X W F Dana Keller Ann Larkowski Beth Foti Valencia Butts Barbi Freiermuth Debbie Gross Teri Frankum Melvia Mathis Assistant Principal Supt. CLT Representative COE Chairperson EC Teacher Representative EC Teacher Representative Primary Teacher Rep, Primary Teacher Rep. Intermediate Teacher Rep. Specialist Representative X X X X X X X X X B w . w W B w w w B F F F F F F F F F Coreen Frasier Specialist Representative X w F Martha Roberts EC Coordinator X w F Vivian Mangan Rick Taylor Parent/P.T.A. President X w F Business Partner X w M Mary Kay Roe Theme Specialist X w F Candy Blackwell Smart Start Rep. X w F Rose Mitchell Erma Jackson Fred Allen Non-Certified Staff Rep. Non-Certified Staff Rep. Business Partner X X X B B B F F M Father Kirtley Yearwood Community Leader X B M Fay and Donald McTyer . Parents X B/B M/F Pat Price Kathy Wells LRSD Broker X w F Downtown Neighborhood Association W F J Campus Leadership Team Verification Form School Romine Interdlst rlct 1999 - 2000 Name of Team Member - (Please Type) Position Elected/AppoinTed 'i (Check One) -LilJ.ic, Scii1]________ -Itidrmc.. Lane lev Jacque Rain^'aier _^loris Banks Er.lrif 1\nvi! -laaiiisr. Teachc\nr Teacher - Ch 1 V i n Ch r_l_cj_-_ onH)ii1f,r....Sr)eci?il i-0 Tout iL Phillip'^ JQrjna lliinrap ____ -Mr,.. Sandy Becker - Rev. Charles McAdtJo ^/XMaili_SjMidLaLlsi ------- tjlialC-Special isi- Parent Coniniunii y ssi(? Middlei_i.m Pa' ric ia Phill ius - .-Br/Acr___ G/T SperlHl ist____ fa=iggy Car.cnU....... Jlarcnt. Signature (Principal) ii/oj/ ioao Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School TERRY ELHyENTARY SCHOOL\nSignature ot Principal name of TEAM MEMBER  NANCY ACRE. ANNA TATUM JOYCE ALT.FY ANN MOORE TERESA COOK DOROTHY MALONE. BRENDA OSBORNE BEVERLY ROBINSON MARGO ROWE JANA TERRI ANDERSON ED WILLIAMS BARBARA SCHIRACK KELLY WHITEHORN iTiE mSLEY NICHOLE HENDERSON poSItioH PPTMPTPM ELECTED lA^PdlbiTE GENOfeb {chck) (chok) 1ST GR. TEACHER iHt. GR  TEACHER MEDIA SPECIALIST 4th GR. TEACHER Sth GR. TEACHER 00UNSEU3R title I - PTA PRESIDENT PARENT DIBTRICT-RRQKER iwa:*.awi PTA VICE_PRES BI,1SINE.S.S,.BEP parent Z X Ji. X JL X Z X J z X Z WH BL BL WH ZL ZH. JSH. WH JlQL id jFjH WH BL 'for xamels: 1st grade laachor, BlgsOrs teacfiar, steering cornminee chelr, support eteff, etc, - net at) positions hew F E . F  Z F JE. z F Z z z Z Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School WakpflplH__RI pmon t- ary Signature of Principal I . NAME OF TEAM MEMBER -T.i 11. i, a Ka.nk.s_____ :: -Barbara_ F tynar t_____ Sita Montgomery Sherry Trim1inc\nrin Dorothy Davis______ Julie Wiedover Shirley Gordon Joy Davidson________ Raymond House_______ Greg Hughes_________ Heather Gage_____ Mary Jane Cheatham Gary Patterson POSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER (check) (check) E-rimary Teachcr^ .. Primary Toarhor Intermediate  Tntprmprli at-p  xSiinnnrt Tparhpr Central Offire Non-certified Community Person Parent_______ Parent______ P.artner -in Edur,, Principal______ Girls \u0026amp; Boys Cl uh X X X X X X X 112 Bl B2 Bl B2 Bi 02 B2 02 BZ Bi Bi Bi z X X . z F i X K X Z K for example: 1 st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. -- list all positions held Booker T. Washington Magnet School Campus Leadership Team 1999-2000  + Gwen Strong-Zeigler + Johnny Neeley + Katherine Snyder Principal, Washington Magnet Assistant Principal, Washington Magnet Assistant Principal, Washington Magnet * Lucy Neal Broker, Information Services, LRSD * Ruben Johnson * Carolyn Williams PTA Co-President, Washington Magnet PTA Co-President, Washington Magnet * Stephanie Dhonau Community Representative, Division of International and Second Language Studies, UALR * Kelly Robbins\nCommunity Representative Arkansas Forestry Association * Dr, Katherine Mitchell Community Representative LRSD Board of Directors W atershed Proj ect * Becky Ramsey Community Representative Aerospace Education Center \u0026lt; Barbara Brown \u0026lt; Rebecca Broussard \u0026lt; Tommie Walker \u0026gt; Darrick Williams \u0026gt; Katina Ray \u0026gt; Linda Umerah * Shantail Miller First Grade Teacher, Washington Magnet Kindergarten Teacher, Washington Magnet Fifth Grade Teacher, Washington Magnet Third Grade Teacher, Washington Magnet Fourth Grade Teacher, Washington Magnet Second Grade Teacher, Washington Magnet Technology Specialist, Washington Magnet Appointed Position * Ex-Officio Member + Elected Position  Tenn Ends June 2000 \u0026lt; Elected Position - Term Ends June 2001 \u0026gt;Booker T, Washington Magnet School Campus Leadership Team Meeting Agenda November 4,1999 I. IL m. IV. V. VI. VII. Welcome - Gwen Strong-Zeigler Introduction of Members - Danick Williams School Improvement Plan A. Introductory Statements - Katina Ray  B. Priority #1 - Reading and Language Arts  Linda Umerah C. Priority #2 - Mathematics - Barbara Brown D. Priority #3 - Science - Rebecca Broussard E. Priority #4 English as Second Language (ESL) Newcomer Program  Shantail Miller F. Plan Evaluation-Katherine Snyder Extended Year / Year Round-School  Paulette Den son Campus Work Audit - Tommie Walker Assignments for Future Meetings - Katina Ray Other BusinessTo: Campus Leadership Team Members From\nG. S. Zeigler Subject: CLT Meeting Dates The following dates have been established for Campus Leadership Team monthly meetings: November 4, 1999 December 2, 1999 January 6, 2000 February 3, 2000 March 2, 2000 April 6, 2000 May 4,2000 June 2,2000 The meetings will begin at 2:45 in the Washington Media Center. If you cannot attend please make certain that you contact Gwen Strong-Zeigler at 501/324-2470. I am looking forward to working with each of you this school year. Working on this team promises to be a challenging and worthwhile experience.04/04/2000 14:36 3242032 LRSD PAGE 02/02 Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Signature of Principal NAME OF ________TEAM MEMBER Janice Anderson ^ara Brown Maraaret Dawson Karen Ditto Mary Ann Forrest Sandra Hinson Paulette Martin Michael Oliver Paula Kamsey Vera Robinson Marvin Henderson' POSITION Tcac.her-5 th Teacher-4Y0 TcachGr-2nd Teacher-3rd Teacher-4Y0 Broker Principal Counselor PTA Pres. ELECTED (eMO X X X X X X APPOIHTED {otweW X X X Z. RACE W W B W w VI B _IL^ GENDER F F F F __ F F .a.__ F F....... _a__ \"fee amsli l\" Bii t*ehr, algebra toaoher, steering committee chair. uppori staff, etc. - Sat ill poaltiorM heW Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1S99-2000 NAME OF Western Hills Elementary Signature of Principal School 'OSITION ELECTED APPOINTED RACE GENDER TEAM MEMBER (check) (check) Scott Morgan Jennifer Welborn Principal 1 st Grade VI \"W MT Shirley Thomas Terese Klaus Ruth Anderson 2nd Grade 2nd Grade 3rd Grade B W W F F F Nancy Brandt Ruth Schwerin Librarian Title I W FT Lee Ann Matson Lona Taunton Versie Burgess Broker F Parent Neighborhood W B F F Pam Perry Parent W F for exampla: 1st grade teacfter, algebra teacher, steering eommlttee chair, support staff, etc. - list all positions held Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Williams Traditional Magnet Signature of Principal NAME OF TEAM MEMBER Mary Menking Eunice Thrasher .Wi Hiam.q Behn___________ Barbara .Phr-i clri anri Maryipp- Rnbinann________ Flrirptta Babh.s__________ Ella Moble^r----------- Nancy Mnrtnn_____________ Deborah Tsreal_________ Stephanip Wa 1kpr-Pjmpp Eddy Pphpr.a__________ _ nffirpr Crpo Vint______ Chris- Ra^znolds-------------- Suellen Vann 'POSITION ELECTED (chsck) APPOINTED RACE GENDER Principal/Chairman Vice Principal Certified Member PF___X fdember (^F^fP^y^ber Ie (check) X X W F X X X X ?^ler Y w IL X X M. X X 11 X X X X X P Paronh___________ Parpnt-__________ CnThrmini ty_______ 'Rnoinpgg_______ Central Office X X XX X X wX w 'for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering ccnimittee chair, support staff, etc. - list all positions held M K F Recommended # 1 6 1 2 - 1 1 1 1 TEAM MEMBERS POSITION Principal Assistant Principal P.E. Specialist Music Specialist Gifted/Talented Specialist Kindergarten Specialist r Grade Specialist Curriculum Specialist_____ Paraprofessional Parent Parent Community Business Central Office CAMPUS TEAM MATRIX Of Positions Principal Certified Teachers Central Office _____Parent Business Community Non-certified Staff Assistant Principal NAME Mary Menking Eunice Thrasher William Bobo Barbara Strickland Marylee Robinson Floretta Babbs Ella Mobley Nancy Morton Deborah Isreal Stephanie Walker-Hynes Eddy Peters Officer Greg Vint Chris Reynolds Suellen Vann Position Title Chairman _____Elected_____ Invited/Appointed Appointed Appointed Appointed Elected/Appointed Appointed Membership Required Required Required Required Required Required Optional Optional ADDRESS________ 5 Heritage Court Little Rock, 72211 2000 Dennison Little Rock 72202 13617 Napeleon Rd. Little Rock, 72211 202 East Maddox Jacksonville, 72076 #7 Longfellow Ln Little Rock, 72207 12804 St. Charles Blvd. Little Rock, 72211 11283 Southrid^e Dr. Little Rock, 72212 4710 Westchester Dr. Little Rock, 72212 3812 Wimbledon Loop Little Rock, 72209 5414 Robin Rd. Little Rock, 72204 21 Countryside Cv. Little Rock, 72212 7206 Evergreen Dr. Little Rock, 72207 2516-F Cantrell Rd Little Rock, 72207 21 Winona Dr. Maumelle, 72113 PHONE \" (H) 225-3822 (W)671-6363  (H) 374-0528 (W0671-6363  (H)223-4998 (W)671-6363  (H)982-2308 (W)671-6363  (11)664-2222 (W)671-6363 ' (H)227-5415 (V0671-6363  (H)227-6496 (W)671-6363  (H) 868-4322 (W)671-6363  (H) 455-5503 (W)671-6363  (H) 565-3449 (W)324-2250 (H) 868-6604 (W)664-1004 (H) 664-8660 (W)280-7688 (W)666-9500 (H) (W)324-2020Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Wn.W Er.FMRNTAPV Signature of Principal NAME OF TEAM MEMBER POSITION ELECTED appointed RACE GENDER (check) (check) SUSAN WEST TEACHER MICHELLE DORSEY TEACHER WILLYE TALLEY EDNA SCHOEMAKER ROSEMARY ROLAND GREGORY JONES MARJORIE RIANT KIMBERLY REEVKS TEACHER JEACHER aide ..TEACHER TEACHER. teacher X. X X X X 'for example: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering commlttsa chair, support staff, etc, - list all positions held rjJ./ Ui Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 School Signature of Principal NAME OF -- *Qr*5Cirs\u0026gt;\u0026gt;M POSITION TEAM MEMBER (fAono.. V-^o\u0026lt;jd 'uc\\r\\\u0026lt;s ELECTED (check) APPOINTED (oiieok) RACE GENDER GVYirx. '\u0026lt;f?nA- Laij.rox W\nHFnm5 Norberci Ib/r.sn Vvny'Vw^ Prf V''\"~VfC\u0026gt;.r'T' FF\u0026lt; \\ Ca VA n cF\u0026lt;\u0026gt;' \\ fW/i^ 14. f I iAjrrh^t'A KxvH ~Vtn\\rp. Wi\\So.'i 1 iSr^-n y.\\.i rwxrv-'n L\u0026gt;F4jAWkY\\L_ FV. V-Y N'lriF'Ver Mtcn.b An Aubfe-\\- ' G r CvlOr (A\\\\ kiSW.vip An CVYAA\\\\p,icO VpG A S\\ k\\V'JQ PnuFcA'pgrVi.'^'f AnCr^-Vr-r.rF 5y\u0026lt;-] Qitzbo -Vt^/rbgi ZrT Af^.nrbr=\u0026gt;r Y 1 FoAgrarkrAen FFii fa~br TTAir\\5()nr pGrteAfnA f.mrvA-O-Mff-inV- \\ 1 A UAmb Cm urn \u0026gt; nt bl Ca(F( ParAn-f 'G\u0026gt;?Vv.r\\ ey-s: 5Aa ).r.\\eAnA A, X 1 V. W. :^... FZ r) b w k/ JF F F AX \\aL for exampla: 1st grade teacher, algebra teacher, steering committee chair, support staff, etc. - lie! ell positions held r\" T F F F F !-V\u0026gt;, ______ F O'A t-Campus Leadership Team Verification Form 1999-2000 7 Schooi Alternative Learning Center Signature of Principal ,7( 2=tf NAME OF \\ TEAM MEMBER POSITION ELECTED (check) APPOINTEI (check) RACE GENDE Lloyd Sain, Jr, Sharon Cauley Lee Braden Carol Overton Kay Kimbrough Kelan Watson Otis Banks Michael Reynold Phyllis Hodge s Arlandris Norris *This member changes as a ------nijractoE________ Facilitator Z-gyaprof ess Tonal -Ean'l t' i-a.i-n.- Community/Busin Facilitator Facilitatoi parent Su\u0026lt;jeiiT. result X B X X X B ir. X X .B. B X X X of changin\n/migrating populat W B -B- on K F M F M F M .___ -M---- to_a:id.. from ALC. Of example, tstprade teacher, alpebra teacher, steering cornmitteo chair, support staff, etc. - list all positions heldExhibit No. 66: LI230-90 Program Evaluation for English as a Second Language. I I i k I Program Evaluation For English-as-a Second Language (ESL) School Year: 1999-2000 October 30, 2000 IMIfllHllly S } AK Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501-324-212 \\\\ I I 1 able of Contents Executive Summary - -----pg. 3 Purpose of this Evaluation  I I -pg. 6 Evaluation Design------ ------pg. 6 Research Questions  -pg. 7 Methodology  -----pg. 8 ESL Curriculum Delivery and Instructional Model School Choices: Magnet, Incentive, \u0026amp; Area------- Participants------------------------------------------- Academic Variables------------------------------------ Behavioral Variables------------------------------- Pg. 8 pg. 9 -pg. pg. pg- 11 16 18 Results  ----pg. 19 Conclusions  pg. 31 Recommendations  ------pg. 3 3 References  pg. 34 Appendix A\nNumber of Students by Grade by PHLOTE Category____________ Appendix B: Comparison of Newcomer v. Non-Newcomer schools____________ Appendix C: Students Receiving G/T and Special Education Services___________ Appendix D: Students by the Top Four Languages---------------------------------------- Appendix E: LRSD Regulations on the Academic Assessment of PHLOTE Students Appendix F: LRSD Audit Policy--------------------------------------- pg- 35 pg. 37 pg. 44 pg. 47 pg. 62 ------pg. 64 Appendix G: Achievement Data by Area, Magnet, and Incentive Appendix H: Achievement Data by School_________________ Schools pg. 67 pg. 75 A 2Executive Summary Evalu ofPlanning, Research, and E aluation (PRE) has undertaken this evaluation to determine if the Districts English-a\u0026lt;- - nroSernTLEPlstud! succeeding in meeting the needs of limited-English p oticient (LEP) students in overcoming their laneuaae ham'pre tUo t ___ as-a- overcoming their language barriers. The LRSDs Commitment to Resolve (CTR, agreement with the Office for Civil Rights (NveX?0, 1999,ZZ LRSD to compare hrntted-Enghsh proficient students' academic achievement, retention dZut Vd attendance data to the general population and to make similar comparisons with limited English th to their fluent-English proficiency. aI per section L of the CTR the scope of this evaluation will consider\ncomparisons with limited English 1.) the curriculum service delivery, staffing and scope of teacher trainina- 2.) the extent to which limited English language students to other students in the District\nand are performing in comparison 3.) the extent to which limited English proficient students who have English (i.e., have exited the ESL other students in the District. become proficient in program due to proficiency in English) compare to The CTR requires that a longitudinal evaluation be conducted annually. The data reported in this evaluation are baseline data and constitutes the initial collection of comparison annual evaluations. With baseline datA it ic Hiffi/'nit nrosram succe\u0026lt;\n\u0026lt;i nr fniliirp Ft i  **^^PPropnate to make picsumptions o program success or failure. Future evaluations will address the issue of program effectiveness. data for future presumptions of Concerning staffing and scope of teacher training, as of June 2000, 15 teachers have their ESL .dd H teachers earned theh ESL endorsemeTSn ddition 15 teachers have taken at least three credit hours towards earning an ESL endorsement Given the increase in the number of ESL endorsed teachers, ftiture evaluations will add tWs variable m comparing students across the LRSD.  805 students whose primary home language is other than English (PHLOTE) Wilhm this poptilatton of PHLOTE students are sub-populations identified by the LRSD to L in * and to provide a greater understanding of what the LRSD considers when approaching the education of PEILOTE students greater understanding of what the LRSD 3The sub-populations of PHLOTE students have been identified as: Limited-English proficient (LEP) - students administered the Language Assessment Scales (LAS) upon admission to the LRSD and determined not to be proficient in reading, writing. listening comprehension, and/or speaking English.  Not assessed as to their English proficiency (NAEP)  students who have not been administered the LAS.  Fluent-English proficient (FEP) - students administered the LAS upon admission to the LRSD and determined to be proficient in reading, writing, listening comprehension, and speaking English.  Fluent-English proficient and exited from the program (FEPE) - students initially identified as LEP, received LRSD ESL program services, and exited the program after the LAS indicated a proficiency in reading, writing, listening comprehension, and speaking English. The top four languages spoken are Spanish (56%), Chinese (8%), Arabic (3%) and Korean (3%) M /\"It\"*-! at- i'qm 1 ______ C T !-\u0026gt; _ '' Newcomer Center schools serve most of the LEP students (N= 309). However, there are LEP students in all but seven of the LRSDs schools. The highest enrollment for a Newcomer Center is Chicot Elementary with 74 LEP students, and the highest enrollment for a neighborhood school is Wakefield Elementary with 20 LEP students. Results from comparing students enrolled in a Newcomer v. a Non-newcomer indicate:  Newcomer Centers had higher growth for LEP and FEP kindergarten students, as measured by the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), than similar students attending newcomer school. a non-  Newcomer Centers had lower growth for LEP and FEP students on the DRA for and 2^ grade students in comparison to similar students at non-Newcomer schools.  Comparison data on other academic variables for 4^^ grade and above are mixed. The number of PHLOTE students receiving G/T and Special Education services is small making data comparison difficult. However, PHLOTE receiving G/T services generally perform above the LRSD and national averages. Across the four top languages of Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, and Korean, LEP students ...............* Ml upaiuMi, vmucsc, Mjaoic, ana Korean, I.hl' students compare favorably with other PHLOTE students on DRA growth scores, but they have lower scores on other academic variables. PHLOTE students who attend a magnet school, regardless of their sub-population category, scored higher than other PHLOTE students. Typically on a school by school comparison. Newcomer Center School PHLOTE students do not compare as well as PHLOTE students who attend a Non-Newcomer Center School. This phenomenon could be attributed to the dearth of ESL endorsed teachers across the LRSD. As of June 1, 2000, there were only 15 ESL endorsed teachers in the LRSD. 4Concerning the extent to which LEP and FEPE students are performing in comparison to other students in the District, the results indicate that a majority of kindergarten and 2\"'' grade LEP students are reading at grade level, while only a third of the V* grade LEP students are at the readiness level. Reading growth for LEP students in grade 1 are not growing as fast as the general population. Across other achievement measures LEP students are performing below the general population. On these same academic measures, FEPE students typically perform above the general population. Also, LEP students have lower rates of attendance than the general population. Given that this is the baseline year for future yearly evaluations it would be premature to attribute any evaluation results to ESL program success or failure. However, recommendations include investigating the high retention numbers of not only LEP, but also FEP students\ncontinue to expand the professional development opportunities and ESL endorsement\nand continue to support early literacy strategies. w 5Introduction Purpose of this Evaluation The purpose of this evaluation to determine if the Little Rock School Districts (LRSDs) Enghsh-as-a-Second Language (ESL) Program is succeeding in meeting the needs of limitedEnglish proficient (LEP) students in overcoming their language barriers. The LRSDs Commitment to Resolve (CTR) agreement with the Office for Civil Rights, November 10, 1999, requires LRSD to compare limited-English proficient students academic achievement, retention, dropout, and attendance data to the general population and to make similar comparisons with limited English proficient students who have exited the program due to their fluent-English proficiency. As per section L of the CTR the scope of this evaluation will consider: 1.) the curriculum service delivery, staffing and scope of teacher training\n2.) the extent to which limited English language students are performing in comparison to other students in the District\nand 3.) the extent to which limited English proficient students who have become proficient in English (i.e., have exited the ESL program due to proficiency in English) compare other students in the District. to This evaluation will examine students who have participated in the Districts ESL program to determine mastery of English language skills (reading, writing, speaking, and listening/comprehension), content area concepts, and skills. To be assessed is the amount of progress identified students have made during program participation, after program exit, and upon reclassifying/reentry into the program. The evaluation will report data indicating student performance in mathematics, literacy, reading, and language usage. Curriculum service delivery by school and the progress of teacher training will be reported, as well as comparison data on Newcomer v. Non-newcomer centers (see Appendix B). Achievement data will also be reported on PHLOTE students receiving G/T and Special Education services (see Appendix C). There are 8 LEP and 28 FEP suidents receiving G/T services. There are 7 LEP and 3 NAEP students receiving special education services. Data will be reported by students attending -------------------g area, magnet, and incentive schools (see Appendix G) and also by individual school (see Appendix H). Evaluation Design The following are sub-populations of PHLOTE students:  Limited-English proficient (LEP) - students administered the Language Assessment Survey (LAS) upon admission to the LRSD and determined not to be proficient in reading, writing, listening comprehension, and speaking English.  Not assessed as to their English proficiency (NAEP) - students who have not been administered the LAS. 6 Fluent-English proficient (FEP) - students administered the LAS upon admission to the LRSD and determined to be proficient in reading and writing English.  Fluent-English proficient and exited from the program (FEPE)  students initially identified as LEP, received LRSD ESL program services, and exited the program after the LAS indicated a proficiency in reading, writing, listening comprehension, and speaking English. The aforementioned sub-populations will be compared to each other and to the general population on the following academic and behavioral variables\nArkansas State Benchmark Examination LRSDs Achievement Level Tests Stanford Achievement Test-9' edition (SAT-9) Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) Retention Dropout Attendance Graduation In addition, PHLOTE sub-population data will be reported by students receiving gifted and talented (GT) and special education (SPD) (see Appendix C)\nstudents attending a Newcomer Center v. Non-Newcomer Center (see Appendix B)\ntop four languages (see Appendix D)\narea, incentive, or Magnet school (see Appendix G)\nand individual school (see Appendix H). The general population for this report, unless otherwise stated, will consist of all students in the Little Rock School District except those students classified as LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE. Research Questions What types of curriculum service delivery are PHLOTE students receiving and how do schools receiving these service deliveries compare. Is the academic progress and behavior of LEP, NAEP, FEP and FEPE comparable to the general population? What level of training are teachers working with LEP students receiving? Examination of student academic performance as measured by the academic variables, retention, and attendance rates of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE students versus the general population of students will address these questions. Methodology w 7LRSD ESL Curriculum Delivery and Instructional Model Elementary Schools: LEP students are served in the alternative language services program in one of two ways: Students who are developing their proficiency in English are clustered in classes with native English speakers, and the teachers provide the essential modifications to accommodate their developing fluency. in classes which  Students who are developing their proficiency in English are grouped are designated for LEP students. There are fewer students in these classes. The numbers were kept low because of a class size reduction grant. The schools who benefited from this during the 1999-2000 school year were Brady, Chicot, Romine, Terry and Washington. The teachers at these five former Newcomer Center Schools either have their ESL endorsement or are working on completing the course requirements for the endorsement. The Newcomer Center elementary schools maintain larger numbers of LEP students. LEP students have the option of attending a Newcomer Center or any of the other LRSD. Teachers at the non-Newcomer Center schools receive a comprehensive ESL training program which is research-based and from the Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL). Middle Schools: LEP students are primarily served in the alternative language services program at our Newcomer Center schools, Dunbar and Cloverdale Middle Schools. There are two configurations to provide the same type of service\n At Cloverdale Middle Level Academy students are grouped into discrete ESL classes for Reading/Writing Workshop classes, ESL Science and ESL Social Studies. These students receive their instruction from an ESL endorsed teacher or one who is working on completing the endorsement courses.  At Dunbar Magnet Middle School, LEP students receive their specialized, modified instruction in mainstream classes beside their peers. The difference for these students is in the teacher's training and qualifications. Teachers at Dunbar Middle School are also completing their ESL endorsement courses. There is a smaller group of LEP students at Dunbar, not enough to constitute discrete ESL classes for groups of students at each respective grade level (grades 6,7,\u0026amp; 8). LEP students who attend some of the other middle schools, not designated a Newcomer Center school receive their instruction from their classroom teachers. Those teachers in the 4 core disciplines either participated in the ESL training during the summer of SY2000 or will participate during the current school year. High School: LEP students are primarily served in the alternative language services program at our Newcomer Center school. Hall High School.  There are a few exceptions where students attend some of our other high school for a specialized program, such as Parkview Arts/Science Magnet.  Students at Hall High School receive their instruction in ESL classes, which provide a sheltered English model.  This approach allows the teachers to build on prior knowledge in the content areas in which the student is developing his/her proficiency in English. 8J i 1 i * ESL-endorsed or completing the required courses for At Hall High School students are assigned to ESL classes, made up of LEP students. In the English classes the grouping reflects levels of proficiency rather than distinct grade levels. School Choices: Magnet, Incentive, and Area Magnet schools are themed schools in which enrollment requests are filled by a I irttpr\\z T PQH ctmi_______ ___i random lottery, LRSD stipulation magnet schools are:  Booker Arts Elementary  Carver Basic Skills / Math Elementary  Gibbs Foreign Languages! International Studies Elementary  Williams Traditional Elementary  Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Middle School  Parkview Arts \u0026amp; Science High School Incentive schools, identified in 1990, continue to receive extra financial resources in order to improve basic skills education and provide enrichment. These schools offer extended-day, extended-week and extended-year programs as well as before and after school care. Students who live near these schools make up the majority of the enrollment. The incentive schools are:  Franklin Communications Technology Elementary  Academy Elementary (This school will become Stephens Elementary ^\\J\\J\\J 1 in Fall  Mitchell Academy of Creative Dramatic Arts Elementary  Rightsell Academy Elementary  Rockefeller Academy Elementary There are no PHLOTE students at Rightsell or Mitchell. 9Area schools are:  Badgett Elementary  Bale Elementary  Baseline Elementary  Brady Elementary  Chicot Elementary  Cloverdale Elementary  Dodd Elementary  Fair Park Elementary  Forest Park Elementary  Fulbright Elementary  Geyer Springs Elementary  King Elementary  Jefferson Elementary  Mabelvale Elementary  McDermott Elementary  Meadowcliff Elementary  Otter Creek Elementary  Pulaski Heights Elementary  Romine Elementary  Terry Elementary  Wakefield Elementary  Washington Elementary  Watson Elementary  Western Hills Elementary  Wilson Elementary  Woodruff Elementary  Cloverdale Middle School  Dunbar Middle School  Forest Heights Middle School  Henderson Middle School  Mabelvale Middle School  Pulaski Heights Middle School  Southwest Middle School  Central High School  J.A. Fair High School  Hall High School  McClellan High School There were no PHLOTE students at Badgett, Dodd, Jefferson, Western Hills, and Woodruff. 10Participants The LRSD student enrollment process includes a determination of the primary home language other than English (PHLOTE). Once the Home Language Survey is administered, an attempt to assess is made if the student is PHOTE. After a review of assessment results or an attempt to assess, students are tagged within the LRSDs database as\n1. LEP - limited-English proficient, 2. NAEP - not assessed as to their English proficiency, 3. FEP - fluent-English proficient, and 4. FEPE - fluent-English proficient and exited from the program. As of June 2,2000, the District had identified 805 PHLOTE students (LEP = 467, NAEP = 45, and FEP = 268, FEPE = 25). Appendix A lists PHLOTE students by category and by grade level. Elementary LEP students have the option of attending a Newcomer Center school or any of the other LRSD schools. Middle and high school level LEP students are assigned to Newcomer Center schools. See Tables 1 and 2 for enrollment data on newcomer and nonNewcomer Center schools. Table 1 Table 2 Newcomer Center: LEP Enrollment Top 7 Non-newcomer: LEP Enrollment Brady Chicot Romine Terry_____ Washington Cloverdale MS Dunbar MS . I Hall HS I Total 11/30/99 26 68 33 22 38 42 16 3/24/00 25 71 30 18 33 I 80 I 44 16 74 6/2/00 26 74 28 23 30 47 13 I 325 I 311 I 309 \"I 11 Wakefield Cloverdale McDermott Bale Garland Henderson MS Forest Heights MS pfotd 11/30/99 21 17 17 10 6 7 11 89 3/24/00 22 14 18 9 8 8 10 ] 89 6/2/00 20 14 13 12 8 8 7The District s primary database housed on the AS400 mainframe computer X VUU.V. O piuuary uaiaoase nousea on the AS400 mainframe computer uses CIMS as Its electronic student database software. Student data are collected at the school level. Current year data are filed in the students permanent record file (PRE'). Baseline data are stored in ESL Department files. The initial portion of this section will report demographic data (i.e., gender, language school location, grade level distribution, and any sub-groups) on LEP, NAEP FEP and FEPE students. The subsequent sections will report academic and behavioral bcciiuns win report academic and behavioral progress (e.g. attendance) of LEP students and how LEP students compare on academic and behavioral variables to NAEP, FEP, FEPE and the Districts general school population. Unless otherwise stated, general population is defined as all students in the District except LEP NAEP FEP and FEPE students.    Description of Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students. As of June 2 2000 there were 467 LEP students in the Little Rock School District (LRSD). Supporting charts reflect three data gathering points, 11/30/99, 3/24/00, and 6/2/00, and correspond to the Districts reporting to the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), Districts Quarterly Report, and the program evaluation report, conducted annually, as required by Title VI. As previously reported, LEP students have the option to attend a Newcomer Center school or any of the other LRSD schools Demographics on this population are the following:  There are 255 male (54.6%) and 212 female (45.4%) students.  Newcomer Centers serve most of the LEP students, 309 students (66.2%) (see Table 1).  LRSD has 48 schools and LEP students are being served in all of the high schools, middle schools, ^d all but seven of the elementary schools (i.e., Badgett, Dodd, Jefferson, Mitchell Western Hills, Rightsell, and Woodruff).  Non-Newcomer Centers serve the remaining LEP students (N = 158), with the top schools serving between 7 and 20 students (see Table 2). seven  Appendix A lists the following breakdown of students by grade level and sub-population: The pre-kindergarten program (i.e. LRSDs 4-year-old program) had 29 LEP students enrolled. * (grades kindergarten through 5*^ has the highest number of LEP students per grade level with an average grade-level enrollment of 46.  Middle school (grades 6* through 8*') average grade-level enrollment is 29.  High school (grades 9* through 12) per grade level enrollment average of 19. 12 Among LEP students Spanish is the most common language spoken (71.3%), followed by Chinese (4.5%), Arabic (3.6%), Assyrian (2.3%), Korean (2.3%), and Vietnamese (1.5%). An additional 29 languages account for the remaining 14.2% of LEP students. To provide insight in understanding what the LRSD considers when approaching the education of students receiving ESL program services, students within the sub-population of LEP are further identified as: LEPNC - In an ESL program at a Newcomer Center (N = 309) LEPSO - Being served at a school other than a Newcomer Center (N = 158) LEPNS - Not being served (N = 9). Parental denial of alternative language services. LEPSPD - Receiving special education and LEP services (N = 7) LEPGT- Receiving gifted and talented (GT) and LEP services (N = 8) LEPREC - Students who have left the program, have been reclassified, and have re-entered the program (N = 0) Additional demographic data on these sub-populations are as follows\n Newcomer Centers serve all of the LEP students receiving gifted and talented services (N = 7).  Five of the nine LEP students receiving special education services (LEPSPD) attend a Newcomer Center. Five of the nine LEP students not receiving services (LEPNS) attend Newcomer Centers. Academic and behavioral data for the above groups will be reported in the results section. Description of Not Assessed as to their English Proficiency (NAEP). There are 45 NAEP students identified in the Districts database. Demographics for this population are as follows:  There are 23 male (51.1 %) and 22 female (48.9%) students.  Spanish is the most common language (31.1%), followed by Korean (15.5%), Gujarati (8.9%), German (4.4%), Farsi (4.4%), and Chinese (4.4%).  Appendix A lists the following breakdown of NAEP students by grade level and subpopulation:  In grades kindergarten through 5\" there is an average grade-level enrollment of 1. 13 In grades 6* through 8*' there is an average enrollment of 2. In grades 9**' through 12* there is an average enrollment of 8.  Within the sub-population of NAEP students\n Thirty-six NAEP students have refused to be assessed\n Three are special education students and were unable to complete the Language Assessment Survey (LAS)\nThree have not been at school when the LAS was administered\n One student had been auditing (see Appendix F for LRSD policy on auditing), but is no longer a student for SY2000-2001\n One has not returned the signed letter from a parent, and one has been assessed but the score report has not been received by the ESL office. The ESL program has been informed of these two irregularities for follow-up.  Only 6.7% (N = 3) attend a Newcomer Center.  Parkview High School has the most NAEP students, 44.4% (N = 20). Parkview High School is an arts and science magnet school. Description of Fluent English Proficient (FEP) Students. FEP students are PHLOTE students who at the time of admission to the LRSD are assessed by the LAS and have demonstrated a proficiency in reading, writing, listening comprehension, and speaking English. There are 293 FEP in the Little Rock School District. Demographics for this population are as follows:  There are 147 male (50.2%) and 146 female (49.8%) students.  Spanish is the most common language (35.2%), followed by Chinese (11.6%), Vietnamese (6.7%), Urdu (4.5%), Korean (3.4%), Arabic (3.4%), and Russian (3.0%). The 34 remaining languages constitute an additional 32.2%. One hundred eighteen (31.8%) of the students attend a Newcomer Center, with Chicot Elementary having 75 students, Cloverdale Middle 46 students, and Hall High 72 students. A 14 Appendix A lists the following breakdown of students by grade level and sub-population\n In grades kindergarten through 5* the average grade level distribution is 26.  In grades 6* through 8* the average grade level distribution is 27.  In grades 9* through 12* the average grade level distribution is 13.  There are nine FEP students in the Districts 4-year old program.  Twenty-eight students receive gifted and talented (G/T) services. One student attends Cloverdale Middle, 22 attend Dunbar Middle, and 5 attend Hall High school. Description of Fluent English Proficient-Exited (FEPE) Students. FEPE students are LEP students that have exited from the ESL program due to their demonstration of proficiency in English, as measured by the LAS. Twenty-five students, since 11/30/99, have exited from LEP to FEPE. Demographics for this sub-population are as follows\n There are 12 male (48%) and 13 female (52%) students.  Ten students were exited with an LAS of 3/4 and 15 students with a LAS of 3/5. A score of 3/4 is indicative of high-level reading and writing skills. A score of 3/5 is indicative of high- level proficient listening and speaking skills.  One student exited September 1999, 2 exited November 1999,2 exited February 2000 2 exited March 2000, 5 exited April 2000, and 13 exited May 2000.  Spanish is the most common language (60%, N = 15), followed by Chinese (16%, N = 4), Vietnamese (4%, N = 1), Laotian (4%, N = 1), Mongolian (4%, N = 1), Pakistan (4%, N = 1), Portuguese (4%, N = 1), and Slovakia (4%, N = 1).  None of the FEPE students received (G/T) services.  Appendix A lists the breakdown of FEPE students by grade level and sub-population\n Sixty-four percent of the exited students were from grades 2\" through 5*.  Twenty-eight percent were from grades 6* through 8*.  Eight percent were from grades 9 and 11.  11 of the students (44%) were from Newcomer Centers. 15Academic Variables State Mandated ACTAAP Benchmark Examination, Grades 4 fe 8. The State is in the process of implementing its Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment \u0026amp; Accountability Program (ACTAAP) which includes a Benchmark Examination containing a measure of mathematics and literacy achievement. The intent and purpose of this component is to identify students in need of additional instruction in mathematics and literacy. The comprehensive mathematics and literacy exams are valid, reliable, and objective measures that contain multiple-choice and open-response questions based on The Arkansas Mathematics, Reading, and English/Language Arts Curriculum Frameworks. Items are developed with the assistance and approval of the Arkansas Content Advisory Committees composed of active Arkansas educators with expertise in mathematics and literacy. The committees developed and reviewed both multiple-choice and open-response items to ensure they reflect the Arkansas Citrriculum Frameworks and are grade-appropriate. The multiple-choice questions are scored by machine to determine if the student chose the correct answer from four options. Trained readers using a pre-established set of scoring criteria score answers to open-response mathematics and literacy questions. Students are given scores in math and literacy. Students can receive a test score of one through four with four representing Advanced followed by Proficient, Basic, and Below Basic. On both exams the Proficient cut-off score is 200 and the Advanced cut-off score is 250 and above. On the mathematics exam the Basic cut-off score is 149-199 and the Below-Basic cut-off score is 148 and below. On the literacy exam the Basic cut-off score is 164-199 and the Below-Basic cut-off score is 163 and below This examination process is being developed, piloted, and implemented in a sequential and cumulative process begirming with 4* grade in SY 1997-98, and including 8* grade in SY 1998-99. SY 2000-2001 will incorporate the math measure for b* grade currently being piloted in schools across Arkansas. Also end-of-course measures for Algebra I, Geometry, and Biology 1 are cunently in the item development phase. The test for the 1999-2000 school year was given in April 2000. Scores from the April 2000 test will not be available until the end of October 2000. This evaluation will examine students who took the test during the 1998-1999 school year as 4* graders. LEP students are required to take the test unless the language proficiency assessment committee at the students school determines that the test is inappropriate. In addition, parental permission is required to confirm the exemption. Achievement Level Test (ALTT Grades 2-11. The recently implemented Achievement Level Test (ALT) includes a series of mathematics, reading, language usage, and science achievement measures that increase in difficulty across eight levels. This test is important to the ESL program evaluation process, for the tests are designed to document growth by assessing students at the cutting edge of their individual achievement level. Fall and spring administration across grades 3-11 permit measurement of growth within and across school years expressed in two kinds of scores: percentile scores and scale or RIT (Rasch Interval Scale) scores. Percentile scores can be used to compare students to the large group of test takers using the ALT developed by the Northwest Evaluation Association. It is important to note that this is a comparative group currently involving 104 schools districts and 500,000 students and growing 164 to 13 points annually. This is not a norm group configured to represent public school populations. LRSD regulations (see Appendix E ) can exempt LEP students from District level tests for up to tw'o years on LRSD criterion referenced tests (CRTs). However, for program evaluation purposes all students, including LEP students, are to take the ALT. Demonstration of growth within and across an individuals matriculation. Fall to Spring, in grades 3  11 is documented using the RJT score designed to make direct comparisons to a criterion performance level along a scale from 160 to 250. Students typically start at a RIT__ of about 170-190 in the fall of the 3 grade and progress to the 230260 range by high school. Students at 235 have reached a readiness level for Algebra 1. It is very important to note that along the Rasch Interval Scale, scores have the same meaning regardless of the individual students grade level. This type of measurement allows some students to start at a higher RIT level and some low-achieving students to never reach the top level. The design provides an accurate measure of each students achievement where the typical standardized test, by its nature, provides inadequate measures for many students, especially those at the high and low ends of the scale. score Also important is the fact that tests are aligned with The Arkansas Mathematics, Reading, and English/Language Arts Curriculum Frameworks, thus enabling the District to determine impact and effectiveness of its instructional programs. The pool of test questions, developed by the Northwest Evaluation Association, has been extensively field tested to insure items of the highest quality and fairness. Teachers and curriculum specialists balanced by race, gender, and grade level matched the pool of questions to the standards and their attending benchmarks included in the aforementioned Frameworks. During test development activities, questions calibrated for difficulty and assigned to a level (e.g.. Math levels 1-8). For example: An appropriate expectation of a Level 1 student is to multiply whole numbers, while a Level 6 student should be able to multiply fractions. This calibration makes it possible to calculate the RIT score which is tied directly to the curriculum. ALTs are administered during the P* and 4* quarters annually. were Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA). The DRA is administered individually kindergarten through 2\"^a . . . . .\nrade students. Administration of the DRA is to occur during to gl September and April of each school year. The DRA is a measure of a readiness to read at grade level. Test results provide a method for comparing students within the LRSD. The Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) provides teachers with a method for assessing and documenting primary students development as readers over time within a literature-based instructional reading program. The DRA is designed to be used in K-3 classrooms with rich literate environments. The assessments are conducted during one- on-one reading conferences as children read specially selected assessment texts. Sets of 20 stories, which increase in difficulty, are used for the assessment. The DRA evaluates two major aspects of reading: accuracy of oral reading and comprehension through reading and retelling of narrative stores. Both aspects of reading are critical to independence as a reader. Factors which contribute to the gradient of difficulty of the stories include the number of words on a page, complexity of vocabulary, length of the stories, degree of support from the pictures, as well as complexity of sentence and story 17Structure. Questions pertaining to concepts about print are also included in the assessment of lower leveled texts (Southeastern Louisiana University, 1998, p. 1). The DRA is appropriate for assessing grade-level reading ability\nit is also used for early detection of reading difficulties. This test is important to the ESL program evaluation process for the tests are designed to document growth by assessing students at the cutting edge of their individual achievement level. The instrument helps teachers by focusing on specific problems of each child and by serving as a guide to the classroom reading instruction, based on the individual needs of each child. Early diagnosis of specific reading difficulties, when matched with appropriate instruction, can help to ensure that the students progress in school. The structure of the PreK-3 Literacy Program ensures that these assessment instruments are aligned with the curriculum content standards for these grades and the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) teaching strategies that shape the professional development for teachers at these grade levels. The DRA is written for classroom teachers who must become careful observers of young children as they leam to read and write. The DRA is useful to teachers who work one-on-one with students who are having difficulty in learning to read and write. The DRA is administered to all students. Stanford Achievement Test- 9*** edition (SAT-9'). The SAT-9 is a overall measure of achievement in reading, mathematics, language arts, science, and social science. The SAT-9 is designed to measure student achievement in relation to the performance of a national sample selected to be representative of the nations students in each of the grades tested. The test provides a method for comparing the achievement of students with that of students in the same grade across the country. The SAT-9 is administered to students in grades 5, 7, and 10 during the month of September. The SAT-9 is a timed test. Results are reported as raw scores, mean scaled scores, normal curve equivalent (NCE), percentile, and stanine scores. For this report, complete battery NCE scores from SY1999-2000 are used. The general population does not include LEP, NAEP, FEP, FEPE or special education students. Future evaluations will include data on the SAT-9 math, reading, and language subtest scores. Behavioral and Professional Development Data LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE students will be compared among themselves and the general population on attendance, retention, graduation, and dropout rates. In addition, PHLOTE students receiving G/T and Special Education services will be compared on the above behavioral variables. The number of ESL endorsed teachers and other professional development will be reported. \\\\ 18Results State Mandated ACTAAP Benchmark Examination, Grades 4 \u0026amp; 8 The State Benchmark exam for the 1999-2000 school year was given in April 2000 and the results will not be available to the District until the end of October 2000. The Benchmark exam was given to 4**' grade students in February 1999 for the 1998-1999 school year. Fifth- grade data from SY1998-1999 will be used for this report. Several LEP students (N = 11) did not take the test. The State of Arkansas allows LEP students, with permission from their parents, to be exempted from taking the test. The Arkansas Department of Education is currently field testing an alternate assessment for students who would be considered for exemption. Training on the administration of the alternate assessment will begin in fall 2000. Interpretation. The State of Arkansas expects all students to be proficient or advanced. A scaled score of 200 is considered proficient and a score of 250 is considered to be advanced. All of the LEP students that took the test scored in the Below-Basic category in both mathematics and literacy. The general population had 59% of those tested in the Below-Basic category in Math and 42% in literacy. FEP students performed above District results with 53% of students at Proficient and above in math and 58% in literacy. In math both students were in the Basic category and in literacy, one student was Basic and the other Below-Basic. The general population had 22% at Proficient and above in math and 30% in literacy (see Tables 3 and 4). Table 3 Math: 4'*' Grade Benchmark Exam, SY1998-1999 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) General Population LEP % Below Basic 59% N= 1,038 100% N = 9 % Basic 19^ N = 332 % Proficient 13% N = 228 % Advanced 9% N = 162 NAEP \u0026gt; FEP 23% N = 6 FEPE 23% N = 6 100% N = 2 i \\\\ 19 31% N = 8 23% N = 6Table 4 Literacy: 4'*' Grade Benchmark Exam, SY1998-1999 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) General Population LEP % Below Basic 42% N = 677 100% N = 9 % Basic 28^ N = 460 % Proficient 28% N = 453 % Advanced 2% N = 31 NAEP FEP FEPE 15% N = 4 50% N = 1 27% N = 7 50% N = 1 50% N= 13 8% N = 2 Conclusion. Neither the LEP, NAEP, FEP, FEPE, nor the general population of students attained the state goal of 100% proficient or advanced. LEP students did not perform as well as general population, FEP, or FEPE students. FEPE students did not perform as well as FEP students. However, FEP students performed better than the general population. These results could be attributed to fact that these FEPE students tested had not received the ESL services that are currently in place. ESL services in years prior to the 1999-2000 school year were not as structured as the current program. Plus, the used for this evaluation was collected two years ago, during SYl998-99. While all students in the District would benefit from additional intervention (e.g., learning the State standards), it appears that LEP and FEPE students should be provided additional practice on completing opened-ended questions, a cornerstone of the State Benchmark assessment. Achievement Level Test (ALT), Grades 2-11 The Districts ALT exams were given during March 2000. Grades 2-11 were assessed on Reading and Language Usage. The Elementary and Middle grades were assessed on general mathematics skills and students enrolled in Algebra 1, 2, and Geometry were assessed in these specific subject areas. The national comparison group for Tables 5-11 is comprised of 104 schools districts and 500,000 students that have taken the ALT. Interpretation. Across all subjects, LEP student performance was below the general, FEP, and NAEP population.  Consistently across subjects, FEP and NAEP students performed above the general population.  Specifically, in reading and language usage, FEPE students out-performed the general population in all grade levels 2\"' through 9*, elementary math grades 2'\" through 5*, and middle math grades 6'* and S*. 20 FEPE students performed better than FEP students in grades 2 and 3 in reading and language usage.  In math FEPE students out-performed LEP students in the grades 3 and 6.  Algebra 1 is taken primarily by students in the Q* grade, Geometry in lO'*, and Algebra 2 in 11*. Given these primary grade levels, there are no comparison data between FEPE students and their peers (see RIT Score Tables 5-11).  All groups scored below the national comparison group.  Newcomer data are mixed, but FEPE students generally did better that other PHLOTE students at the elementary level (e.g., grades 2 and 3 in reading).  FEP students receiving G/T services did better that the national comparison group. Table 5 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) ALT Reading Scores: Spring 2000 8 7 5 6 Grade Level National Comparison Group 2 1^ 3 4 9 10 11 1981 205| 21212171 2211225 228 230  j' General Population Number Tested 179 1761 1911 1991 20512091 2131216 221 223 227 1891 1879 1795 1574 1517 1511 1360 1411 1179 LEP Number Tested I 160| 172| 184| 187| 192| 204| 202| 178| 174| 20^ 54 43 33 24 11 29 26 14 6 6 NAEP Number Tested 1 2 2 2 5 4 3 4 FEP Number Tested FEPE Number Tested I 184{ 201| 211| 215| 216| 222| 225| 230| 225| 159] 16 23 23 31 28 20 24 10 12 3 Q89[22O5[2O3]2212[216[22^^ 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 21Table 6 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) ALT Language Usage Scores: Spring 2000 Grade Level 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 National Comparison Group 193 199 207 213 2161 2201 223 225  General Population 186 195 203 208 212 216 218 223 224 228 Number Tested 1735 1890 1870 1758 1561 1503 1477 1357 1357 1156 LEP Number Tested I 173| 183| 192| 191| 198| 208| 207| 211| 210| 214| 54 43 33 24 11 29 26 14 6 6 NAEP Number Tested I,, 207| 200|ft^ 230| 227| 239| 229| 227| 214| 2 2 0 1 0 2 5 4 2 4 FEP Number Tested I 1911 207| 216| 218| 220| 227| 230| 236] 208| 224| 16 23 23 31 28 20 24 10 12 3 FEPE Number Tested I 194] 212| 211| 215| 217| 214] 227|'-7 [ 5 4 3 3 1 1 4 Table 7 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) ALT Elementary Math Scores: Spring 2000 Table 8 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) Grade Level 2 3 4 5 National Comparison Group 192 200 208 215 ALT Middle Math Scores: Spring 2000 Grade Level 6 7 8 National Comparison Group 220 227 235 General Population 182 193 202 208 Number Tested 1785 1911 1899 1804 General Population Number Tested 207 1633 213 213 1566 1235 LEP Number Tested I 167] 186] 195] 191] 54 43 33 24 LEP Number Tested I 199] 204] 208] 11 29 26 NAEP Number Tested [ rig] 207] 209] 0 1 2 0 NAEP Number Tested I 234] 230|~^ 2 2 0 FEP Number Tested 1 197] 208| 216|~2^ 16 23 23 31 FEP Number Tested I 2211 228]'^ 16 13 8 FEPE Number Tested I 193] 2111 2lT[2Zr| 5 4 3 3 FEPE Number Tested I 223] 210|2^ 1 1 3 22Table 9 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) Table 10 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) ALT Algebra 1 Scores\nSpring 2000 ALT Algebra 2 Scores: Spring 2000 Grade Level General Population Number Tested 7 8 9 10 2601 252 241 239 23 281 1010 151 Grade Level General Population Number Tested 8 9 10 11 2591 2561 254 250 1 314 245 553 LEP Number Tested I ^,1P86|T1^ 0 0 9 2 LEP Number Tested 0 2511 3 0 2 NAEP Number Tested iBil 257| 24O|^ 0 4 1 NAEP Number Tested I 2711 253| 266| 126| 1 i 12 1 FEP Number Tested I 267| 238| 244|247| 7 14 3 1 FEP Number Tested I 169| 174| 254| 0 3 3 3 FEPE Number Tested WB 0 I 0 0 1 FEPE Number Tested 0 0 0 0 Table 11 ALT Geometry Scores: Spring 2000 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) Grade Level General Population Number Tested 10 11 264 256 248 246 11 100 1067 278 8 9 LEP Number Tested I 266| 250| 246| 246| 114 3 \\\\ NAEP Number Tested FEP Number Tested FEPE Number Tested 273| 25Tp50l I 2711 273| 250(^ I \"-a ,1 257] 23 0 2 0 1 2 2 4 8 0 0 0 1Conclusion. Since SYl 999-2000 was the first year for the administration of the ALT across grades 2 - 11 it would be difficult to make an assumption, based on the data, indicating ESL program success. However, LEP performance on the Districts ALT is consistent with performance on the State Benchmark assessment (i.e., 4* grade) and, as will be noted later, on the SAT-9 (i.e., 5*, 7*, and 10* grade) in that LEP students are performing below the general population. However, FEPE students (i.e., LEP students who have exited the program) are performing above the general population. Stanford Achievement Test. 9* edition (SAT-9) Students in the 5*, 7*, and 10* grades took the SAT-9 during September 1999. For this evaluation report, students will be compared on complete battery percentile scores. The complete battery scores reported are a compilation of reading, mathematics, language, spelling, study skills, science, social science, using information, and thinking skills subtest results. In addition to LEP, FEP, NAEP, and FEPE students, the general population does not include special education students. Future evaluations will include subtest results on reading, math, and language. Interpretation. LEP students in the 5*, 7*, and 10* grades performed below the general population and FEP and NAEP students. FEPE, FEP, and NAEP students who took the test performed above the general population (see Table 12). A number of LEP students (18-5 graders, 15-7* graders, and 18-10* graders) did not take the SAT-9. School staff determines whether it is appropriate for LEP students to take the SAT-9 and the State of Arkansas allows LEP students, with permission from their parents, to be exempted from taking the test. Table 12 SAT-9 Complete Battery Percentile Scores, SY1999-2000 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) Grade 5* yth 10* General Population 36 N= 1481 42 N= 1363 40 N= 1448 LEP 15 N= 11 21 N = 22 30 N = 2 NAEP N = 0 78 N = 2 40 N = 6 FEP 55 N = 30 71 N = 21 55 N = 16 FEPE 39 N = 2 33 N = 2 N = 0 Conclusion. Several paper and pencil assessments (i.e., ALT, State Benchmark, \u0026amp; SAT- 9) have validated the below-average performance of LEP students vs. other populations (i.e., general, FEP, and NAEP). However, it appears that FEPE students are becoming proficient in English and maintaining their academic achievement. 24Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) The DRA is designed to measure growth over the school year by administering the DRA in the fall and spring. The DRA was administered to kindergarten through 2\"'* grade students during the early fall and late spring SY 1999-2000. During the DRA observation the student reads materials that are typically used within the classroom, and the observer records the directional movements that are made, errors or miscues. The student is assessed on deriving meaning, structure and information from the material. The spring DRA score is used to determine grade-level readiness. Readiness is indicated by a score of 2 at kindergarten, 16 at grade, and 24 at 2\"* grade. On most of the State and District assessments (i.e., SAT-9 and State Benchmark), LEP students are allowed to be exempted, with parental permission, from testing with the DRA. Teachers were asked to assess all students. Unless otherwise noted, the growth data in the DRA tables reflects only those students who were assessed both in the fall and spring. The fall and spring scores reflect all students who were assessed. Interpretation. LEP students in kindergarten out-performed the general population and were performing above the readiness level of 2.  LEP students in the and 2\"'* grade did not perform as well as the general population.  grade LEP students as a group are below the readiness level, and 2\"* grade students are performing at the readiness level.  FEP students are outperforming the general population.  While there are no FEPE students in kindergarten or 1 st grade, FEPE students in the 2\"' grade performed the same as LEP students, but below the general population.  FEPE students in the 2\"** grade, with average reading readiness of 24.87, exceeded grade readiness level equivalency of 24 (see Tables 13-15). Table 13 Kindergarten DRA scores (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) General Population LEP NAEP FEP FEPE Fall 1.55 1.22 4.48 25 Spring 4.43 4.47 Growth +2.88  +3.18 9.57 +5.09Table 14 1 Grade DRA scores (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) General Population LEP NAEP FEP FEPE Fall 5.1 3.46 1 8.52 Spring 21.2 14.03 6 21.29 Growth +14.0 +11.9 +5 +12.77 Table 15 2\"* Grade DRA scores (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) General Population LEP NAEP FEP FEPE Fall 19.9 15.74 34.7 19.5 Spring 30.8 24.87 38.5 34 Growth +10.3 +13.0 +7.8 +14.5 In kindergarten and grade, LEP and FEPE students had higher DRA growth scores than the general population. However, LEP students in 1 grade did not have DRA growth scores as high as the general population. Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA), supported by the Arkansas Department of Education and by LRSD, consists of teacher training in early literacy strategies and the administration of the DRA. District-wide results correlating DRA scores to ELLA training indicates a significant positive relationship between the amount of training that teachers participated in and the amount of growth achieved. Teachers can receive from 2 to 12 days of training. The first two days of training covers the administration of the DRA. Subsequent training days covers early literacy strategies. Conclusion. While and 2\" grade LEP students are performing below the general population, kindergarten LEP students demonstrated exceptional performance and growth. It is possible that the expanded District pre-kindergarten programs and the Animated Literacy program at the kindergarten level may have had an effect on kindergarten scores. Also, FEPE 2' grade students are performing at the grade readiness level. Scores on the DRA are supported by the reading and language usage scores on the Districts ALT. It appears that the early literacy program may be having more effect on the early grades (i.e., kindergarten and grade) than on nd 262\"'. This is probably due to the date and level of early literacy program intervention. Future evaluations will identify and report on the academic progress of PHLOTE students who attended the LRSDs pre-kindergarten program. Dropout, Retention, Attendance, and Graduation Interpretation. No PHLOTE students dropped out during SY1998-1999 or SY1999-200O. Table 16 Retention rates for SY1998-1999 and SY1999-2000 (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) Level and SY Elementary SY1998-1999 SY1999-2000 Middle School SY1998-1999 SY1999-2000 High School SY1998-1999 SYl 999-2000 General Population 1.33% N=169 available 12/15/00 .98% N=52 available 12/15/00 .42% N=28 available 12/15/00 LEP 4.29% N=13 1.32% N=4 2.94% N=2 1.31% N=1 2.62% N=2 NAEP 3.39% N=1 3.39% N=1 FEP .65% N=1 5.06% N=4 6% N=6 2% N=2 FEPE  Retention data SY1998-1999: Twenty-five students (16 LEP, 1 NAEP, and 8 FEP) were retained after the 1998-1999 school year. Retention rates of these subpopulations were generally higher than the general school population.  Among the LEP students retained, there were 10 male and 6 female students. Of these students, 14 students spoke Spanish, 1 spoke Chinese and 1 spoke Filipino.  The one NAEP student was female and spoke Spanish.  One Spanish speaking LEPSPD male in the 7* grade was retained.  Among the FEP students retained, there were 6 males and 2 females, with 7 speaking Spanish and 1 speaking Portuguese. \\\\ 27 One Spanish speaking FEP male in the 6* grade, receiving G/T services, was retained.  LEP students had high retention rates in the middle and high school levels (see Table 16).  Retention data SY1999-2000: Thirteen students (10 LEP, 1 NAEP, and 2 FEP) were retained.  Among LEP students, there were 9 males and 1 female student. All of these students spoke Spanish.  The one 11* grade NAEP student is male and speaks Spanish.  The two FEP students are 9* and 11* grade Spanish speaking males.  One 9* grade LEP student at JA Fair High School was retained for both SYl998-1999 and SY 1999-2000. Table 17 Student Attendance Rates for SY1999-2000: Average Number of Days Missed (See page 4 for a description of LEP, NAEP, FEP, and FEPE) School Year SY1999-2000 General Population 4?88 LEP 9.8 NAEP 7.62 FEP 7.16 FEPE 7.52  The average number of days missed by a general population, during ST 1999-2000 was 4.88 days  LEP students miss over twice as many days as the general population.  NAEP, FEP, and FEPE students miss more days than the general population (see Table 17).  FEP and LEP students receiving G/T services missed an average of 3.64 and 7.87 days respectively.  LEP students receiving special education services missed an average of 12.43 days.  NAEP students receiving special education services missed an average of 13.33 days. 28Graduation rate. All of the 12* grade PHLOTE students (N = 27) graduated with a diploma at the end of SY1999-2000.  Nine FEP students.  Twelve LEP students.  Six NAEP students. Conclusion. It is commendable that there were no LEP student dropouts for the last two years. The District has made a concerted effort to decrease the dropout rate. The graduation rate was 100% of 12* grade students. While students receiving G/T services had lower absenteeism rates than the general population, students receiving Special Education services had higher absenteeism rates than the general population. The number of students retained fell by almost 50% from SY1998-1999 to SY1999-2000. Professional Development LRSD professional development activities have focused on teacher ESL endorsement and enhancing English language learning in the classroom. State ESL endorsement requires 12 credit hours consisting of four classes: 1. 2. Teaching second languages. Second language acquisition. 3. Teaching people of other cultures, and 4. Second language assessment. As of this date, 29 teachers have received their ESL endorsement: School Name As of June 2,2000 # of ESL Endorsed Teachers # of Teachers Endorsed during the summer of 2000 8 . Hall High*  McClellan High  Cloverdale Middle*  Forest Heights Middle  Mabelvale Middle  Henderson Middle  Chicot Elementary*  Washington Elementary^  Geyer Springs Elementary  Wakefield Elementary  McDermott Elementary 3 1 2 2 Total * = Newcomer Center 15 14 \\\\ 29 1 1 2 1 1 1 4 2Also, approximately 75 teachers have taken at least three hours of credit toward ESL endorsement. In addition, 181 teachers have received training in enhancing English language learning in the classroom. As an increased number of teachers become endorsed, future evaluations should provide comparison data on PHLOTE students being served by non-endorsed vs. endorsed teachers. \\\\ 30Conclusions Evaluating the curriculum service delivery, staffing and scope of teacher training Concerning the curriculum service delivery, staffing and scope of teacher training it appears that Newcomer and non-Newcomer center schools are contributing equally to student achievement. There is not a critical mass of ESL endorsed teachers in the Newcomer Center schools. This situation is not changing. Only 5 of the 15 teachers endorsed during summer 2000 were from Newcomer Center schools. Future evaluations will need to examine closely the: 1.) diffusion of LEP students throughout the LRSD\n2.) amount of staffing and teacher training as it relates to the above diffusion\nand 3.) the relationship of ESL endorsement to student achievement. Evaluating the extent to which limited English language students are performing in comparison to other students in the District Regarding student achievement, LEP students do not perform as well as their FEP or general population peers on the DRA, SAT-9, State Benchmark Exam, and ALT. While academic achievement is of particular concern, so also the absenteeism rates of LEP and FEPE students. ESL program staff need to continue to consult and work closely with the Districts curriculum specialists to insure that ESL students are receiving the optimal services possible under the LRSDs ESL curriculum delivery plan. In addition to providing quality service to ESL students, the ESL program staff needs to focus on the absenteeism rates through increased parental involvement. The number of PHLOTE students receiving G/T and Special Education services is small, making data comparison difficult. However, PHLOTE students receiving G/T services generally perform above the LRSD and National averages. A concern is that there are few students in the elementary grades receiving G/T services. Across the four top languages of Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, and Korean, LEP students compare favorably with other PHLOTE students on DRA growth scores, but have lower scores on other academic variables. PHLOTE students, regardless of their sub-population category who attend a magnet school, score higher than other PHLOTE students in the LRSD. Typically on a school-by-school comparison. Newcomer Center school PHLOTE students do not compaie as well as PHLOTE students who attend a non-Newcomer Center school. Evaluating the extent to which limited English proficient students who have become proficient in English (i.e., have exited the ESL program due to proficiency in English) compare to other students in the District 1 I 31It appears that these FEPE students in the early elementary years, grades Z\"** and 3^*, are out-performing their LEP and general population peers. It is apparent that FEPE students in 4 grade and above are not performing as well as the 2\"'* and 3^'* grade FEPE students. English proficiency is no guarantee that these students will be able to perform academically and it is only through the analysis of a variety of academic variables that any assumptions can be made. Given the baseline data for this evaluation, it is not possible to draw conclusions as to the reasons for FEPE student achievement. Future evaluations will continue to monitor the progress of all FEPE students. Since the 11/30/99 report to the Arkansas State Department of Education, 25 of the 325 LEP students exited from the program. Since this is a baseline year, it is not possible to determine whether these numbers are low, average, or high. However, a 7.7% exit rate seems low. Most students exit the program during their elementary years (64%). An additional data point is time in the program. Due to the style of record keeping prior to SY 1999-2000, this data was not available. Future evaluations will have this data available for students who entered the program during SY1999-2000. Limitations of this Evaluation Date of entry into the ESL program is not available for most LEP students. Future evaluation reports will use date registered with the LRSD as a program entry date for those students missing data on this variable. This evaluation report reflects baseline data that will be used for future ESL evaluation reports. Given the type of data, it is difficult and inappropriate determine the success or failure of LRSDs ESL program. LRSD has made a concerted effort to staff and train teachers. While LEP students do perform below other students in the District, FEPE students who have been in the ESL program perform above other LRSD students on a number of variables. 32Recommendations  Attendance is an important variable affecting student achievement. The LRSDs Division of Administrative Services needs to investigate and intervene on the low attendance rates of LEP students. Also recommended is that the ESL parent coordinator work on this need.  Professional development is a building block to student achievement. The ESL program needs to continue to offer and promote the professional development opportunities for all teachers in the areas of ESL methodology, alternate assessments, cultural awareness, and second language acquisition. Future ESL program evaluations will consider this a key variable to student success.  Early intervention is a proven model for improving student achievement. The ESL program needs to work closely with LRSDs Department of Early Childhood! Elementary Literacy. In particular, this department needs to insure that all elementary teachers in the LRSD have the opportunity to attend early literacy professional development activities. Future ESL evaluations will consider professional development, in early intervention, a key variable.  Program entry and exit dates are important variables in helping to determine program success. Most LEP students are missing program entry data. Future evaluations will use the LRSD student registration date as a program entry date for those students missing data on this variable.  ESL endorsed teachers have the foundation to improve PHLOTE student achievement. It is imperative that the ESL program support teachers in attaining the ESL Endorsement. Future ESL evaluations will compare students who are taught by endorsed v. non-endorsed teachers.  Students receiving G/T services perform above the LRSD average. However, there are few of these students in the elementary grades. The ESL program needs to work closely with the LRSDs Department of Exceptional Children to promote early identification of PFILOTE students that qualify for G/T services.  Students currently attending Newcomer Center schools do not necessarily perform better than students attending non-Newcomer Center schools. There is insufficient data to analyze the outcomes of this situation accurately. Future ESL evaluations will closely monitor and report data on Newcomer v. non-Newcomer Center schools. 33References Southeastern Louisiana University (2000). Administering the developmental reading assessment. \\\\ 34Appendix A Number of Students by Grade by PHLOTE Category A 35Limit-English Proficient (LEP) Not-Assessed as to their English Proficiency (NAEP) Grade Level PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 Total Number of Students 29 56 47 58 46 38 29 20 37 31 26 20 18 12 467 Grade Level PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Number of Students 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 2 2 5 3 5 15 6 45 Fluent-English Proficient (FEP) Fluent-English Proficient Exited (FEPE) Grade Level PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Number of Students 9 23 22 17 23 23 31 28 20 24 10 17 12 9 268 Grade Level PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Number of Students 0 0 0 5 5 3 J 1 2 4 1 0 1 0 25 36Appendix B Comparison of Newcomer and Non-Newcomer schools on Academic Variables W 37Number of Students by Grade Level at Newcomer and Non-Newcomer Center Schools LEP FEP FEPE PK Kindergarten EJ Grade 2\" Grade 3^'* Grade 4^ Grade 5^ Grade 6**' Grade 7^ Grade 8^ Grade 9'*\" Grade 10'Grade lE*^ Grade 12* Grade Newcomer 13 33 28 37 25 27 18 18 21 21 21 19 16 12 Non ST 23 19 21 21 11 11 2 16 10 5 1 2 Newcomer 1 8 12 9 9 11 14 7 9 11 3 3 4 6 Non T 15 10 8 14 12 17 21 11 13 7 14 8 3 Newcomer Non NAEP Newcomer 1 DRA Scores LEP - Kindergarten FEP- Kindergarten FEPE - Kindergarten NAEP- Kindergarten LEP - Grade FEP -1 Grade FEPE - Grade NAEP - Grade LEP - 2\"^ GradT\" FEP-2\"Gradr~ FEPE - 2^* Grade NAEP- 2\"** Grade Non Newcomer fKiI 1.1 4.3 2.8 1 -Sial 16.76 34.7 38 Spring 4.1 11.4 Growth +r +7.1 9.4 19.1 6 23.21 41.37 44 +6.6 +12.1 +5 +6.45 +6.67 +6 38 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 2 1 2 1 J 1 1 2 2 2 5 3 5 14 6 Non-Newcomer Fali 1.3 4.6 Spring 8.6 Growth +3.7 +4  -iTA 4 10.2 14.6 34.2 13.3 18.1 23.7 27.8 43.5 30.6 +14.1 +13.5 +13.2 +9.3 +17.3SAT-9 Complete Battery\nNational Curve Equivalent Scores LEP - 5* Grade FEP - 5* Grade FEPE - 5* Grade NAEP - 5* Grade LEP - Grade FEP - 7^^ Grade FEPE - 7*^ Gr\"^ NAEP - 7'\" Grade LEP - 10'*^ Grade FEP - 10^** GradT\" FEPE - 10^^ Grade NAEP - 10* Grade Newcomer 167 42.3 39 T 26.4 74.5 21 K ^4 *  30 33.5 Non-New comer 1^3 61 27.9 75.1 39 77.5 Vs'- I^SSR,' 51 :i^ ALT RIT Scores: Elementary Math LEP-2'^2 Grade FEP - 2\"** Grade FEPE-2\"^Gr'^ NAEP- 2\"' Grade LEP - 3^ Gradr~ FEP - 3 Grade FEPE - 3'^Grade NAEP - 3^'' Grade LEP - 4^'^ Grade FEP-4^ Grade FEPE - 4* Grade NAEP - 4th Grade LEP - 5* GradT\" FEP - 5^** GradT\" FEPE - 5^ Gr^ NAEP - 5* Grade Newcomer Is? 197 222 Non-Newcomer 184 198 186 A 185 206 217 197 213 202 209 185 217 223 187 209 204 207 193 220 216 204 224 218 \u0026amp; 39ALT RIT Scores: Reading Elementary Level LEP - 2\"*' Grade FEP - 2\"^* Grade FEPE-2\" Grade NAEP- 2\" Grade LEP - 3^^ Grade FEP - 3\"* Grade FEPE - S^^Grade NAEP - 3\"* Grade LEP - 4*^ Grade FEP - d*** Grade FEPE - 4* Grade NAEP - 4th Grade LEP - 5'*^ Grade FEP - 5* Grade FEPE - 5* Grade NAEP - 5*^ Grade Newcomer 184 211 215  \"1 164 194 212 184 209 199 191 184 211 215 41 Non-Newcomer 193 218 '1Q1 ('\"h 180 204 199 201 183 215 205 193 218 207 ALT RIT Scores: Language Elementary Level LEP - 2\"^ Grade FEP - 2\"^* GradT\" FEPE-2\"*G'r^ NAEP- 2\"** Grade LEP - 3^ Grade FEP - 3^^* GradT\" FEPE - d'^Grade NAEP - 3^ Grade LEP - 4*^ Grade FEP -4*^ Grade FEPE-d^^ Grade NAEP - 4th Grade LEP - 5^*^ GradT\" FEP - 5* Grade FEPE - 5^^ Gr^ NAEP - 5^^ Grade Newcomer 166 174 Non-Newcomer [84 206 190 178 203 220 * 188 209 205 207 193 214 201 200 189 214 219 i*.\ni/ 189 220 216 ' jVi. Ki Si .\\k, 197 222 208 StsS! ?7\"4?5:A 40ALT RIT Scores: Middle Level Math LEP - 6* Grade FEP - 6* Grade FEPE - 6* Grade NAEP- 6^*' Grade Newcomer 195 228 223 Non-Newcomer 216 218 234 LEP-7^ Grade FEP - 7*^ Grade FEPE -7^1^ Grade NAEP - 7'*' Grade 214 247 195 239 210 230 LEP - 8^* Grade FEP - 8* Grade FEPE - 8* Grade NAEP - 8* Grade 211 229 211 MB? 209 240 209 260 ALT RIT Scores: Middle Level Reading LEP - 6'** Grade FEP - 6^*^ Gradr~ FEPE - 6'* Grade NAEP- 6* Grade' Newcomer 187 218 216 i Non-Newcomer 216 215 LEP - 7^Grade FEP-7*^ Grade FEPE - 7^'^ Gr^ NAEP - T'^ Grade 203 222 205 224 205 227 LEP - 8* Grade FEP -8^ Grade ' FEPE - 8' Grade NAEP - 8* Grade 199 226 210 S 208 225 208 236 \\\\ 41ALT RIT Scores: Middle Level Language LEP - 6* Grade FEP - 6* Grade FEPE - 6* Grade NAEP- O'** Grade Newcomer 195 220 2\\1 Non-Newcomer 212 219 230 LEP - 7^ Grade FEP - 7^*^ Grade FEPE - 7^ Grade NAEP - 7'* Grade 205 225 'k 210 230 214 227 LEP - 8* Grade FEP - 8* Grade FEPE - 8* Grade NAEP - 8* Grade 203 231 210 vr 216 229 215 239 ALT RIT Scores: High School Level Reading LEP - 9* Grad?\" FEP - 9^** GradT\" FEPE-9^Gi^ NAEP-9^ Grade LEP -10* Grade FEP - 10* Grade FEPE - 10* Gr^ NAEP-10* Grade LEP - 11^ Grade FEP - 1L** Grade\" FEPE - 11^ Grade NAEP-ll'^ Grade Newcomer 163 222 174 226 208 208 213 -w w Non-Neyvcomer 205 234 223 224..... 228 206 208 228 42ALT RIT Scores\nHigh School Level Language LEP - 9'* Grade FEP - 9* Grade FEPE - 9* Grade NAEP-9' Grade Newcomer 214 215 1 Non-Neyvcomer 208 241 229 LEP - 10* Grade FEP-10* Grade FEPE - 10* Grade NAEP -10* Grade LEP -11* Grade FEP - 11* Grade FEPE -11* Grade NAEP-11* Grade \\\\. 210 227 216 223 233 .'fe 202 in 201 215 - * * 214 43Appendix C Results of PHLOTE Students Receiving G/T and Special Education Services 44Gifted and Talented Students by Grade Level FEP 3^'* Grade 4* Grade 5* Grade ' 6* Grade ~ 7* Grade 8* Grade ~ 9* Grade 10* Grade 11* Grade 12* Grade Math RIT Score 3\"^** Grade 6*' Grade 7^ Grade 8'*' Grade 9* Grade 10* Grade FEP LEP 186 LEP 3 6 7 10 1 T\" 1 2 1 1 232 256 231 256 Reading RIT Score 3^' Grade 6* Grade 7* Grade 8* Grade 9* Grade 10* Grade 237 252 FEP w 228 228 LEP 123 233 Language Usage RIT Score 3^^ Grade 6* Grade 7* Grade 8* Grade 9*Grade 10* Grade \\\\ 210 218 FEP 222 230 233 235 LEP 180 217 226 45SAT-9 NCE Scores: Complete Battery 7'* Grade FEP 82.7 Special Education Students by Grade Level LEP 2\"** Grade 3^* Grade 4* Grade 5^** Grade ~ 6'*' Grade 7* Grade  8* Grade 9^** Grade~ 1 O'** Grade 11^ Grade n'** Grade 1 2 3 1 LEP 6' Grade S'** Grade 9*^ Grade NAEP 4* Grade Math RIT Score 195 181 182 201 Reading RIT Score 166 172 150 172 NAEP 1 1 1 Language Usage RIT Score 173 183 162 189 46Appendix D Academic Results of PHLOTE Students by the Top Four Languages 47Top Four Languages by Grade Level LEP NAEP FEP FEPE PK Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 22 1 01 0 00 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kindergarten Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 35 542 0 0 00 72 2 0 1 Grade Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 36 121 10 0 0 11 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 2\" Grade Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 38 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 6101 410 0 3\"* Grade Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 36 1 02 2 00 0 9214 2 00 0 4'* Grade Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 29 2 2 0 010 0 6511 3 0 0 0 5* Grade Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean 20 0 01 0 00 0 12 211 110 0 6* Grade Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean I \\ 14 2 0 2 0 0 01 10 511 48 010 0 LEP ..NAEP FEP FEPE 7* Grade 8* Grade P* Grade 10'*'Grade IP Grade 12 Grade L Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean Spanish Chinese Arabic Korean  'I 29 3 21 24 0 0 0 15 2 21 15 01 0 13 01 0 61 10 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 010 0 2 0 0 0 5 0 0 4 4 0 01 651 1 7 10 0 4 10 0 7 10 0 6 0 0 0 210 0 49 0 0 0 0 2 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spanish language DRA Scores K Fall .2 n=31 2.6 n=20 13.6 n=25 LEP Spring 1.7 11.6 25.4 Growth 1.5 9 11.8 Fall 1 n=l State Benchmark Exam Math 5'* Grade Language 5'* Grade NAEP Spring 6 Growth 5 Fall 1.3 n=7 5.5 n=ll 38 n=4 FEP Spring 3.7 16.1 42.5 Growth 2.4 10.6 4.5 Fall 12 n=2 FEPE Spring 28 Growth 17 LEP 67 n=7 LEP 140 n=7 NAEP FEP 148 n=10 FEPE 165 n=l NAEP FEP 191 n=10 FEPE 158 n=l SAT-9: Complete Battery NCE Scores 5'* Grade 7'* Grade' 10* Grade LEP 12 n=9 25.5 n=14 16 n=l NAEP 21 n=2 FEP 40 n=l 1 58.2 n=5 n=l FEPE 25 n=l A 50 ALT RIT Scores Reading 2\" Grade 3^'* Grade 4* Grade 5* Grade 6* Grade 2^\" Grade 8'*' Grade 9'*' Grade IO'** Grade 11'** Grade Language 2\"** Grade 3^' Grade 4* Grade 5'* Grade O'*' Grade 7'\" Grade 8* Grade 9* Grade 1 O'*\" Grade 11'*'Grade LEP 149 n=34 171 n=33 n=25 W n=17 192 n=7 202 n=21 202 n=20 174 n=8 208 n=4 208 n=6 NAEP 201 n=l 224 n=l 232 n=3 FEP 157 n=5 191 n=9 205 n=6 ioT n=12 211 n=10 214 n=6 w n=2 221 n=4 W n=6 W n=l FEPE 181 n=3 203 n=3 203 n=l 203 n=l 220 n=2 213 n=l LEP 165 n=34 182 n=33 187 n=25 192 n=17 196 n=7 202 n=21 202 n=20 205 n=8 215 n=4 214 n=6 NAEP 207 n=l 214 n=l 213 n=3 FEP 161 n=5 199 n=9 nr n=6 213 n=12 yiT n=10 220 n=6 nr 'in n=4 W n=6 nr n=2 FEPE 186 n=3 212' n=3 \"TTT n=l 202 n=l  \u0026gt;M- - 225 n=2 233 n=l 51 Math 2\" Grade 3^*^ Grade 4'*' Grade 5* Grade 6* Grade 7' Grade 8* Grade 9* Grade' 10*' Grade 11^ Grade LEP 162 n=34 183 n=33 191 n=25 199 n=17 198 n=l 199 n=21 210 n=20 itT n=8 \"W n=4 207 NAEP 207 n=l 253 n=l 250 n=3 FEP 191 n=5 \"W\" n=9 213 n=6 ITT' n=12 211 n=10 226 n=6 W n=7 185 n=4 206 n=6 n=2 FEPE 185 n=3 211 n=3 ITT n=l 217 n=l 231 n=2 233 n=l 52 Chinese Language DRA Scores K 1^ Fall 5.7 n=4 0 n=l 19 n=3 LEP Spring 16.5 1 33 Growth 10.8 1 14 Fall State Benchmark Exam Math 5'* Grade Language 5^ Grade i NAEP Spring LEP LEP Growth NAEP NAEP i-f SAT-9: Complete Battery NCE Scores LEP NAEP 5* Grade 7'* Grade IO' Grade w 27 n=3 FEP 70 n=2 9l4 n=5 TT n=l FEP 195 n=l Fall 2.5 n=2 n=3 20 n=l FEP 208 n=l 53 FEP Spring 9 42.7 FEPE FEPE FEPE 53 n=l 44 Growth 6.5 14.7 24 Fall 38 n=l FEPE Spring 44 Growth 6 ALT RIT Scores Reading 2\"* Grade 3'** Grade 4* Grade LEP 188 n=6 1^ n=l 193 n=2 NAEP 210 n=l 5* Grade 6^ Grade 7'*' Grade 202 n=2 2TO n=3 8'' Grade 9* Grade 231 n=2 10* Grade 225 n=l FEP 214 n=l 216 n=2 1^ n=5 \"W n=2 22^ n=5 '133' n=5 240 n=l 240 n=l 142 n=l FEPE 207 n=l - 226 n=l 216 n=l 228 n=l 11* Grade Language 2\" Grade 3^ Grade 4'^ Grade LEP 195 n=6 n=l 199 n=2 NAEP 211 n=l 5^ Grade 6* Grade 7'*' Grade 2\u0026lt;il n=2 W n=3 8'*' Grade 9*^ Grade 111 n=2 236 n=l 10* Grade 11'*'Grade FEP 223 n=l 214 n=2 n=5 n=2 a=5 239 n=5 249 n=l 251 n=l 14T n=l FEPE 209 n=l 231 n=l lAl n=l 236 n=l 54 Math 2\"** Grade Grade 4'* Grade LEP 193 n=6 179 n=l 218 n=2 NAEP \u0026gt;.w' s'** Grade 6^' Grade 7^ Grade 207 n=2 213 n=3 8* Grade 9*' Grade 252 n=2 10'^ Grade 11^ Grade 217 n=l 273 n=l FEP 203 n=l 220 n=2 n=5 234 n=2 23? n=5 n=5 \"W n=l W n=l FEPE 222 n=l * 229 n=l 223 n=l 254 n=l\n 264 n=l 55K Arabic Language DRA Scores Fall 4 n=l 20 n=l LEP Spring 10 38 Growth 6 18 ' * Fall State Benchmark Exam Math 5^ Grade Language 5'*' Grade NAEP Spring * LEP LEP Growth NAEP NAEP SAT-9: Complete Battery NCE Scores LEP NAEP 5* Grade 7'*' Grade 15.5 n=2 10'*' Grade FEP 19 n=l 83 n=l n=l \\\\ FEP 315 n=l FEP 255 n=l Fall 4 n=2 TT n=2 FEP Spring FEPE FEPE FEPE 56 16 Growth 5 9.5 Fall FEPE Spring Growth 5*-ALT RIT Scores Reading 2\" Grade 3^* Grade 4\" Grade 5* Grade 6'*' Grade 7' Grade 8' Grade 9' Grade 10' Grade 11*^ Grade Language 2\" Grade Grade 4'* Grade 5* Grade 6' Grade 7' Grade 8* Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11' Grade LEP 189 n=2 197 n=l 204 n=2 212 n=l Sag LEP 191 n=2 203 n=2 NAEP 205 n=2 216 n=l 213 n=l \\\\ NAEP ji FEP 193 n=l 217 n=l 227 n=l 204 n=l 227 n=l FEP 208 n=l 216 n=l 225 n=l 209 n=l 232 n=l FEPE a FEPE t- 51 Math LEP NAEP FEP FEPE 2\" Grade 182 n=l 3^* Grade 4'*' Grade 197 n=l 5'* Grade :Sa 6* Grade 7' Grade 212 n=2 204 n=l 217 n=l n=l 216 n=l n=l *?T 8'*' Grade 9'*' Grade 10'*' Grade 11'* Grade 237 n=l 252 n=l W 58 Korean Language DRA Scores K P\" 2^ Fall 1.5 n=2 n=l LEP Spring 2.5 34 Growth i Fall Y'' 28 State Benchmark Exam Math 5' Grade LEP Language 5'' Grade LEP NAEP Spring Growth NAEP NAEP SAT-9: Complete Battery NCE Scores LEP NAEP Fall 28 n=l 5*^ Grade 7' Grade IO'** Grade \\\\ 52 n=l FEP 34 n=l 87 n=l FEP Spring 44 Growth 16 Fall FEPE Spring Growth FEP 195 n=l FEP 218 n=l FEPE FEPE 4 FEPE IB ALT RIT Scores 59 Reading LEP NAEP 2\"' Grade 3\"* Grade 166 n=2 4* Grade 5* Grade 6* Grade 7* Grade 163 n=l 185 n=2 214 n=l 21n=l FEP 193 n=l \"204 n=4 221 n=l \"W n=l 204 n=l 229 n=l FEPE 8* Grade 9* Grade 10* Grade 11* Grade Language LEP 2\" Grade 3^ Grade 181 n=2 4* Grade 5* Grade 6* Grade 7* Grade 8* Grade 9^^ Grade 10* Grade 11* Grade 228 n=l NAEP 173 n=l 195 n=2 211 n=l .. '.i.E .-,- ITl n=l ' - t\n-. 230 n=l -PS it-: FEP 206 n=l 210 n=4 \"229 n=l W n=l 222 n=l IdO n=l FEPE 60Math LEP NAEP 2\"** Grade 3'I Grade 202 n=2 4 Grade S'** Grade 6 Grade 7'* Grade 8* Grade Grade 10'*'Grade 11Grade 194 n=l 192 n=2 n=l 234 n= 1 247 n=l 1 FEP 214 n=l 207 n=4 218 n=l 213 n=l 211 n=l n=l FEPE '-f'' 61Appendix E LRSD Regulations on the Academic Assessment of PHLOTE St\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_300","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Dissemination of Assessment Result''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Dissemination of Assessment Result''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/300"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDISSEMINATION OF ASSESSMENT RESULTzoo mm z Vi Q n 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. Dissemination of Assessment Results Memorandum to elementary principals and teachers in Feb. 3, 1999, Learning Links, attaching the results for the second quarter reading and mathematics GRTs Memorandum to Les Gamine, June 1, 1999, providing status report on the development of the Quality Index and reporting on recommendations of Dr. Steve Ross relating to the assessment program E-mail to Gabinet, Sept. 28,1999, providing preview of grade 8 Benchmark examination results E-mail to middle school principals, Oct. 8, 1999, relating to dissemination of Benchmark results E-mail between Lucy Neal and Kathy Lease, Oct. 28-Nov. 2, 1999, relating to need for SAT9 scores to evaluate Title VI Memorandum to Judy Milam, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on quarterly SEA assessments Memorandum to Kathy Lease, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on DRA results for fall 6/ 8. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Dec. 3, 1999, advising her of Dr. Gamines request for results of climate surveys 9. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 3, 2000, with report on Advanced Placement scores 6/ 10. Memorandum to principals in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links providing information on packets being sent to schools on ALT results 11. E-mail to John Ruffins and Kathy Lease, Apr. 12,2000, requesting course enrollment data for NSF report ^7 12. Memorandum to principals and teachers in Apr. 26, 2000, Learning Links with comparisons of second quarter GRT results for 1998-99 and 1999-2000 13. E-mail to Diane Barksdale, Apr. 19, 2000, providing feedback on ALT scores *7/ 14. Memorandum to all principals in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 15. Memorandum to counselors and ALT coordinators in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 73 16. Memorandum to professional staff of Division of Instruction in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 17. E-mail to Dermis Glasgow and Ed Williams, May 15, 2000, requesting a special report on the middle school ALT mathematics scores 18. E-mail to SEA principals. May 23, 2000, relating to training for SEA schools for improved academic achievement 19. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, May 19-23, 2000, relating to data collections for NSE evaluations and results of middle school student survey 20. E-mail to elementary principals, June 1, 2000, relating to results of 1999-2000 Developmental Reading Assessment 21. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting report on Science ALTs 22. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Ed Williams, June 7,2000, relating to data requests from Dr. Camine 23. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting results of middle school student survey 24. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 23, 2000, requesting interpretation of DRA results 25. E-mail to Les Camine, July 7, 2000, providing information on interpretation of DRA results 26. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Ed Williams, and Linda Austin, July 13, 2000, requesting data for Southwest Education Development Lab relating to implementation of the Collaborative Action Team 27. E-mail to Sadie Mitchell and Erances Cawthon Jones, July 14, 2000, relating to DRA interpretations 28. E-mail to Pat Busbea, Patricia Price, and Ed Williams, July 14, 2000, relating to interpretation of DRA results\nattached document defines proficient 29. E-mail to Patricia Price and Pat Busbea, July 17, 2000, requesting correlation of teacher participation in ELLA training and student achievement 30. E-mail to elementary staff, July 21, 2000, attaching copy of presentation slides to the Campus Leadership Institute on DRA results 77 '75' 9? 30 5s3 31. E-mail to Leon Adams, July 28,2000, providing rationale from Mitchell Academy for the abandonment of Success for All, based on data analysis 32. E-mail to selected SFA principals, Aug. 8, 2000, with report on achievement of SFA schools as compared to others and with suggestions on possible abandonment of SFA based on data analysis 33. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 9, 2000, from Freddie Fields relating to possible modification of SFA and requesting ELLA training, based on data analysis 34. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Sept. 14, 2000, from Linda Austin requesting copy of LRSD Assessment Notebook 35. Memorandum to curriculum division, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmark examinations 36. Memorandum to Board of Directors, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 3/ 37. Memorandum to Cabinet, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 38. Memoranda to selected principals, Nov. 3, 2000, congratulating them for achievement on grade 4 Benchmarks 9^- 39. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Nov. 6, 2000, requesting several sets of data to include in Compliance Report 40. E-mail to Patricia Price and Dennis Glasgow, Nov. 8, 2000, attaching spreadsheets on Benchmark data by SES status 41. E-mail to Kathy Lease from Tara Adams, Jan. 17, 2001, requesting information on interpretation of the ALT results 42. E-mail to principals and cabinet, Jan.l7, 2001, with attached reports on SAT9 scores, five-year comparison\nSAT9, three-year comparison\nand SAT9 quartile report. 43. E-mail to principals. May 30, 2000, with attached sample letter to parents that can accompany the ALT results 44. Document entitled Identified Issues from Data/Attendance Focus Group prepared by PRE 45. Document entitled Assessment Window prepared with advice from Focus Group /03. 46. Document entitled Assessment Advisory Committee, 2000-01 with names of advisory committee members 47. Copies of PowerPoint presentation to Board of Education, Nov. 16, 2000: A Quick Look at the 4* Grade Benchmark Exam and a Preview of the SAT-9 48. E-mail to Steve Ross, Nov. 20, 2000, including feedback to a draft plan he had written relating to loan forgiveness 49. E-mail to principals and Cabinet, Nov. 29, 2000, with information on how to access test data on the ADE web page 50. Memorandum to IRC Staff, Dec. 1, 2000, relating to available SAT9 and Benchmark reports 51. Memorandum to middle school principals, Dec. 11, 2000, attaching reports on assignments of eighth graders to high schools 52. E-mail to SEA principals and facilitators, Feb. 23, 2001, announcing training on the SEA Student Data Base 53. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, Mar. 14, 2001, relating to analysis of end-of-module test results 54. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 23, 2001, with attached information on the Duke Talent Search 55. E-mail to middle school principals, June 29,2001, reminding them of information sent to them earlier about how to access test data on the ADE web site 56. E-mail to principals, June 29, 2001, attaching copies of DRA test results /c/p no /Il IL /// 1TO: FROM: Re: MEMO Elementary School Principals and Teachers Plarming Research and Evaluation Dr. Kathy Lease Dr. Ed Williams LRSD CRT Test Results and Reminder for March Testing Attached are the District average scores for the 2\"* quarter reading and math benchmarks. Each benchmark has four questions. _A score of three or above is considered proficient. There are ten benchmarks each for reading and math. The reading benchmarks correspond to the list of 2\"'* quarter benchmarks for each grade level. Math benchmarks combine the 1* and 2\"'* quarter benchmarks. For example: 3\"* grade math benchmark Ml 1 means 1\" quarter, benchmark, while M23 means 2\"'* quarter, 3'* benchmark. Please contact our office if you have any questions, 324-2125. The 3\"* quarter benchmark exams are scheduled to be given March lb*-18'*'. This memorandum is also to inform you of the procedures for the upcoming administration of the CRT. The grade levels to be tested are 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. The subject areas that will be tested are mathematics and reading. The CRT is scheduled to be administered to one half of the schools on March 16-17, 1999\nthe remaining schools will test on March 17-18. Each school will test on the same sequence of days as the January CRT (i.e., schools which tested on January 6-7 will test on-March 16-17, and schools which tested on January 7-8 will test on March 17-18). If you have a conflict with your assigned testing dates please contact PRE and we will try our best to accommodate your schedule. As you are aware, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Education approved the administration of the CRT to measure student progress with the curriculum. It is for this purpose that we are conducting the third CRT in March of 1999 that will assess progress on the grade level benchmarks. This test will be machine scored by PRE in order to assist teachers with the grading. Therefore, it is necessary that the instructions and procedures for administering be followed exactly. Please remember that the results of this test must be incorporated into the third nine weeks grade. The value of the test and how it is incorporated may be decided at the building level. Please share the relevant information from this memo with your teachers. 3rd Grade, 2nd Quarter, CRT Results pjumber taking me test n Average score RD1 7555 2.2391 RD2 \"7555 3.3038 RD3 2.1988 RD4 7555 2.0509 RD5 7555 2.6660 RD6 \"7555 2.8563 RD7 7555 2.9242 RD8 7555 2.6681 RD9 7555 2.2794 RD10 \"7555 2.4030 Number taking me test Average score_______ Mil 7555 2.8531 M12 -7555 3.1935 M13 2.5742 M14 \"7555 2.6273 M15 i586 2.4910 M21 \"7555 2.7078 M22 7555 2.4889 M23 7555 3.1098 IVI24 \"7555 2.9602 M25 2.7057 4th Grade, 2nd Quarter, CRT Results Numoer taking me test Average score_______ RD1 755? 2.5783 RD2 -755? 2.4906 RD3 1859* 2.7310 RD4 1659 3.0941 RD5 \"755? 2.7434 RD6 755? 2.0613 RD7 \"755? 3.1834 RD8 \"755? 2.1232 RD9 185\u0026amp; 2.3583 RD10 2.3986 Number taking me test Average score_______ Mil 1859 2.7827 M12 755? 2.8731 M13 755? 2.7138 M14 755? 3.2184 M15 \"755? 2.4933 M16 \"755? 2.6304 M21 \"755? 2.8913 M22 \"755? 2.5487 M23 755? 2.5336 M24 755? 2.6961 Sth Grade, 2nd Quarter, CRT Results Numoer taking me test Average score_______ RD1 \"7757 2.8213 Numoer taking me test Average score_______ M12 \"772T 2.2384 RD2 775T 2.7378 M14 \"7727 2.4014 RD3 772T 3.1404 M15 T72T 1.9037 RD4 7727 2.5922 M21 7757 2.0505 RD5 \"7727 3.5835 M22 7727 2.2807 RD6 \"7727 2.1398 -M23 \"7727 2.2454 RD7 \"7727 2.8399 M24 7727 2.3643 RD8 \"7727 1.6520 M25 \"7727 2.0278 RD9 \"T72T 2.4455 M26 \"7727 1.8138 RD1O 2.7732 M27 772T 1.3840 6th Grade, 2nd Quarter, CRT Results Numoer taking me test Average score_______ RD1 \"7557 3.4351 RD2 \"7557 3.6688 RD3 \"7557 2.9172 RD4 \"7557 2.3965 RD5 TW 2.6145 RD6 \"7557 2.4600 RD7 \"7557 3.2879 RD8 7557 3.2245 RD9 \"7557 2.8234 RD10 \"7557 3.0810 Numoer taking me test Average score Mil 7557 2.7948 M13 \"TUST 3.0414 M14 108^ 2.3891 M21 \"7557 2.4821 M22 \"7557 1.9954 M23 7557 2.3717 M24 7557 2.5713 M25 7557 2.2410 M26 wr 2.4839 M27 \"7557 1.8896 Page 1 I 2 Division of Instruction Instructional Resource Center 3001 S Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 TO: Les Camine, Superintendent FROM: Bonnie Lesley SUBJ: Quality Index DATE: June 1, 1999 I have been very concerned for several months about how to move forward with Cluster Bs assignment, given the following unresolved problems: 1. Decisions relating to the assessment plan, especially the need for annual tests at every grade level if we are going to emphasize value-added gains of individual students. 2. How to avoid two conflicting accountability systems: ACTAAP and the LRSD Quality Index. On Tuesday, May 25, Kathy Lease and I met with Dr. Steve Ross for several hours. We reviewed our progress since we had last met with him, and we sought his advice on several issues still to be decided. His advice on assessment follows\n1. 2. 3. That we identify one test to administer annually at every grade and that we avoid any mix and match (such as two different tests at grades K-2\nthe SAT9 for state- mandated grade levels\nand something else for other grades). The test we choose must, of course, be aligned with our curriculum standards and benchmarks and should, to the extent possible, be aligned with the States benchmark examinations. That Kathy Lease should investigate the availability of instruments, check with school districts that have used them, compare short- and long-range costs, and construct an assessment plan with all haste. He suggested that we look at the Terra Nova series, K-10, since this is the test used by Tennessee in their value-added system. That we test reading and mathematics only for the immediate future since they are the priorities and since it is more difficult to secure alignment of science and social studies instruments with local curriculum and those data dont tend to be useful. On the Quality Index, he made the following suggestions: Option 1. Drop the idea of a local system and use the state system, ACTAAP. The rationale includes the idea that if we align the local system with ACTAAP, we would need a correlation of at least .9. The question then becomes, why bother? Why have two separate systems that would serve to confuse principals, other staff, and the public? Another argument is that we could use the energy and resources that would be necessary to develop, communicate, maintain, and refine a local system to building the schools capacity to improve in ways to impact ACTAAP measures. We could go ahead and develop our local system of rewards/recognitions and sanctions. Quality Schools would be schools that achieve x percentage of state indicators, plus demonstrate an acceptable level of implementation of district reforms. I Option II. Adopt the ACTAAP system for local use. Then use other academic indicators to triangulate data, to find a preponderance of evidence that improvement has/has not occurred. Use a more qualitative approach to making decisions about rewards and sanctions. The qualitative analysis could be the text of the school narrative that must be provided in Tier 3 of ACTAAP. Option in. Adopt the ACTAAP for local use. Use our own system of rewards and sanctions. Include other desired indicators in the building-level report card, but not as part of the determination of accountability status. Option IV. Contact Dr. William Sanders, who developed the Tennessee system and see if he will contract with us in the development of out systemif we are determined to pursue a local system. Sophisticated statistical procedures are required to make it credible, and we need to be sure that we have the appropriate testing in place. Dr. Ross noted that when we began to create the Quality Index, the state system was not yet on the table. Its development is a strong reason for us to adjust and modify our plans since compliance with the state system will consume so much energy. The use of ACTAAP does not preclude our ability to include a value-added report to the community, either as a part of a report to the Board, in a press conference, or as a significant part of the building-level report cards that are to be distributed to every school community. I have devoted a considerable number of hours trying to complete the Cluster B report. I cannot, of course, complete the list of academic indicators until Dr. Lease finalizes the assessment plan since I must know what measures will be available at each grade level, and I must know how to include the value-added piece. The more I try to align the indicators with the state system, so as to avoid confusion and mixed messages to the school and to the community, the more convinced I am that we do not need two separate systems. I recommend that we consider some combination of Options II and III for the Quality Index. In this way, we still get what we want without creating a second accountability system. ACTAAP I have studied the latest draft of ACTAAP, and it seems clear to me that we need to move rapidly to realign some of our thinking so that we optimize the schools ability to do well on the measures that matter in the state accountability system. According to the February draft, the SAT9 scores will not count in the point system, and, indeed, ADE is phasing out norm-referenced tests. The Tier I indicators depend solely on the Arkansas benchmark examinations at grades 4, 6, 8, and the end-of-level tests at the high school level. If this draft is going to prevail, then we need to pay a great deal more attention to the use/ implementation of the Smart Start gateway examinations that have been provided by Doug Reeves through the ADE. We need also to place more emphasis on training all teachers how to teach writing in their disciplines\nwe need to require that nine-weeks and semester examinations be at least 60 percent constructed responses\nand we need to train teachers how to develop their own performance tasks with assessments and rubrics. As some of us have said all year as well, the new curriculum that we are establishing in language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies calls for performance assessments, assessments that test whether students have learned the material beyond memorization or lucky guesses to the level of understanding. These approaches would support more vigorously what is happening at the state level and would enable us more quickly to show improvement on those important examinations. Finally, I have spent the last month reviewing and synthesizing several instructional framework models and cognitive science research for the presentation that I will be making to high school teachers on June 4. After doing so, I am more and more convinced that performance assessments are more appropriate measures of student achievement than the SAT9 and similar examinations. I do not object to the administration of a norm-referenced test, but I think we as leaders should down-play its importance in favor of a more performance-based measure. Next Stens As you can see, the basic assumptions that we have been working on all year in planning the assessment system and in the Cluster B assignments seem to have changed as we have learned more about what the state plans are and as we have thought through what we need to be doing. We need, I think, to have a real discussion of these issues at least at the Cabinet level and then to make appropriate adjustments to our planning so that we can move forward. Right now we are stuck. 3 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE. KATHY R. Tuesday, September 28,1999 5:21 PM BABBS, JUNIOUS\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nGADBERRY, BRADY L.\nHURLEY, RICHARD\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nCARNINE, LESLIE V.\nWATSON, LINDA\nLACEY, MARIAN G.\nMILHOLLEN, MARK\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nVANN, SUELLEN\nANDERSON, VICTOR Benchmark Exams-8th grade-98-99 Heres a quick preview of our S grade benchmark exam results. We can talk about these further later. We will schedule a meeting with all middle school principals and go over these results. We are then going to volunteer to work with teachers at each school to talk about these results and what they mean. If you have any questions, give me a call. Benchmark Grade 8 charts 98-99.. Kathy Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt. Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski St. Little Rock, AR 72206 Phone: 501-324-2122 Fax: 501-324-2126 Email: krieaseig)irc.lrsd.k12.ar.us 1 100% 90% 88% 80%  70% -- 63% 60%  50%  40%  30% -- 2 3% 20%  10%-/^ 0% i% Cloverdale Dunbar Grade 8 Benchmark (2/99): Math, All Students W%- 65% 2 3% 73% 72% 52% 48%  Below Basic  Basic  Proficient  Advanced :3% :2% 2 3% 2 2% Hr 2% % 2% 3% %% Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 4LESLEY, BONNIE From\nSent: To\nCc: Subject\nLEASE, KATHY R. Friday, October 08, 1999 11:09 AM BERRY, DEBORAH\nFULLERTON, JAMES\nHUDSON, ELOUISE\nJAMES, BRENDA\nBUCK, LARRY\nMOSBY, JIMMY\nPATTERSON, DAVID\nROUSSEAU, NANCY BRIGGS, MONA\nDILLINGHAM, YVETTE\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA\nTRUETT, IRMA\nWILLIAMS, ED Benchmark Scores Importance: High Dear Middle School Principals: We are very sensitive to number of times that we ask you to come out of your buildings for meetings, but we know that you want your benchmark data as soon as possible. Weve come up with an idea that might work. You are supposed to be in a meeting with Dr. Lesley on school improvement plans on Oct. 14'^ at 10:30. Could you meet with PRE at 9:30 in the superintendents conference room? We will give you your scores and the released items, and answer questions about strategies to improve scores. Ed has done a bar graph that you may find helpful. Let me know if this plan will not work for you. Thanks, Kathy Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt. Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski St. Little Rock, AR 72206 Phone: 501-324-2122 Fax: 501-324-2126 Email: krleaseig)irc.lrsd.k12.ar.us 1 5 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Tuesday, November 02,1999 1:19 PM TRUETT, IRMA FW: Title VI Evaluation Can you get this to Lucy once we get the 99's are finished? Make me a copy, too. KL Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt. Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District Phone: 501-324-2122 3001 S. Pulaski st. Little Rock, AR 72206 Fax: 501-324-2126 Email: krlease@irc.lrsd.k12.ar.us -----Original Message----- From: NEAL, LUCY Sent: Monday, November 01, 1999 8:14 AM To: LEASE, KATHY R. Subject: RE: Title Vl Evaluation I think it is December 1. I'll check with Leon. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Sunday, October 31, 1999 11:21 PM NEAL, LUCY WILLIAMS, ED RE: Title VI Evaluation The 99 SAT-9's just came in. We are verifying hard copy scores with our computer program. We'll get your scores to you. What is your deadline? KL Original Message From: NEAL. LUCY Sent: Thursday, October 28,1999 2:12 PM To: LEASE, KATHY R. Subject: Title Vl Evaluation Last year I got a little Title VI money for library books at the middle schools and one of the evaluations we put down was SAT-9 scores. Haven't heard anybody say we have them for this fall yet, but here is what I need if you can point this request to the right person in your shop. Fall 98 Stanford scores for grade 7 on Reading/Language Arts Fall 99 Stanford scores for grade 7 on Reading/Language Arts I don't even need it broken down by school. I hope you can help me and please let me know if you need more information. Thank you to the department that lives to serve. Lucy M. Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501.324.0577 (voice) 501.324.0504 (fax) 1 6 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 November 4, 1999 TO: Judy Milam FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley^^^i isociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Eight-Week SFA Assessments Please provide me quarterly with an analysis of each SFA schools progress as revealed in the assessment data. We can monitor progress using this information. BAL/rcm 1 Cc: Pat Price 7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 November 4, 1999 TO: Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintend, Planning Research \u0026amp; Evaluation FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley 'Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: K-2 Observation Surveys I am eagerly anticipating the results of our initial assessment of K-2 children. When can I expect these data? What is the process for establishing performance levels? BAL/rcm 8 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Tuesday, December 07,1999 10:56 AM TRUETT, IRMA FW: Reports to Dr. Gamine Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt. Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski SI. Little Rock, AR 72206 Phone: 501-324-2122 Fax: 501-324-2126 Email: kriease^irc.lrsd.kl 2.ar.us Original Message- F ro m: __5AVAGE, KEN iT -riday, December 03^ ffo: LEASI :14 PM Reports to Dr. Gamine Thanks for the advance notice that Dr. Gamine would be looking for me-he did today at lunch. It seems he was VERY interested in having the overall results for the parents and for the teachers. I just delivered the reports that he asked for with the latest data. I am attaching copies of the reports to this email. One note, youll notice a number in the box with each question. That number is the total percentage of respondents who either marked \"Strongly Agree\" or \"Agree for that question. ParenlA Table 12-3.xls Parents Table 12-3.xls Teacher Table 12-3.xls ENJOY! Ken. 1 9 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: DONALDSON, MABLE Monday, April 03. 2000 3:33 PM LESLEY. BONNIE RE: AP Scores I just faxed the information to 324-0504. Did you get the fifteen pages? Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 3:09 PM To: DONALDSON. MABLE Subject: RE: AP Scores Right! Thanks. 324-0567 (fax) Original Message From: Sent: To: DONALDSON, MABLE Monday, April 03, 2000 2:19 PM LESLEY, BONNIE Subject: RE: AP Scores Yes I can. You are talking about the full report of scores, right? Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 1:42 PM To: DONALDSON, MABLE Subject: AP Scores Thanks for getting the report to me. In the copy for 1999 that you gave me earlier, I could not read the last couple of columns~cut off by copy machine, I think. Can you fax me another copy of that report? Thanks. 1 10 Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72201 DD To: From: Date: Re: rincipals\nathy Lease, Asst. Supt, PRE April 3, 2000 Achievement Level Test Results ^^1 Enclosed in the packets being sent to you by school mail you will find the Class Reports for teachers that show the Achievement Level Test results, for students by class and preliminary reports on data by subject and grade. When you review the reports, remember that the emphasis is on the RIT score, which will be the baseline score that we will use to monitor the growth of students. M i? w I Pr0\u0026lt;^ Retest results are on separate sheets because system software is programmed to combine the two reports only when retest results from all schools are entered. Three schools did not meet the deadline, so it is not possible to complete the remaining reports at this time. As soon as these schools turn in their retests, they will be scanned, and the process of generating school reports, individual student reports and parent reports will begin. PRE will work as quickly as possible to get these results to you. Those of you who honored test deadlines are appreciated. Many worked very hard to complete the testing on time. S' PRE will be scheduling a workshop on interpreting ALT test data\nhowever, we have several time constraints centering around requirements for the Benchmark and End of Course testing. Videos will also be available for use with staff and parents\nwe are doing some editing on the videos at this time. The goal is to have videos delivered to you in time to use as you interpret your data. 0w fi\nH w I As each of you review test results, please note any errors, omissions, or questions, and call, fax, or email us. We appreciate receiving this input in writing so that we can have a record of concerns and be able to track the resolution to the problem. We cant thank you enough for your efforts in the initial implementation of this phase of the districts new assessment program. The only piece that is still to be administered is the science test. We will communicate with you shortly on the proposed timeline for that test. The data from math and science tests will be essential to our ability to track our progress with the NSF grant. I 11LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, April 12, 2000 4:56 PM LEASE, KATHY R. RE: NSF Report I think one problem is that she reported every single math course as a gate-keeping course, but she didn't get the total enrollment included since she didn't aggregate the various versions of a course. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Wednesday, April 12, 2000 3:43 PM LESLEY. BONNIE RUFFINS, JOHN\nSAVAGE. KEN\nJOHNSON. VIRGINIA\nCARNINE. LESLIE V. RE\nNSF Report Virginia is going through the data that has already been pulled. She was originally told to pull the gatekeeping courses, so we will request from John whatever courses are missing from your list. KL Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, April 12, 2000 10:50 AM RUFFINS, JOHN\nLEASE, KATHY R. CARNINE, LESLIE V.\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject: NSF REport I just returned from a meeting with the NSF program officer, and he is requiring us to submit to him THIS WEEK a ton of information in order to justify our continued funding. I MUST have immediately the following: disaggregated by school, race and gender, the enrollment this year (October 1?) in every mathematics and science course. Please get someone on this TODAY, or we will not have the time we need to convert it to our tables and do the analysis and interpretation. THANKS. The numbers follow: Mathematics MATH 111000 112000 112001 112002 112004 112006 112008 113001 113002 113003 113004 113006 113008 114000 114002 115000 115002 115004 115006 ALGI ALGIl ACT PREP:MATH ALG 11 PRE-AP GEOMETRY GEOM PRE-AP CONCEPT GEOM PRE-CALC A PRE-CALCULUS PRE-CAL B U TRIG/ADV ALG TRIG PRE-AP STATISTICS CALCULUS APPL OF MATH STATS AP CALC AB AP CALC BC AP CALC AB APU Algebra I Algebra II ACT Preparation: Mathematics Algebra II Pre-AP Geometry Geometry Pre-AP Concepts of Geometry Pre-Calculus A (Hall only) 9-12 10-12 10-12 9-12 10-12 10-12 10-12 11-12 1 1 /2 1 111 1/2 Pre-Calculus Pacesetter Mathematics (Hall, McClellan, Parkview Only) 11-12 Pre-Calculus B U (University Studies\nHall only) Trigonometry/ Advanced Algebra Trigonometry/ Advanced Algebra Pre-AP Statistics Calculus Applications of Mathematics (Fair only) Statistics AP Calculus AB AP Calculus BC AP Calculus AB APU (University Course) (Hall 11-12 11-12 11-12 12 11-12 11-12 11-12 12 11-12 11 11 1111 1 Only 11-12 1 1 1 Course # MS MATH 116002 116004 116010 116100 117002 117004 117006 117010 117012 117100 118002 118004 118006 118008 118010 118100 Abbreviation Title Grade(s) Credit PLATO LAB-MATH MATH 6 MATH 6 PRE-AP MATH 6 GT MAP 6 MATH 7 MATH 7 PRE-AP ALG 1 PRE-AP INTL MONEY MATH 7 GT MAP 7 MATHS MATH 8 PRE-AP ALG 1 PRE-AP GEOM PRE-AP ALG 2 PRE-AP MAP 8 Mathematics 6 Mathematics 6 Pre-AP Mathematics 6 GT (Dunbar only) MAP 6 Mathematics 7 Mathematics 7 Pre-AP Algebra I Pre-AP (Dunbar only) International Money (Dunbar only) Mathematics 7 GT ([Dunbar only) MAP 7 Mathematics 8 Mathematics 8 Pre-AP Algebra I Pre-AP Geometry Pre-AP (Dunbar only) Algebra II Pre-AP MAPS 666 6777 7-8 7 $ 8 88 88 119000 119002 119004 ALG I PLTO ALG II PLTO GEOM PLTO Algebra I (Plato Lab) (Central, Fair, McClellan) Algebra I (Plato Lab) (Central, Fair, McClellan) Geometry (Plato Lab) (Central, Fair, McClellan) Science SCIENCE 131000 131002 Deleted ESL PHYS I ESL Physics I (Hall Only) PHYSICS I 131004 131006 131008 131010 132000 132002 132004 133000 133002 133004 133006 PHYS 1 PRE-AP 9-12 Physics f 1 PHYSICS I ESL ACT PHYS ACTIVE PHYS ESL BIOL 1 BIOLOGY 1 BIO 1 PRE-AP ESL CHEMI CHEMISTRY I CHEM 1 PRE-AP ANAT\u0026amp;PHYS 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 I 1 11 11 9-12 10-12 11-12 1 9~12 111 1 Physics I Pre-AP (Students may take this course instead of Active Physics or in addition to Active Physics) 9-12 Physics I ESL Active Physics (Hall only) Active Physics ESL Biology 1 (Hall Only) Biology I Biology I Pre-AP ESL Chemistry I (Hall Only) Chemistry 1 Chemistry I Pre-AP Human Anatomy and Physiology 11-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 10-12 10-12 9-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 1 11 11 11 11 1 2 Course # J33008 Deleted Abbreviation Title AOysa RSRCH Grade(s) Credit 133010 133101 133103 133104 133105 133107 133109 133110 133111 134000 135001 135002 135004 135006 135008 135010 135012 135014 135016 MS SCI 136000 136002 136004 136006 136008 136010 136012 136014 136016 136018 137000 137001 137002 137003 137004 137006 137008 137014 137016 137018 138000 138001 138002 138004 138006 138008 138014 138016 138018 138020 ADV RSRCH MICROBIO QUAL ANALY PHYSICS I PRE-AP STATS/WRTG ENV HEALTH ANAT\u0026amp;PHYS PHYSICS I PRE-AP ORG CHEM GEOL/SPACE BIO lAU PHYS 2 AP PHYS 2 APU BIOL 2 AP CHEM 2 AP ENV SCI AP BIOL 2 APU BIO 11 AP PHYS I PRE-AP U Advanced Science/ Theoretical Research Pre-AP Advanced Science/ Theoretical Research 11-12 1 PLATOLAB SCIENCE ESL SCI 6 SCIENCE 6 SCIENCE 6 PRE-AP HEALTH SCI 6 HLTH SCI 6 PRE-AP SCIENCE/HEALTH 6 SCI/HLTH 6 PRE-AP LAB SCIENCE 6 LAB SCI 6 PRE-AP SCIENCE 6 GT ESL SCI 7 SCI ILLUS SCIENCE 7 TECH WRTG SCIENCE 7 PRE-AP HEALTH SCI 7 HLTH SCI 7 PRE-AP LAB SCIENCE 7 LAB SCI 7 PRE-AP SCIENCE 7 GT ESL SCI 8 SEM HLTH SCI SCIENCE 8 SCIENCE 8 PRE-AP HEALTH SCI 8 HLTH SCI 8 PRE-AP LAB SCIENCE 8 LAB SCI 8 PRE-AP SCIENCE 8 GT SEM HLTH SCI 139000 139002 BIOG I PLTO CHEM I PLTO Microbiology (Parkview Only) Qualitative Analysis (Parkview Only) Physics I Pre-AP 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 A A 1 1 Applied Statistics and Technical Writing (Parkview Only) 11-12 Environmental Health (Parkview Only) 11-12 Human Anatomy and Physiology (Parkview Only) Physics I Pre-AP (Early Bird) Organic Chemistry (Parkview Only) Geology and Space Science 11-12 11-12 12 Biology lA U (University Studies\nHall only) 11-12 Physics II AP Physics II APU (Hall Only) Biology n AP Chemistry II AP Environmental Science AP Biology II APU (University Course) (Hall Only) Biology II AP (zero hour) 12 Physics I Pre-AP (University Studies\nHall only) ESL Science 6 (Cloverdale and Dunbar) Science 6 Science 6 Pre-AP Health Science 6 (Henderson only) Health Science 6 Pre-AP (Henderson only) Science/Health 6 (Mann only) Science/Health 6 Pre-AP (Mann only) Laboratory Science 6 (Mann only) Laboratory Science 6 Pre-AP (Mann only) Science 6 GT (Dunbar only) ESL Science 7 (Cloverdale and Dunbar) Scientific Illustration (Henderson only) Science 7 Technical Writing (Henderson only) Science 7 Pre-AP Health Science 7 (Henderson only) Health Science 7 Pre-AP (Henderson only) Laboratory Science 7 (Mann only) Laboratory Science 7 Pre-AP (Mann only) Science 7 GT (Dunbar only) ESL Science 8 Seminar in Health Science (Henderson only) Science 8 Science 8 Health Science 8 (Henderson only) Health Science 8 Pre-AP (Henderson only) Laboratory Science 8 (Mann only) Laboratory Science 8 Pre-AP (Mann only) Science 8 GT (Dunbar only) Seminar in Health Science (Henderson only) 12 12 12 12 11-12 'A 11-12 1 '/a 1 /a 11111 12 1 11-12 Vi 1 1 6666666666 7 7-8 7 7-8 7777778888888888 1 11 11 I I 11 11 /a 1 '/a 11 11 1 I 1 /a 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 Biology I (Plato Lab) (Central, Fair, McClellan) Chemistry I (Plato Lab) (Central, Fair, McClellan) 10-12 11-12 I I Special Education Mathematics 191004 Math 1 RR 191006 PhysSci RR 191008 Biology RR 191010 Health Science RR 191104 Math 1 SC 191106 Phys Sci SC 192004 Math 2 RR 192012 Earth Sci RR 192104 Math 2 SC 192016-Biology SC 193004 Math 3 RR 193104 Math 3 SC 193106 Health Sci SC 194004 Math 4 RR 3 194104 Math 4 SC 194106 Earth Sci SC 196004 Math 6 RR 196006 Sci 6 RR 196104 Math 6 SC 196106 Sci 6 SC 197004 Math 7 RR 197006 Sci 7 RR 197104 Math 7 SC 197106 Sci 7 SC 198004 Math 8 RR 198006 Sci 8 RR 198104 Math 8 SC 198106 Sci 8 SC The numbers that I have given you include some new numbers that have been added for next year, but almost all were in existence in 1999-2000. 4 12MEMORANDUM LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning Research \u0026amp; Evaluation April 18,2000 To: Principals and Teachers fFrroomm\n: )Dr. Ed R. Wvviullniaamiuss,, oSitaautissLtiicuiiaann aannud rRveesbeeaarrcchn oSppecialist, P ' ThroughKathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent, PRE Re: Comparing 2\"' QT CRT results, 1998 v. 1999 Attached are two documents containing 2\"'^ QT CRT from the 1998-99 and 1999-00 school year. The first attachment:  Compares the same grade year to year  Reports the percent correct on each of the Benchmarks and total percent correct for the Reading test. Total percent correct is reported for the Math test. Since different Benchmarks were measured on the two Math tests, year-to year comparison is not appropriate. Same grade comparison data is helpful to determine the success of benchmark mastery, instructional methods, and curriculum implementation. In the reading test, 3^', 4*, and 5* grades demonstrated a total score gain of 1% while the 6* grade had a decrease of 3%. In the math test, 4* and 5* grade had gains of 1.5% and 18.8%, while 3\"* and 6* grades had a decrease of 3.4% and 4%. The second attachment:  Reports year-to year growth  Reports only percent correct on the entire test, since the benchmarks change from one year to the next Year-to-year growth is an indicator of chaining. That is, how well did students build on the learning principles learned in an earlier grade level. Except for growth figures for the math test, 6* grade to 7'* grade, all students demonstrated growth in scores. In reading, 6* grade students in 1998 demonstrated the greatest amount of growth moving from 75% correct in 1998 to 83% correct in 1999. In the math test, 1998 5* grade students demonstrated the greatest amount of growth moving from 52% correct in 1998 to 57% correct in 1999. Test Description. The 1998 and 1999 reading tests had 40 questions each and measured 10 benchmarks. Thel998 math tests had 40 questions and measured 10 benchmarks, but 1999 tests ranged from 16 to 36 questions and did not measure as many benchmarks as the 1998 tests. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 324-2125. k i 2nd Quarter Reading CRT Results for the 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 School Year 3rd grade 3rd grade 1998 1999 % + or- 4th grade 4th grade 1998 1999 % + or- Benchmark % correct % correct Benchmark % correct % correct Total 1 2' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 56% 83% 55% 51% 67% 71% 73% 67% 57% 60% 64% 58% 83% 58% 48% 68% 74% 70% 74% 59% 59% 65% 5th grade 5th grade 1998 1999 Benchmark % correct % correct Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 70% 68% 79% 65% 90% 60% 71% 41% 61% 69% 67% 73% 70% 82% 60% 92% 55% 70% 43% 62% 73% 68% 2% 0% 3% -3% 1% 3% -3% 7% 2% -1% 1% Total % + or- 3% 2% 3% -5% 2% -5% -1% 2% 1% 4% 1% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 64% 62% 68% 77% 69% 52% 80% 53% 59% 60% 64% 67% 63% 70% 61% 87% 18% 83% 57% 63% 64% 65% 6th grade 6th grade 1998 1999 Benchmark % correct % correct Total 1 2' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 86% 92% 73% 60% 65% 62% 82% 81% 71% 77% 75% 85% 93% 74% 57% 54% 55% 80% 79% 67% 76% 72% 3% 1% -16% 18% -34% 3% 4% 4% 4% 1% % + or- -1% 1% 1% -3% -11% -6% -2% -2% -4% -1% -3% 2nd Quarter Math CRT Results for the 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 School Year 3rd grade 3rd grade 1998 1999 % + or- 4th grade 4th grade 1998 1999 % + or- Total Total % correct % correct I 69.3% 1 65.9%| -3.4% Sth grade Sth grade 1998 1999 % + or- % correct % correct I 52% I 70.8% I 18.8% Total Total % correct % correct I 68% I 69.5% 1 1.5% 6th grade 6th grade 1998 1999 % + or - % correct % correct I 61% I 57% I -4% 13 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, May 02, 2000 4:32 PM BARKSDALE, MARY D. RE: ALT Results Thanks for this invite. I wish I could have been there. Last week was one of those weeks from hell for me. I wrote the District's application for the Quality award, and it was really, really hard. I prayed the kids would do their best last week. We really need to look good on this. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: BARKSDALE, MARY D. Wednesday, April 19, 2000 7:13 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: ALT Results Thank you for the wonderful news. I only hope that the team effort will pay off next week in Benchmark results. We have developed a rubric for participation for next week and a reward/incentive of Fourth Grade Field Day Friday afternoon. Craig O'Neal is coming Friday Morning at 9:30 for a rally. You are invited to bothwhy not come and get out of the IRC for a few minutes. We would love to have you. Bring anyone else you can get your hands on-ya'll need some fun time also. DBarksdale Original Message From: Sent: To: BARKSDALE, MAiBXDr Subject: ALT RySulIT I've had a quick look this morning of the ALT scores, and your school apparently did greatl Congratulations! This is wonderful. I know that your whole team worked really, really hard this year. 1 14 I I To: From: Through: Subject: LL Sbofoo Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 All Principals May 7, 2000 Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintende\nMona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist'Zb^ Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent NWEA Training This is to inform you that we are scheduling a data interpretation training session regarding the Achievement Level Test information. A consultant from NWEA out of Portland will be with us. This session will be geared specifically for principals. We will be meeting on May 25 from 8:30 am until 3:30 pm in room 18 here at the IRC. At that time you will receive your ALT test results. This should be a very beneficial meeting for you as you begin the process of using your ALT data. Cc: Dr. Les. Camine Dr. Bonnie Lesley J. Babbs15 w t?o Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 May 7, 2000 To: From: Through: Subject: Counselors \u0026amp; ALT Coordinators v Mona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist /\u0026gt;/\u0026gt; Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant SuperintendeQ,^^^ NWEA Training This is to inform you that we are scheduling a data interpretation training session regarding the Achievement Level Test information. A consultant from NWEA out of Portland will be with us. This session will be especially helpful for counselors and testing coordinators. We will be meeting on May 24 from 8:30 am until 3:30 pm in the Board Room at the District Office. This should be a very beneficial meeting for you as you begin the process of using your ALT data. Cc: J. Babbs J. Elston16co TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 May 8, 2000 Professional Staff of Division of Instruction Mona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent NWEA Training / This is to inform you that a data interpretation training session regarding the Achievement Level Test information has been scheduled for this month. A consultant from NWEA out of Portland will be with us. We believe you will find this session especially informative and helpful to you. We will be meeting at the IRC, room 18 on Tuesday, May 23 from 8:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. We hope that you can make arrangements to join us for this very informative session. MB/adg 1 I I '1 f Little Rock School District NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION  Using Data to Make a Difference Interpreting Level Test Reports May 23-25, 2000 8:30 Agenda Welcome and introductions Intended Accomplishments Workshop participants will...  Understand the Level Test administration process including locator tests, retest issues, and logistics  Read and interpret Achievement Level Test reports  Use data to focus instruction and evaluate programs  Communicate data to parents and students 8:45 Level Test Administration  Locator tests  Why retest? Adjusting the levels and reducing retest rates  Logistics - tips to make test administration more efficient  Test environment - Language shapes your future 10:00 Break 10:15 How to read and interpret reports - Class reports  Parent report  Longitudinal report  District goal summary report 12:00 Lunch 1:00 1:30 Communication with students and parents  Using the RJT chart to communicate  Setting classroom and individual student goals Interpreting your own data  Data analysis assignment  Investigating the data 3:15 Debrief assignments ! Questions and answers 17 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Monday, May 15, 2000 2:14 PM GLASGOW, DENNIS\nWILLIAMS, ED Middle School Math I need a report, by teacher and by school, of the middle school math scores on the ALT. I need to know which classes are regular and which are Pre-AP. We need to know exactly what is happening in those classes. Even though our current controversy is only at grade 6, I'd like to see all three grade levels. Thanks! 1 18LESLEY, BONNIE From\nSent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, May 23, 2000 5:06 PM KEOWN, ADA\nCOX, ELEANOR\nSMITH, DARIAN\nWORM, JERRY\nFIELDS, FREDERICK\nBRANCH, SAMUEL\nSCULL, LILLIE\nWILSON, JANICE M. ADAMS, LEON\nMILAM, JUDY\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H. SFA I asked for a meeting today with the SFA folks from Memphis to talk about next year and the kind of support that you all need to be even more successful. I was delighted to learn that all except one school was greatly improved this year in terms of their evaluation of the site visits, and I am so very pleased. Thanks for your hard work. I asked specifically about the family support component and why we are not getting that here. It is an option, they told me, and they will be happy to add it to the contract of any school that wants it. If you are interested in knowing more about that, in adding more professional development for your school to meet specific needs, or in any other of the services that they have available, then please call Betsy or, of course, Judy Milam, and they will answer your questions. As I understand the situation, the Title I office negotiates the basic contract, but you may certainly use your Title I funds to add to that basic contract for additional training or programs or materials-whatever you need to support your teachers. You can amend your Title I plan if you need to so that it includes the additional contract components. Keep Mr. Adams informed if you need to do that. Again, I feel much better at the end of this year than I did after the report I received at the end of last year. I know you have worked hard to get your school to a higher level of implementation, that your teachers have had more training this year, and that generally you have had more information. Congratulations. We are improving, and that is what we all want to see! 1 19LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, May 23, 2000 12:33 PM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA RE: SECME EVALUATION When can I see the results of the kid survey on middle school? Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Monday, May 22, 2000 9:19 AM LESLEY, BONNIE FW: SECME EVALUATION I appreciate the way you are handling this. I admire the outcomes of your administrative style. FYI. Related to evaluation of the academic enrichment initiatives (see list), I got data last Thursday and Friday from 179 participants (Elementary, Middle, and High Schoolers) in the Summer Science Club Program at their final meeting. The final version of the program evaluation report for this initiative will be ready to distribute at our project meeting next week. In addition, I hope to have the report for the UALR Summer Science Institute done and ready to distribute at that time. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Museum of Discovery After School Science Club Program University of Arkansas at Little Rock Summer Science Institute Philander Smith College Summer Algebra Readiness Program(SARP) Algebra Summer Math Advanced Readiness Training (SMART) SECME Thrive Algebra Community-based Family Math and Science Thank you again. -----Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 9:16 AM To:CLEAVER, VANESSA Subject: RE: SECME EVALUATION No-I just wondered if you were thinking we should evaluate the program Jo Evelyn is doing. --Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: CLEAVER, VANESSA Thursday, May 18, 2000 3:36 PM LESLEY, BONNIE JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject: RE: SECME EVALUATION Dr. Lesley, I simply would like to know what impact SECME is making on our students. How are we measuring that impact to 1 justify our continued support? Virginia did an evaluation of the After School Science Club program. She correlated the program activities to the standards and benchmarks. I'd like to do the same for SECME. I'm not worried about our project evaluation - this is just information that I'd like to have about this particular program. I'll be happy to sit down with you and discuss this further. Original Message From: Sent: To: CLEAVER, VANESSA LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, May 17, 2000 11:47 AM Subject: RE: SECME EVALUATION I don't understand what this is about. Are you intending to use Jo's evaluation as a supplement to the one that Virginia is doing? Are you worried about our project evaluation? I don't understand. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: CLEAVER, VANESSA Wednesday, May 17, 2000 9:54 AM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA LESLEY, BONNIE SECME EVALUATION I would like to meet with Jo Evelyn to take a look at her evaluation plan for SECME. We need to know if it will meet our needs. I've requested a copy of the evaluation plan from the project director of Prince George's County Public Schools (they are a CPMSA site). When are you available? I can arrange for Jo Evelyn to come over here. Vanessa E. Cleaver Project Director - LR CPMSA (501) 324-0522 2 20LESLEY, BONNIE From\nSent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 8:34 AM BARKSDALE, MARY D. RE: K-2 Literacy Thanks, Diane. Hope you all had a good last day yesterday! Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject\nBARKSDALE, MARY D. Sunday, June 04, 2000 6:55 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: K-2 Literacy Wow, what an upper. Thanks to you and your leadership we have all been focused in the right direction and hopefully are going to make progress withALL kids. Diane Original Message From: Sent: To: lesle\nThi Al way, June 01,2000 10:45 lERSON, BARBABAHASfffEY, VIRGINIA\nBRANCH. SAMUEL\nCARSON, CHERYL\nCARTER, LILLIE\nCHEATHAM, MARY\nCc: Subject: ---CUORTnEY, THERESA\nCOX, ELEANOR\nDARIAN SMITH\nDEBORAH MITCHELL\nETHEL DUNBAR\nFaith Donovan\nFIELDS, FREDERICK\nGOLSTON, MARY\nHARKEY, JANE\nHOBBS, FELICIA L.\nJONES, BEVERLY\nKEOWN, ADA\nMANGAN, ANN\nMARY BARKSDALE\nMENKING, MARY\nMORGAN, SCOTT\nNANCY ACRE\nOLIVER, MICHAEL\nPHILLIPS, TABITHA\nSHARON BROOKS\nTUCKER, JANIS A.\nWARD, LIONEL\nWILSON, JANICE M.\nZEIGLER, GWEN S. MITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nLACEY, MARIAN G.\nBABBS, JUNIOUS\nANDERSON, VICTOR\nSTEWART, DONALD M.\nMILHOLLEN, MARK\nVANN, SUELLEN\nHURLEY, RICHARD\nWATSON, LINDA\nELSTON, JO\nCARNINE, LESLIE V.\nADAMS, LEON\nAUSTIN, LINDA\nBRIGGS, MONA\nCLEAVER, VANESSA\nCRAWFORD, PAMELA\nDAVIS, SUZI\nDEBBIE MILAM\nDILLINGHAM, YVETTE\nDONALDSON, MABLE\nEddie McCoy\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nGREEN, CAROL\nHOBBY, SELMA\nLEASE, KATHY R.\nMARION BALDWIN\nMARTIN, PAULETTE\nMcNEAL, MARIE\nNEAL, LUCY\nPRICE, PATRICIA\nSMITH, GARY\nWALLS, COLLEEN\nWILLIAMS, ED\nWOODS, MARION K-2 Literacy I am sitting here with tears of joy rolling down my face. We have the first run of the reports on the K-2 Literacy exams, and the kids are WAY UP at all three grade levels, particularly in vocabulary. I am so happy and so grateful-on behalf of all those kids you all taught so well and on behalf of their parents and the greater community. We don't have the individual school scores yet, but we'll get them to you as soon as possible. CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF YOU AND TO YOUR SPLENDID TEACHERS. WE DID IT! These are our first true growth scores-from fall to spring. THANK YOU for hanging in and working so very hard! CELEBRATE! 1 21 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, June 07, 2000 9:24 AM LEASE, KATHY R. Science ALT When can I expect to see the reports on the Science ALTs? 1 22 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject\nLESLEY. BONNIE Wednesday, June 07. 2000 10:31 AM JOHNSON. VIRGINIA\nWILLIAMS. ED FW\nAcademic Progress Heads up! Note the data requests. In Kathy's absence, will you see what you all can do to gather this stuff up? I have written Hall for the University Studies info. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Wednesday, June 07, 2000 9:41 AM LESLEY, BONNIE\nMcNEAL, MARIE\nDONALDSON, MABLE\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nPRICE, PATRICIA\nDAVIS, SUZI\nCLEAVER, VANESSA\nGREEN, CAROL LEASE, KATHY R.\nWILLIAMS, ED\nBABBS, JUNIOUS\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nGADBERRY, BRADY L.\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nLACEY, MARIAN G.\nVANN, SUELLEN Academic Progress As you know one the primary goals has been to improve academic achievement. I have been attempting to create a comprehensive look at this issue and the following are the factors, which I thought should be considered. For report purposes we will want a racial breakout of statistics. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. State of Arkansas 4th Grade Bench Mark Test(s) 1998-991999-2000 Numbers of Students successfully completing Algebra 1997-981998-19991999-2000 (Biology should also have a comparison and what other subjects?) Enrollment in AP courses \u0026amp; successful completion of AP Courses 1997-981998-19991999-2000 (Inclusion of UALR courses at Hall into AP designation) ACT Exam data \u0026amp; Scores for the three mentioned years and % of seniors participating College Scholarship Data-number of students and amount Developmental Reading Assessment K-2 Data Number of student qualifying for Duke University Talent Program ? These are examples and hope you will recommend other measurements that you think may be more valid and predictive. This is for the annual report and I would like to have agreement before the week is out. Also remember we need to think about does this give us the evidence that we are making progress with the various commitments we have with the Deseg. Plan, NSF Grant, etc. Obviously it will take a couple of days for the statistics to be generated. 1 23 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, June 07, 2000 9:23 AM LEASE, KATHY R. Middle School Study Survey When can I expect to see the results and analysis of this survey? 1 24LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, June 23, 2000 8:48 AM CARNINE, LESLIE V. RE: Developmental Reading Assessment 1 am going to wait untii Pat Price gets back to answer some of these questions. One thing: This was our first year of the program impiementation, and some teachers weren't trained until late in the first semester. I am thrilled with the results as I've been able to study them so far, but there are more things I want to look at. From: Sent: To: Cc: Original Message Subject: CARMINE, LESLIE V. Friday, June 16, 2000 12:56 PM PRICE, PATRICIA\nWILLIAMS, ED LESLEY, BONNIE\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nLEASE, KATHY R.\nMILAM, JUDY\nHUFFMAN, KRIS\nTEETER, JUDY Developmental Reading Assessment I finally had time to look at the data and I have the following questions. What caused the difference in enrollment numbers and students tested? Did you isolate those k kids who have had a prek program vs. those who did not have a prek educational experience? The report uses proficient but isn't this really basic under the old system? And that would not necessarily suggesting at grade level but the child will or could benefit from and participate in that grade level? As I looked at the data the difference in the beginning or initial readiness between black and white suggested that on this test was factor of .67. At the end of 1st grade it had dropped to .37 which is a remarkable make up of readiness ground and /or vocabulary. At the end of 2nd grade there again had been significant growth and the gap had been reduced to a differential of .25. I think I am right but isn't this the 2nd year for the program which suggests that next year the 2nd grade gap could possibly be further reduced? If I am reading this correctly including the assumption about proficient and basic, the instructional issue is not remedial but acceleration of vocabulary / language development. Have I missed something or is the proper way to read the differential. Congratulations the numbers look great! 1 25 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, July 07, 2000 4:41 PM CARNINE, LESLIE V. RE: July Board Agenda Items I've spent a ton of time analyzing the DRA results, and it is clearer in my head now than when we have talked earlier. I have requested another report that will show us the PERCENT of kids at each level who are performing at or above the cut-points. After talking with Pat Busbea and reading some stuff on the DRA, I think I would feel more comfortable calling those cutpoints \"Readiness Level,\" rather than \"Proficiency Level.\" I don't think we can use these DRA results at all to correlate with this year's grade 4 exams. We cannot expect grade 4 kids to do as well after only a partial year of instruction (some teachers didn't get trained until up in the fall) as we will expect them to do when they have had two, three, four, and five years of good literacy instruction. We won't know if the K- 2 program really has improved grade 4 results until we can compare grade 4 scores in four years. The only thing we have to measure K-2 program implementation is these K-2 DRA results. But I agree to delaying the report. I want to look at the results more. -Original Message- From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Friday, July 07, 2000 11:01 AM LESLEY, BONNIE GRIFFIN, BEVERLY July Board Agenda Items Reports: I would concur with the briefing on the Carnegie Grant...It will be on the Report Agenda. I would like to hold the Literacy Report until we have the 4th Grade Benchmark results. I think it will be much more powerful if are projections are on target. If they are not we can show as what the future holds. Action Agenda: Home Schooling Policy and Regulations And lets hope we can recommend a Director for Safe Schools. Since we will not have the Mablevale position finalized I will recommend that we suspend the rules for approval on the 27th. I have briefed Mrs. Strickland. 1 26 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, July 13, 2000 8:25 AM MILAM, DEBBIE\nWILLIAMS, ED\nLEASE, KATHY R.\nAUSTIN, LINDA RE: SEDL request for information Kathy-will you be sure that Debbie gets this info for SEDL? I think we already have the reports. It's just gathering them up. Thanks. Original Message From\nSent: To\nCc\nSubject: MILAM, DEBBIE Thursday, July 13, 2000 7:41 AM WILLIAMS, ED\nLEASE, KATHY R.\nAUSTIN, LINDA LESLEY, BONNIE SEDL request for information SEDL has requested the following information on our district. We need to provide this as our part of the partnership we have with SEDL. 1 wasn't sure who who would have it so I'm sending this to all of you. Little Rock  Attendance rate 98-99 district 99-00 district, state  Completion (graduation rate) 98-99, 99-00 district, state  Dropout rate 98-99, 99-00 district, state  Suspensions/Expulsions 98-99, 99-00 district, state  Norm-referenced test (Stanford 9 all grades given) 98-99, 99-00 district, state  Criterion-referenced test (ACT-AAP) 99-00  SESl (% ffee/reduced lunch) 98-99, 99-00  SES 2 (% economically disadvantaged children) 98-99, 99-00 Thanks for helping us with this. Debbie Miiam Volunteers in Public Schools 1 27 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject: MITCHELL, SADIE Friday, July 14, 2000 10:11 AM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: Great News We have a lot to celebrate. I was so proud of our principals this week. They did a good job and they are growing. They showed strong abilities to process and apply skills that we have been teaching them all year. We have a long way to go though. Sadie Mitchell smmitch@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us Original Message From\nSent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, July 14, 2000 10:09 AM MITCHELL, SADIE RE: Great News Note that right here in River City we have 90-90-90 schools (a la Doug Reeves). 90% minority, 90% poor, and 90% proficient! Praise God! I am thrilled to death with ail this, and I want to buy a big billboard to celebrate! Original Message From: Sent\nTo: MITCHELL. SADIE Friday, July 14, 2000 10:05 AM LESLEY, BONNIE Subject\nRE\nGreat News There is a God Sadie Mitchell smmitch@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us Original Message From\nSent\nLESLEY, BONNIE Friday, July 14, 2000 9:34 AM To\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H. Subject\nGreat News As I told you, I asked for another report on the K-2 scores-this time telling us what the percent of kids is at each grade level who achieved proficiency. For instance, what percent of kids in kindergarten who scored at or above a 2-since this is the way the state reports out the scores. We'd be more consistent. Attached is the analysis I did last night. Do you love it?  File: DRA Percent Proficient 1999-2000.doc  128LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, July 14, 2000 2:24 PM BUSBEA, PAT\nPRICE, PATRICIA\nWILLIAMS, ED Definition of Proficiency Please critique this attempt to define \"proficient\" as it appears on the DRA. Or should we stick to the term \"readiness\"? Proficient Definition.doc 1 Developmental Reading Assessment, Grades K-2 Definition of Proficient The Arkansas Department of Education has defined performance at four levels: Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced for the Benchmark examinations that are administered at grades 4, 6, and 8 and the end-of-level examinations for designated high school courses. Proficient is the performance standard that all students should achieve. The ADE definition follows: Proficient students demonstrate solid academic performance for the grade tested and are well-prepared for the next level of schooling. They can use Arkansas established reading, writing, and mathematics skills and knowledge to solve problems and complete tasks on their own. Students can tie ideas together and explain the ways their ideas are connected. The Developmental Reading Assessment allows us to assess reading levels of students through a one-on-one test reading conference between teacher and student. Teachers observe student performance during the test, make notes on reading behaviors, and score the performance as they go along. To gauge which level on the DRA is equivalent to how Arkansas defines proficiency, the staff used national reading standards for each grade level and then identified the DRA level that corresponds to that specific performance. Standards and DRA equivalents by grade level follow: Grade Level Kindergarten Reading Standards______________________ Children at the end of kindergarten should understand that every word in a text says something specific. They can demonstrate this competence by reading Level B books that they have not seen before, but that have been previewed for them, attending to each word in sequence and getting most of them conect. Grade 1 By the end of the year, we expect first-grade students to be able to\nread Level 16 books that they have not seen before, but that have been previewed for them, with 90 percent or better accuracy of word recognition (self-correction allowed). When they read aloud, we expect first graders to sound like they know what they are reading. Fluent readers may pause occasionally to work out difficult passages. By the end of the year, we expect first-grade students to be able to independently read aloud from Level I books that have been previewed for them, using intonation, pauses and emphasis that signal the structure of the sentence and the meaning of the text. DRA Level_____________________________ Assessment texts A through 2 consist of a repeated word or sentence pattern with natural language structures. The simple illustrations include animals and objects familiar to primary children and highly support the text. One or two lines of text appear on the left page and are large and well spaced so that children can point as they read. The number of words in the texts ranges from ten to thirty-six._______________ Assessment texts 16 through 28 are stories with begirmings, middles, and ends, throughout which problems are presented and resolved. The characters are either imaginary (giants and elves) or animals with human characteristics. The content begins to move beyond childrens personal experiences and builds a basis with which to compare and contrast other stories. Literacy language structures are integrated with natural language. Some description of characters and setting is included. Illustrations provide moderate to minimum support. The text may be three to twelve lines above or beneath the illustrations, or a full page. The number of words in these texts starts at 266 and increases with each level of difficulty. Grade 2 By the end of the year, we expect second-grade students to be able to independently read aloud unfamiliar Level 24 books with 90 percent or better accuracy of word recognition (selfcorrection allowed). Assessment texts 16 through 28 are stories with beginnings, middles, and ends, throughout which problems are presented and resolved. The characters are either imaginary (giants and elves) or animals with human characteristics. The content begins to move beyond childrens personal experiences and builds a basis with which to compare and contrast other stories. Literacy language structures are integrated with natural language. Some description of characters and setting is included. Illustrations provide moderate to minimum support. The text may be three to twelve lines above or beneath the illustrations, or a full page. The number of words in these texts starts at 266 and increases with each level of difficulty. 29 1^^LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject\nLESLEY. BONNIE Monday. July 17. 2000 12:14 PM PRICE. PATRICIA RE: Effect of Professional Development No big rush--but I'll need by Thursday. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject\nPRICE, PATRICIA Monday, July 17, 2000 12:12 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE\nEffect of Professional Development I will have it this afternoon. From: Sent\nOriginal Message- LESLEY, BONNIE Monday, July 17. 2000 9:31 AM To: PRICE. PATRICIA\nBUSBEA, PAT Subject: Effect of Professional Development Is it possible to put together some info on the number/percent of teachers by school who participated in the ELLA training? How many days did they attend? I think that might give us some needed insight on the scores. We may also need this for grade 4. 1 30LESLEY, BONNIE From\nSent: To: Subject: LESLEY. BONNIE Friday. July 21,2000 12:22 PM DAVIS. SUZI\nPRICE, PATRICIA\nFREEMAN, ANN\nBUSBEA, PAT\nHUFFMAN, KRIS\nTEETER, JUDY\nMILAM, JUDY\nWILSON, LEV ANNA\nBRIGGS, MONA\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nPERRITT, YORIKO\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nBFtANDON, BARBARA\nBRANDON. BARBARA\nKILLINGSWORTH. PATRICIA DRA Scores-Percent Proficient Here's the report that I will use in Monday's presentation for the CLTs. DRA Percent Readiness. 1999-20... 1 31 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Saturday, July 29, 2000 9:34 AM WILLIAMS, ED FW: Success For All Importance: High Both Wakefield and Mitchell have made the decision to bail out of SFA--two examples of abandoning programs that are not working for African American children. You may want to put that in the PreK-2 evaluation report. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Importance: SMiiy,.eRlAN^ ^ii^July 28, 2000 4:^ ADAMS, LEON CAwmowrrR: Success For All High 'M (NCES H.\nLESLEY. BONNIE Mr. Adams, The Mitchell Academy Campus Leadership Team had a very intense discussion concerning the achievement of our students in reading. This discussion began last March. Throughout the discussion, the team looked at the test data and the cost of the Success For All Program. The CLT took its concerns to the entire staff and the staff agreed to end the use of the Success For All Program last May. Dr. Lesley reported that she was seeing growth in achievement from grades 2'^^ - 5**^. After further review, this growth was simply the increase from 2\"'* - 5* grade because the students were so low at 2\"' grade. We have a 3-year goal of seeing significant growth in our students achievement and believe that at this time, the Success For All Program and its cost is not the way. With that said. Im requesting for an extension on the deadline for our Title I Plan in order to make the necessary adjustments to include a change in our program. 132LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, August 08, 2000 12:24 PM KEOWN, ADA\nCOX, ELEANOR\nFIELDS, FREDERICK ADAMS, LEON\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nPRICE, PATRICIA Continuation of SFA I continue to be very concerned about the performance of some SFA schools, especially in reviewing the DRA data. Your SFA schools performed significantly less well than most ELLA schools with similar characteristics. See the attached score analysis. DRA. SFA Schools.doc Another concern that I have is that we are equipped and funded to coach teachers, to provide professional development, and to otherwise support ELLA/Effective Literacy. We cannot do that at such an intense level for SFA since those programs are funded solely from your Title I budgets and since we have to rely on the University of Memphis to train and coach. One thing we noted in our data analysis is that SFA teachers typically received last year much less professional development than ELLA/Effective Literacy teachers, and that variable in itself will make a major difference in student performance. SFA is much more expensive than ELLA/Effective Literacy. That expense is especially a problem when you are not getting results. I told you all my first year here that I knew that SFA could work and that we needed to give it a chance. I told you last year and again in the fall that if you didn't get improvements this year (that was your chance), you definitely had to make a change. It is time for most of you to make that change, and that is my strongest recommendation. Please meet with your teams and do a thorough data analysis. I know that we need State Benchmark scores to make a determination about grades 3-4, but the DRA data for K-2 and the ALT data for 2-5 give us a lot of indication that SFA is not working. It may not be the program itself. It may be, as I told you last year that the Univ, of Memphis trainers said, that we have not implemented it appropriately. It may be that your teachers just are not committed to its success. Whatever the reason, at this point, I think you and your staff need to make a convincing argument to be allowed to continue SFA. If you are going to make a change, you need to inform Leon Adams immediately since he is putting the finishing touches on the Title I plan to submit to ADE. You should also consult with Ms. Mitchell or Ms. Jones in making your decision since it will also affect your School Improvement Plan. Finally, if you are going to make a change, you need to let Pat Price know immediately so that she can arrange for your teachers to have the necessary training to implement ELLA/Effective Literacy. You will note that I have not directed you to make a change. I am, instead, giving you my best advice. Also, I stand ready to assist you in your school improvement efforts. Let me know. 1 33 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To\nSubject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, August 09, 2000 5:13 PM MITCHELL, SADIE\nPRICE, PATRICIA FW: Continuation of SFA Look! They are thinking as weli! Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, August 09, 2000 5:12 PM FIELDS, FREDERICK RE: Continuation of SFA Yea! I think having a control group would be a wonderful idea. Do it! I can help you set up the study. Don't ever worry about bugging me. I am here to help you all, and the principals have not used me nearly enough. I want to help. All of us are in this game for the same reason. We care about the kids. I cannot realize my goals without you, so I'll be there to help. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: FIELDS, FREDERICK Wednesday, August 09, 2000 4:02 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: Continuation of SFA Thank you for your reply. I will go back to the CLT with this information and If their feelings are still the same, then I will give the program one last try. I am excited about the massive amount of data that you have taught us how to use. It has helped me to understand what we need to do. I am committed to this. I will wait on ELLA if you don't think I should combine the two. I completely trust your advice. By all means, you will get tired of me bugging you this year. These children will achieve. I will be seeking your assistance all year long. Thank you in advance for being there. Lastly, what do you think about having a control group, perhaps the two new teachers that I have hired (1st and 2nd grade). I was thinking about letting them implement ELLA and after the potpourri of test, look at the data and see which implementation will show the most growth? Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, August 09, 2000 3:55 PM FIELDS, FREDERICK PRICE, PATRICIA Subject: RE: Continuation of SFA I understand your reluctance to change, but I felt strongly that I should give you all the benefit of my advice, for I know that everyone wants to perform well. Remember that I didn't tell you what to do. I just gave you advice. Unless you are planning to move toward ELLA implementation, my advice is that you NOT engage your teachers in the ELLA training. Instead, buy more SFA training. The two programs are very different in their execution, although not so different in their research base. I don't think teachers can blend them successfully, and I am sure that the Memphis people would tell you the same thing. Think through this carefully. If you want SFA to be successful, you all have really got to get your heads around SFA-know it better than you do your heart beats-and be as committed to its success as you can be. I believe that teachers can make almost anything work-if they want it to work. The issue is not really which program to do. The issue is making a commitment to kids' success and then delivering on it. Let me know how you want me to help. Original Message From: Sent: To: LESLEY, BONNIE FIELDS, FREDERICK Wednesday, August 09, 2000 2:35 PM Subject: RE: Continuation of SFA Dr. Lesley. I have read your email and shared it with the majority of my campus leadership team. I expressed some major 1 concerns es it relates to how our students are not achieving as well as comparable students in other schools. We have decided to continue the program for another year and focus on 100% implementation and monitoring of the program. We have also decided to include ELLA training as a major staff development component early on this year. I have discussed this with Pat Price and she has offered valuable advice that I will begin to put in place. I feel that if my teachers are trained in ELLA and we implement those strategies in conjunction with SFA, any data that will be used will show growth. I am truly concerned about the education and success of my children at Cloverdale. I take this job seriously and want to make decisions that are in the best interest of the students. I have seen children that could not read successfully master that task. My only fear is that I know you are very smart and you have always offered sound advice I don't want you to think I don't value your opinion. I am not blind, according to the tool of measurement that was used, we have not measured up. Please afford me one more year to get it right. I am sure that the scores will be up considerably. Thank you in advance for understanding and taking the time to read my reply. Respectfully, Freddy Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, August 08, 2000 12:24 PM KEOWN, ADA\nCOX, ELEANOR\nFIELDS, FREDERICK ADAMS, LEON\nMITCHELL, SADIE\nCAWTHON, FRANCES H.\nPRICE, PATRICIA Continuation of SFA I continue to be very concerned about the performance of some SFA schools, especially in reviewing the DRA data. Your SFA schools performed significantly less well than most ELLA schools with similar characteristics. See the attached score analysis.  File: DRA. SFA Schools.doc  Another concern that I have is that we are equipped and funded to coach teachers, to provide professional development, and to otherwise support ELLA/Effective Literacy. We cannot do that at such an intense level for SFA since those programs are funded solely from your Title I budgets and since we have to rely on the University of Memphis to train and coach. One thing we noted in our data analysis is that SFA teachers typically received last year much less professional development than ELLA/Effective Literacy teachers, and that variable in itself will make a major difference in student performance. SFA is much more expensive than ELLA/Effective Literacy. That expense is especially a problem when you are not getting results. I told you all my first year here that I knew that SFA could work and that we needed to give it a chance. I told you last year and again in the fall that if you didn't get improvements this year (that was your chance), you definitely had to make a change. It is time for most of you to make that change, and that is my strongest recommendation. Please meet with your teams and do a thorough data analysis. I know that we need State Benchmark scores to make a determination about grades 3-4, but the DRA data for K-2 and the ALT data for 2-5 give us a lot of indication that SFA is not working. It may not be the program itself. It may be, as I told you last year that the Univ, of Memphis trainers said, that we have not implemented it appropriately. It may be that your teachers just are not committed to its success. Whatever the reason, at this point, I think you and your staff need to make a convincing argument to be allowed to continue SFA. If you are going to make a change, you need to inform Leon Adams immediately since he is putting the finishing touches on the Title I plan to submit to ADE. You should also consult with Ms. Mitchell or Ms. Jones in making your decision since it will also affect your School Improvement Plan. Finally, if you are going to make a change, you need to let Pat Price know immediately so that she can arrange for your teachers to have the necessary training to implement ELLA/Effective Literacy. You will note that I have not directed you to make a change. I am. instead, giving you my best advice. Also, I stand ready to assist you in your school improvement efforts. Let me know. 234 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE. KATHY R. Thursday, September 14, 2000 7:05 PM TRUETT, IRMA FW: Request Assessment Notebook Irma, Please get a notebook ready for Linda. We need to add the high school and middle school stuff and check it for anything else that might be missing. We also need to send the high school and MS stuff to New Futures. The ALT Science data also needs to be added. We can start this as soon as the tests are in the schools. Kathy Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEE, BLONDELL Thursday, September 14, 2000 11:40 AM LEASE, KATHY R. AUSTIN, LINDA Request Assessment Notebook I am requesting a copy of your most recently updated Assessment Notebook for Linda Austin. Dr. Lesley referred you as the source for obtaining this information. This is Carutha. I'm at Blondell's desk while she is on medical leave. If I need to come to your office to pick this up, please let me know when it is ready (2112). Thanks for your help. Linda will be back in her office tomorrow, September 15. Carutha Braden (For Linda Austin) 1 35Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 To\nCurriculum Division From: Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt., PRE Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent Date: October 25, 2000 Re: Grade 4 and Grade 8 Benchmark Data i Please find enclosed the following Benchmark Data reports:  District comparison of 98-99 and 99-00 results for mathematics and literacy 1 - District comparison with state results for 99-00  District comparison with state results for 98-99  Grade 4 comparisons by school, subject, and year showing changes  Two year comparisons for each elementary school (Grade 4)  Comparison by middle school (Grade 8) to district average and state average  District comparison to state (Grade 8) for mathematics  District comparison to state (Grade 8) for literacy  School comparisons to state (Grade 8) for mathematics and literacy Additional reports will be prepared based on requests. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 324-2122. 36Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 To: Board of Directors From: Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt., PRE Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent Date: October 25, 2000 Re: Grade 4 and Grade 8 Benchmark Data Please find enclosed the following Benchmark Data reports:  District comparison of 98-99 and 99-00 results for mathematics and literacy  District comparison with state results for 99-00  District comparison with state results for 98-99  Grade 4 comparisons by school, subject, and year showing changes  Two year comparisons for each elementary school (Grade 4)  Comparison by middle school (Grade 8) to district average and state average  District comparison to state (Grade 8) for mathematics 0  District comparison to state (Grade 8) for literacy  School comparisons to state (Grade 8) for mathematics and literacy Additional reports will be prepared based on requests. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 324-2122. 37Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 To: Cabinet From: Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt, PRE Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent Date: October 25, 2000 Re: Grade 4 and Grade 8 Benchmark Data Please find enclosed the following Benchmark Data reports:  District comparison of 98-99 and 99-00 results for mathematics and literacy ]  District comparison with state results for 99-00  District comparison with state results for 98-99  Grade 4 comparisons by school, subject, and year showing changes * Two year comparisons for each elementary school (Grade 4)  Comparison by middle school (Grade 8) to district average and state average  District comparison to state (Grade 8) for mathematics  District comparison to state (Grade 8) for literacy * School comparisons to state (Grade 8) for mathematics and literacy Additional reports will be prepared based on requests. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 324-2122. 38LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 TO: FROM: Mary Smith, Principal - Rightsell Elementary Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET------- ---- LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 TO: FROM: Barbara Anderson, Principal - Bale Elementary ^^Sr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIO N AL RESO O RCE C ENT E R _3fljO4^BULASKI^TREEX. LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 TO\nFROM: November 3, 2000 Diane Barksdale, Principal - Carver Elementary ^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nGrade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, 1 was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! 1 am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratuiations on your achievement. BAL/adg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER . - . 3001 RULASK1 STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Theresa Ketcher, Principal - Forest Park Elementary ^\n^-Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! 1 am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my ^warmest congratulations on your achievement BAL/adg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 TO: FROM: Deborah Mitchell, Principal - Fulbright Elementary ^^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! 1 am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my v/armest congratuiations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER -300-1 PULASKISTREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Ethel Dunbar, Principal - Franklin Elementary ^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nGrade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER w^OO/l'^RULASKI-STREET-LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Felicia Hobbs, Principal - Gibbs Elementary ^Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, 1 was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! 1 am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER _______ .300-1.-P.ULASKI ST-REET  LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3. 2000 Tabitha Phillips, Principal - Mabelvale Elementary Vk)r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER ._----.-3001 P-ULASKI-STREET - LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Jerry Worm, Principal - Meadowcliff Elementary y^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratuiations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 300-1-PULASKI.STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Janis Tucker, Principal - Otter Creek Elementary fe^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER _ 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Lillie Carter, Principal - Pulaski Heights Elementary ^ior. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001-PULASKI-STREET -. LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Nancy Acre, Principal - Terry Elementary \\^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER -----------3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Michael Oliver, Principal - Watson Elementary ^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, 1 was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratuiations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Scott Morgan, Principal - Western Hills Elementary ^^r, Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Janice Wilson, Principal - Woodruff Elementary ^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Gracie 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3. 2000 Mary Golston, Principal - Badgett Elementary ^^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nGrade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam As you can guess, I was absolutely delighted that our District improved ten points on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. Congratulations to you and your school for your achievement! I am so proud of you all - you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. I Please take some time to reflect upon what you think you did that made the biggest difference. Then send that list to me via e-mail. We want to pass that along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3. 2000 Ada Keown, Principal - Brady Elementary \\^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Diane Barksdale, Principal - Carver Elementary ^^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Gracie 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Faith McLaughlin, Principal - Dodd Elementary {^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my v/armest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Deborah Mitchell, Principal - Fulbright Elementary fe^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Tabitha Phillips, Principal - Mabelvale Elementary ^^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nGrade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO\nFROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Virginia Ashley, Principal - McDermott Elementary \\|or. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Janis Tucker, Principal - Otter Creek Elementary ^^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nGrade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg i TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Lillie Carter, Principal - Pulaski Heights Elementary '^^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nGrade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam j Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Scott Morgan, Principal - Western Hills Elementary ^Ur. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3. 2000 Beverly Jones, Principal - Wilson Elementary ^jj-Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3, 2000 Janice Wilson, Principal - Woodruff Elementary Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Gracie 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 3. 2000 Mary Golston, Principal - Badgett Elementary i^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam Congratulations on the achievement of your school on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark! As you probably know, your school either improved as well as or better than the District as a whole. We are very pleased about that - and so proud of you, your teachers, your students, and their parents. Please take some time to reflect upon what you think were your most successful initiatives and e-mail these to me. We want to pass them along to the other schools, and we in the Division of Instruction want to learn from you as well. Again, my warmest congratulations on your achievement. BAL/adg 39 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Monday, November 06, 2000 12:04 PM LEASE, KATHY R. TRUETT, IRMA\nMOORE, REGINA Test Results I need the following asap: 1. Copies of the general population District and each school reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmark tests--copies of the state reports, not your typed reports. 2. Copies of the Executive Summaries for the District and each school of the SAT9 results, grades 5,7, and 10-again, the Harcourt reports, not just your typed reports. 3. Copies of the DRA results for fall 2000 for the District and by school. Please do these reports at least: A. Reports by race and total of average results (display fall 1999, spring 2000, fall 2000). B. Reports by race and total of growth from fall 1999 to 2000 of cohorts (e.g., fall 1999 kindergarten and fall 2000 grade 1) I may need more information later. If you need help getting them copied, Regina or Anita will be happy to do that. Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501/324-2131 501/324-0567 (fax) 1 40LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, November 08, 2000 2:55 PM PRICE, PATRICIA\nGLASGOW, DENNIS FW: Benchmark data by FAR You all take a look at these spreadsheets. They show grade 4 scores by SES. FAR means \"free and reduced\" lunch. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: SAVAGE, KEN Wednesday, November 08, 2000 2:06 PM LESLEY, BONNIE\nLEASE, KATHY R. WILLIAMS, ED Benchmark data by FAR Good afternoon, folks. Please find attached an Excel workbook with two sheets. The data contained on these sheets is the SY99-2000 4th grade General Population Benchmark Math and Literature strands disaggregated by current Free and Reduced (FAR) Lunch program enrollment. (Whew, that was a mouthful.) The original download from the ORME website contained data on 1699 students. Of these 1699,1 was not able to find current student ids for 29-they were here last year and took the test\nhowever, that are not currently enrolled. Additionally, I have been advised to mention that due to the dynamic nature of the FAR program, this information is subject to change (hence the 11-8-2000 date in the header.) I wouldn't expect great changes but certainly some. DR311_01 Strands by FAR.xls Enjoy! Let me know if you need anything else, Ken. 1 41LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Wednesday, January 17, 2001 9:32 AM TRUETT. IRMA FW: Irma, Could you fax Tara one of those NWEA charts that shows the expected RIT Scores? She is at Mann. I think. I put it in your chair. KL Original Message- From: Sent: To: Subject: ADAMS, TARA A. Wednesday, January 17, 2001 8:26 AM LEASE, KATHY R. Hi Kathy I don't have this chart, if you could fax me one I would appreciate it. This is an excerpt from your email of what I need. My fax number is 324-2496. Thanks Tara Adams Horace Mann Middle School \"Monitoring Growth in Student Achievement that has the median scores expected on each test fall and spring and the expected amount of growth in the second chart on the bottom. Call or email me if you don't have one and I'll fax it to you.  1 42 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Wednesday. January 17, 2001 4:29 PM ANDERSON, BARBARA\nASHLEY, VIRGINIA\nBRANCH, SAMUEL\nCARSON, CHERYL\nCARTER, LILLIE\nCOURTNEY, THERESA\nCOX, ELEANOR\nDARIAN SMITH\nDEBORAH MITCHELL\nETHEL DUNBAR\nFaith Donovan\nFIELDS. FREDERICK\nGOLSTON. MARY\nHALL. DONNA\nHARKEY. JANE\nHARRIS. HENRY\nHOBBS. FELICIA L.\nJONES. BEVERLY\nKEOWN. ADA\nLillie Scull\nMANGAN. ANN\nMANNO. ROBERTA\nMARY BARKSDALE\nMENKING. MARY\nMORGAN. SCOTT\nNANCY ACRE\nOLIVER. MICHAEL\nPHILLIPS. TABITHA\nSHARON BROOKS\nSMITH, DARIAN\nSMITH, MARY A.\nTAYLOR, LESLIE B.\nTUCKER, JANIS A.\nWILSON, JANICE M.\nWORM, JERRY\nYOUNG, KRISHNA\nZEIGLER, GWEN S.\nCARTER, JODIE\nHOWARD, RUDOLPH\nLinda Brown\nNORMAN, CASSANDRA R.\nSMITH JR. VERNON\nBERRY, DEBORAH\nBLAYLOCK, ANN\nHUDSON, ELOUISE\nJIM FULLERTON\nLarry Buck\nMOSBY, JIMMY\nPATTERSON, DAVID\nROUSSEAU, NANCY\nBABBS, JUNIOUS\nFRANCES CAWTHON\nGadberry, Brady L.\nHurley, Richard\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nLeslie Camine\nMARIAN LACEY\nMilhollen, Mark\nSadie Mitchell\nSTEWART, DONALD M.\nVann, Suellen\nWATSON, LINDA DILLINGHAM, YVETTE\nHUFFMAN, MAC\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nSUMMERVILLE, ROSALYN P.\nTRUETT, IRMA\nWILLIAMS, ED Assessment Reports Dear Principals and Cabinet, Attached are several assessment reports that you might find interesting. I am sending the 5-year comparison and 3- year comparison of SAT-9 by school, a 3-year district comparison by quartiles, and a district summary. You can print copies of these at your leisure and add them to your data notebook. As we prepare additional reports, we will forward them to you. If you need a special report or if you have questions, please let us know. Thanks, Kathy SATS Five year comparison.xls SATS Three year companson.xls... SAT9 District Five Year Compar... SATS quartile report 88-01 -Xls... Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc.lrscl.kl2.ar.us 1 43 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEASE. KATHY R. Tuesday, May 30, 2000 1:16 PM ANDERSON, BARBARA\nASHLEY, VIRGINIA\nBEARD, SUSAN\nBRANCH, SAMUEL\nCARSON, CHERYL\nCARTER, LILLIE\nCHEATHAM. MARY\nCOURTNEY. THERESA\nCOX. ELEANOR\nSMITH. DARIAN\nMITCHELL. DEBORAH\nETHEL B. DUNBAR\nDONOVAN. FAITH\nFIELDS. FREDERICK\nGOLSTON. MARY\nHALL. DONNA\nHARKEY. JANE\nHARRIS. H. TYRONE\nHOBBS. FELICIA L\nJONES. BEVERLY\nKEOWN. ADA\nSCULL. LILLIE\nMANGAN. ANN\nBARKSDALE. MARY D.\nMENKING. MARY\nMORGAN. SCOTT\nACRE. NANCY\nOLIVER. MICHAEL\nPHILLIPS. TABITHA\nBROOKS. SHARON A.\nSMITH. DARIAN\nTUCKER. JANIS A.\nWARD. LIONEL\nWILSON. JANICE M.\nWORM. JERRY\nZEIGLER. GWEN S.\nCARTER. JODIE\nHOWARD. RUDOLPH\nBROWN. LINDA\nNORMAN. CASSANDRA R.\nSMITH. VERNON\nBERRY. DEBOFiAH\nFULLERTON. JAMES\nHUDSON. ELOUISE\nJAMES. BRENDA\nBUCK. LARRY\nMOSBY. JIMMY\nPATTERSON. DAVID\nROUSSEAU. NANCY MITCHELL. SADIE\nCAWTHON. FRANCES H.\nLACEY. MARIAN G. Cover letter for ALT reports Dear Principals. At your request is the attachment that contains a sample letter to parents that can accompany the ALT results. Please edit it as you choose. This is only a suggestion. Thanks so much for all of your help this year. I think when we step back to look at our work, we will be pleased! Call us when you need us. Kathy ALT Principal letter to Parent... Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent Pianning, Research, and Evaiuation 3001 S. Puiaski Littie Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 Planning, Research, and Evaluation Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 June 1,2000 Dear Parent or Guardian: Enclosed with your students report card is the parent copy of your students score report from our new Achievement Level Test. This test is based on the curriculum of the Little Rock School District and reflects the standards we have set for our students. It is designed to measure student growth in mathematics, reading, language usage, and science. The Achievement Level Test (ALT) is designed to measure the improvement of your student as he or she progresses through our schools. The ALTS will be given both fall and spring so that we can adequately monitor the progress of your child. Once the third administration of the test is given in 2001, you will receive a cumulative report that charts the growth of your child. The tests are given in levels that do not relate to grade level. Each level should be challenging to your child. If it is too easy, your child will be retested with a more difficult level. If a level is too hard, your child will be retested at a level where he or she can be successful. The Planning, Research, and Evaluation department will produce a program this summer for the districts television station that gives additional information about the ALTS and how to interpret them. Principals and counselors have also received training on how to interpret the test scores. In addition, each school has a set of videotapes that can be used for teacher and parent meetings. We are very excited about our new tests and the information that they will give us on the progress of your child, and we look forward to visiting with you about your childs test results. Sincerely, 44 Identified Issues from Data/Attendance Focus Group  Have homebound and day treatment kids been extracted  Dropped kids/kept schedules  Set up specific criteria for printing documents  Problem: Students dropped school to school. Schedule shouldn't be active  September will be Hard for accurate data  If kids aren't properly dropped, they roll over to next year  Check attendance law/policy  Confusion on when to count kids absent and when to drop  Students should be counted absent from day 1- it's not being done  Clear guidelines for principals  \"Grade Quick\" used for attendance  Day treatment kids have to have a \"seat\" when they return  Day treatment report not happening  One person monitor these unusual agency, etc. homebound, juvenile justice kids-large group of kids  Communicate in Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts(Principals)  What about technology?  Those we have carried and we know they are not in district, can we delete? YES!  \"Cheat\" sheet for attendance clerks  ,Homebound teacher name and social security numbers can be reported at school level  Gary Smith's office was to provide attendance/grade sheets: process has broken down  Ken provide scan sheet on missing kids-registrars involved will check attendance clerks need to be involved  Identifying \"short term\" and \"long term\" as it relates to placement in alternative education programs Listed below are the Alternative Education Program: Accelerated learning Program Evening Learning Program Alternative Forest Heights Alternative Learning Center Arkansas State Hospital Bridgeway Charter Hospital C-Step Centers for Youth \u0026amp; Families Florence Crittendon Home Job Corp Juvenile Justice Facility(Step One) Penick Boys Club Pinnacle Point Philander Smith Recovery/Baptist Hospital Rivendale Step Up Center Youth Challenge/Camp Robinson 45 TEST Grade District Assessments: The Assessment Program for 2000-01 K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 DISTRICT PERSPECTIVE: Mastery of State benchmarks/standards as measured by District level tests LRSD 1st and 3rd Quarter Achievement Level Test (ALT) Reading, Language Arts, Math, \u0026amp; Science LRSD 2nd Quarter Open-ended Test Math, Reading/Language Arts, \u0026amp; Science LRSD 4th Quarter Benchmark Math, Reading/Language Arts, \u0026amp; Science LRSD Observation Survey behavioral observation of literacy skills Sept. \u0026amp; April Sept. \u0026amp; April March Sept. \u0026amp; April Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Dec. April/May STATE PERSPECTIVE: Mastery of State benchrnarks and standards State Benchmark objective and performanced-based: Math \u0026amp; Literacy End of Course Algebra I objective and performanced-based End of Course Geometry objective and performanced-based End of Course Literacy objective and performanced-based NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE: National comparison information SAT-9 objective test PLAN EXPLORE PSAT NAEP (randomly selected schools) 7/11/01 Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Dec. April/May Last week of April Feb Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Dec. April/May MidSept. Revised DRAFT Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Aug/Sept \u0026amp; March Dec. April/May Last week of April Dec. Dec. April/May April/May Last week of April May May May May May May May May May May May May MidSept. Oct^ Feb Feb Mid-Sept. Oct \u0026amp; Nov Oct (practice) Oct Feb Assessment Window Code B G Keep Change Z Z Comments Have fall testing first week in August II W Y G W B B B B B z z z Retesting of students is difficult. Use certified person with a duty period for retesting, at a different time spaced out a little more Z Z do one in Sept, and one in October spaced out a little more ALT one week and SAT9 the next Separate State Assessments and ALT B  B  ALT great tool for truly finding out what children are learning. Definitely give at different times Schedule for Sth graders at this school involved testing every day for a week. They were totally drained! 46Assessment Advisory Committee 2000-2001 Name Sharon Brooks Dr. Linda Brown Felicia Hobbs Nancy Rousseau Karen Broadnax Suzi Davis Dennis Glasgow Randy Glenn Marie McNeal Pat Price Shirley Davis Hazel May______ Pat Pennington Alma Smith Arthur Olds Muneerah Qaasim Kitty Sanders Dr. Ed Williams Yvette Dillingham Gayle Hoffman Dr. Kathy Lease _______Position______ Principal____________ Principal____________ Principal____________ Principal____________ ESL Coordinator_____ Director LA/FL_______ Director Math/Science Exceptional Children Director Social Studies Director Early Childhood/Reading Counselor___________ Counselor___________ Counselor ALT Coordinator_____ Teacher_____________ Teacher_____________ Teacher Specialist___________ Specialist___________ Coordinator_________ Asst. Superintendent School/Division Stephens_________ Parkview Gibbs Pulaski Heights MS Curriculum Curriculum_______ Curriculum Curriculum_______ Curriculum Curriculum Woodruff Central Mabelvale Forest Heights MS Dunbar Forest Park Hall_____________ PRE____________ PRE____________ School Services PRE 47R Quick look it the M Irt i BiMliiM A Biii hJ i PMiw if tti SAT-9 Board of Education Presentation November 16, 200012% ACTAAP Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam Comparison in Growth Points: LRSDand State Little Rock School District 1999-2000 Literacy Benchmark Exam Comparison LRSD to State Averages by Race 100% 4th Grade 90% - Lower is better Hi?her is better 80% - 60% 58% 70% - \u0026gt; LRSD ACTAAP Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Comparison: 1999 to 2000 100% Little Rock School District Literacy Benchmark Exam Comparison SY98-99 to SY99-00 4th Grade 90% - 4 Lower is better \u0026gt; Higher is better 80% - 70% - ^00/ 60% 58%____ 58% Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 To: Board of Education From: Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt., PRE Dr. Leslie Carnine, Superintendent Date: November 21, 2000 Re: Assessment Data I Enclosed are the bar graphs that contain the corrected data from our 4*^ Grade Benchmark scores. Please destroy the graphs that were given to you at the Board meeting. The data reports comparing both 98-99 and 99-00 performance and LRSD performance against the States performance had errors. You received an email forwarded to you earlier regarding the problem we experienced with the Excel program that lead to the error. The email also contained an explanation of how we will prevent that problem from occurring again, and what we learned from it. We deeply regret any inconvenience that this has caused, and we have taken measures to improve our processes so that it does not happen again. We are also still receiving data from Harcourt on our SAT-9 test results. We will have to produce that comparative report manually at this point because Harcourt is having problems with the program that they usually send us to produce quick graphs about our results. We are also carefully comparing what they sent us on our data compact disc with what they sent us in hard copy. We want to be sure that there are no errors. We are also currently proofing a five-year comparison report on SAT-9 scores by school, race, and subtest. We will forward those reports to you as soon as they are finished. Please dont hesitate to call me (324-2122), if you have questions. ACTAAP 2000 Benchmark ExamsGrade 4 Literacy Girls who scored Proficient or Advanced grew from 38% in 1999 to 46%'in 23000 Boys who scored Proficient or Advanced grew from 28% in 1999 to 36% in 2000 All ethnic groups improved ^25 out of 35 elementary schools'improved m Literacy (* ,*i4s . iA J . 'J  -A*?' 4? .:3U'z\u0026lt;\u0026gt;uaFzv.-, reS\n-if 'J. Azv\nr 3 Grade 4 Literacy 5'.\nI-* f Ite 1 i / f'.ii-' o' ?*Our growth was 10 points in the Proficient and Advanced categories vOldfiiOfetes growth was 3 points f ? ^ 5 schools had at least 50% of their students in the^Proficieht or Advanced categories in 1999 while 12 reached that level in^OOO ^2 schools had less than 10% of their students in the Proficient or Advanced categorie%in 1999 while none did in 2000 ** TGrade 4 Literacy 16 schools had double-digit gains ill the percentage of students in the Proficlerit and Advanced categories \u0026lt; of this total, 4 schools grew 20 or more percentage points the most improved school gained 30 percentage points in Proficient and Advanced^ categories\n17 r' S?\" jfe/' \u0026gt; ''?C?t !? ii?^. Grade 4 Math W' i \\^v\ns Girls who scored Proficient or Advanced grew from 20% in 1999Jo 27% in 2000 A '^''\nBoys who scored Proficient or Advanced grew from 24% in 1999 to 31% in 2000 ^All ethnic groups improved = it\nfe-, ^23 out of 35 elementary schools improved in Matha4fc*. Grade 4 Math ^Ou\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_320","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits: ''Elementary Schools''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School management and organization","Education, Elementary"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits: ''Elementary Schools''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/320"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nELEMENTRY SCHOOLSzom5 mm z CZ) o -n Elementary Schools 1. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in June 2, 1999, Learning Links with attached copy of new publication. Portraits of Six Benchmark Schools: Diverse Approaches to Improving Student Achievement. 2. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Dec. 1, 1999, Learning Links with attached information on The Basic School model for school improvement created by Ernest Boyer. 3. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links with attached study of nine urban elementary schools with high achievement. 4. Memorandum from Patricia Price to elementary principals in Feb. 7, 2001, Learning Links with information about a new publication, Building Strong Foundations for Early Learning: The U.S. Department of Educations Guide to High-Quality Early Childhood Education Programs. 1 L.L b/^/qcj LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 June 1,1999 TO: Principals FROM\nDr. Bonnie Lesley? Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: School Improvement We are sending to you under separate cover a copy of a school improvement planning resource, Portraits of Six Benchmark Schools: Diverse Approaches to Improving Student Achievement by Gordon Cawelti. We think you will find it useful. In fact, we suggest that you read it before the Principals Institute in late July. BAL/rcm LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 April 20, 1999 TO: All Principals Curriculum Staff FROM: A? Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Training in Teaching Writing I can think of no other single thing you could do with more potential for improving student achievement than in preparing ajl teachers to teach writing across the curriculum. The new Arkansas benchmark examinations are going to be, for the most part, writing tests. The National Writing Project is the most successful professional development program in this country! UALR is awarding 25 scholarships for teacher participation. We need all 25 of those slots! See the article below for how to sign up one or more oyour teachers. Call Gene Parker or me if we can help. Curriculum staff is also encouraged to participate in this training. BAL/rcm 25 teachers get writing fellowships The National Writing Project and the University of Arkansas at Little Rock will award up to 25 fellowships to Arkansas schoolteachers. _ The awards, valued at $900 each, enable teachers to enroll for SIX hours of graduate credit in the U.ALR department of rhetoric and wTiting. They will participate in The Summer Institute, a five-week program from June 28July 2S. Monday through Thursday, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Applicants may be teachers in any subject. The application deadline is May 7. More information is available at 569-8063 or 835-3390. 3RD QUARTER CRT READING RESULTS 1998-99 DISTRICT TOTALS I 2ND GRADE BENCHMARK 1 RD1 BENCHMARK 3 RD3 BENCHMARK 9 RD9 BENCHMARK 10 RD10 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 4.4 2.9 3.8 3.6 14.6 3RD GRADE BENCHMARK 1 RD1 BENCHMARK 2 RD2 BENCHMARKS RD3 BENCHMARK 4 RD4 BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARKS RD6 BENCHMARK 7 RD7 BENCHMARKS RD8 BENCH- BENCH-MARK 9 RD9 MARK 10 RD10 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 3.5 3.2 3.1 2.8 3 2.9 3.1 3 2.3 2.2 29.1 4TH GRADE BENCHMARK 1 RD1 BENCHMARK 2 RD2 BENCHMARK 3 RD3 BENCHMARK 4 RD4 BENCHMARKS RD5 BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARK 7 RD7 BENCHMARKS RD8 BENCHMARK 9 RD9 BENCHMARK 10 RD10 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 3 1.8 3.2 2.8 2.7 3 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.7 26.9 5TH GRADE BENCHMARK 1 RD1 BENCHMARK 2 RD2 BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARK 4 RD4 BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARK 7 RD7 BENCHMARKS RD8 BENCH-MARKO RD9 BENCHMARK 10 RD10 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 2.8 3.2 3.2 2.6 2.7 3.3 3.3 2.8 2.8 3.2 30 I I 6TH GRADE BENCHMARK 1 RD1 BENCHMARK 2 RD2 BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARK 4 RD4 BENCHMARKS RDS BENCHMARKS RD6 BENCHMARK 7 RD7 BENCHMARKS RD8 BENCH-MARKO RD9 BENCHMARK 10 RD10 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 3.5 3.4 2.8 3.1 3 2.5 3 2.7 3.3 3.3 30.7 1 3RD QUARTER CRT MATH RESULTS 1998-99 DISTRICT TOTALS 2ND GRADE 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 1 M3-1 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 2 M3-2 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 4 M3-4 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-5 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-6 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 3.5 3.3 3.1 3.4 3.4 16.8 3RD GRADE 3RD QTR BENCHMARK! M3-1 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 2 M3-2 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-5 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-3 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 4 M3-4 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-3 1ST QTR BENCHMARK 4 MI-4 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 1 M2-1 1ST QTR BENCHMARKS MI-3 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 2 M2-2 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 2.9 2.8 3.1 2.7 3 2.3 2.8 2.4 2.5 3.1 27.5 4TH GRADE 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 2 M3-2 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-5 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 4 M3-4 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-3 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-8 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 1 M3-1 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 7 M3-7 1ST QTR BENCHMARKS MI-5 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-3 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 1 M2-1 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 3.3 2.8 1.9 2.1 2.8 2.3 2.6 2.6 2.7 3.3 26.3 STH GRADE 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 1 M3-1 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 2 MS-? 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-3 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 4 M3-4 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-5 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-6 2ND QTR BENC-MARK7 M2-7 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-3 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 2 M2-2 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 4 M2-4 TOTAL SCORE I I AVERAGE 3.2 2.4 2 1.8 2.7 2.4 1.6 2.4 2.5 1.9 22.8 6TH GRADE 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 2 M3-2 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 1 M3-1 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-3 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 4 M3-4 3RD QTR BENCHMARKS M3-5 3RD QTR BENCHMARK 7 M3-7 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 1 M2-1 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-5 2ND QTR BENCHMARKS M2-6 2ND QTR BENCHMARK 4 M2-4 TOTAL SCORE AVERAGE 21 1.6 2.1 1.4 1.6 1.9 2.7 2.6 2.3 21 21.6 2 Memo To: From: Re: Elementary School Principals and Teachers Dr. Ed Williams, Planning Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation District Wide 3''^\u0026lt;3uarter CRT Results Attached are the District average scores for the 3\"* quarter reading and math benchmarks. The reading scores are on page 1 and the math results are on page 2. For the 2^^ grade there were 20 questions for each subject. Reading had four benchmarks, with five questions for each benchmark. Mastery of a benchmark would be four out of five correct. A total score of 16 or above indicates mastery of the reading section. Math had five benchmarks, with four questions for each benchmark. Mastery of a benchmark would be three out'of four correct. A total score of 15 or above indicates mastery of the math section. For grades 3 through 6, there were 40 questions for each subject, with ten benchmarks and four questions per benchmark. Mastery would be three out of four correct. A total score of 30 or above in a section indicates mastery of that section. Testing for the 4* quarter will be on May 19*^ and 20, except for grade. Due to a conflict with 6' Grade Challenge, we ask that you test your test 6' grade students on May 18. Return scoring sheets to PRE by 5 p.m. on May 21^ The student ID number \u0026amp; name, type of test, and school will be pre-slugged. Teachers will only need to pencil in their ID number. Any school that cannot adhere to the above testing dates please call 2125. 1Memo To: Elementary School Principals and Teachers From: Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Re: Comparison of Z\"** and 3\" Quarter CRT Results District average test scores in reading 2\"** Quarter 3\"^ Quarter % + /- 3\"* grade 25.58 29.07 +13.6% grade 26.72 26.91 +.07% 5* grade 26.73 30.01 +12.27% 6* grade 29.78 30.67 +2.99% District average test scores in math Z\"** Quarter 3^ Quarter % +1- 3\"* grade 27.69 27.51 -.06% 4* grade 20.71 26.32 +27.08% 5 grade 20.71 22.79 +10.04% 6 grade 24.01 21.56 -10.20% Interpreting scores. Some benchmarks were assessed in both quarters (e.g., 3rd grade math M2-1, 2-2, 2-3, \u0026amp; 2-5). Refer to Learning Links, February 3,1999, for average scores, on individual benchmarks, for the 2'* quarter.-Benchmarks are based on the concept of vertical linkage or chaining (i.e., what you learn in a previous quarter is built upon and linked or chained to learning in the current quarter). The question, to some extent, that could be answered by these results is that Yes, student achievement is improving.\" Congratulations! Please share this information with your building teachers. 22 LL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 November 15, 1999 TO: Elementary Principals FROM\nDr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: The Basic School - Model for Change I promised at a recent meeting to send to all of you some information on Ernest Boyer's The Basic School, a change model that I really like. I have lots of information, but I am sending this much to see if you are interested. An address and phone number are included - if you want to order your own book and videotape. They also have a web page\nwww.baesp.org/sci.htm. You Can e-mail the national director. Dr. Mary Ellen Bafumo, at bafumome@imu.edu. Attachment BAL/rcm The Basic School Page 1 of 2 M J M ?\nijdcj?= I J?JLJiJ = National Association of Elementary School Prindpals The Basic School The Basic School Network began as a partnership of The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, the National Association of Elementary School Principals, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, and James Madison University Copyright 1996 \"As I listen to teachers, parents, university faculty, colleagues, even children respond to the ideas of the Basic School, I realize how deeply resonant they are. I believe that the Basic School truly has the potential for changing the face of elementary education in America. These changes will not take place through inspirational talks alone. Teachers will learn from each other\nputting ideas into practice.\" Mary Beth Van Cleave, Principal, Clinton Kelly Elementary School, Portland, Oregon Learn more about The Basic School and the Network from:  The Basic School Network Highlights  The Carnegie Foundation's Basic School Blueprint  Dr. Ernest Boyer's speech at the 1995 NAESP Annual Convention - Part I and Part II  Principal Magazine  Principal Magazine Character\"  Principal Magazine article \"The Basic School: Focusing on the Childfl article \"Character in the Basic School - Making a Commitment to article \"The Basic School: Building a Framework for Curriculum  Communicator article \"Basic School Update -13 Schools Try Out Reforms\"  Teaching PreK-8 article \"Norfolk's 'Model' School\"  Instructor article \"My Colleagues Never Drive Me Crazyft  List of Other Publications on the Basic School and the Basic School Network  Other Up-To-Date Information on The Basic School Network: o Direct link to The Basic School Network at James Madison University o The latest Basic School News ~ o The Basic School Network Events For Further Information: The Basic School: A Community for Learning, by Ernest L. Boyer, is available for $15 (Bulk rate available) plus shipping from: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 350 Sansome Street, Fifth Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104, Telephone 888-378- http\n//www.naesp.org/bshili.htm 11/12/99 2537, Fax 800-605-2665 Or for more information about the network contact: Mary Ellen Bafumo, The Basic School Network, James Madison University, 101 Roop Hall, Harrisonburg, VA 22807, phone (540) 568-7098, fax (540)-568-3803, or E-mail: bafumomef^imu.edu PRINCIPAL ONLINE is sponsored by: The National Association of Elementary School Principals 1615 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314 For Additional Information about NAESP contact us at: 1-800-38-NAESP (voice), 1-800-39-NAESP (fax) or E-Mail: naesp(^naesp.ors ^Honw ^Publications ^Membership \u0026amp; Products ^SpecialProjects ^Programs ^Research  Forum ^Students * Government * Index Copyright  1996-1999 National Association of Elementary School Principals. All rights reserved. s j / M J \u0026gt; HtbCIkMUM ktQVIiX HLVltlM /CUbUKC PMICV S' i' -c a- ' i-iC-Vr ! ?! ivacv- I Partnership f -B -SFh 5^ J V 11 i t J I. W f 9 http://www.naesp.org/bshili.htm 11/12/99National Assodation of Elementary School Prindpals The Basic School A Community for Learning Introduction to The Basic School-A New Beginning For years, America has been working hard to improve the nation's schools. Reform has been high on the public agenda. As a result, academic standards have been raised, teacher certification requirements have been tightened, and educational innovations have been introduced from coast to coast. Without question, progress has been made. Today, America's best schools are among the most outstanding in the world. Others are succeeding, often under difficult conditions. But it's also true that far too many schools are only marginal at best, and that some, often those in our me st troubled neighborhoods, should hardly be called schools. The world has changed and schools must change, too. The lives of children who enroll in school today will span a new century. If, in the days ahead, educators cannot help students to become literate and well informed, if the coming generation cannot be helped to see beyond the confines of their own lives, the nation's prospects for the future will be dangerously diminished. Clearly, the push for school renewal rieeds a new beginning. This time the focus must be on the early years, on elementary education. Every level of learning is important. No sector should be neglected. But school failure starts very early and if all children do not have a good beginning, if they do not receive the support and encouragement they need during the first years of life, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to compensate fully for the failure later on. Responding to this challenge, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has proposed a new, comprehensive plan for elementary schooling called the Basic School, presented in a report entitled The Basic School: A Community for Learning. Following is an introduction to the priorities of the Basic School and answers to most frequently asked questions. What is a Basic School? The Basic School is not just another \"pilot program\" or novel innovation. Rather, it's a comprehensive plan to strengthen elementary education by bringing together, in a single school, the key components of an effective education. The shared vision of the Basic School is excellence for aH. The school affirms, as its central mission, that every child has a right to a quality education, that high academic standards must be set, and that every child can and will succeed in ways that reflect his or her own aptitudes and interests. This vision defines the purpose of the Basic School and becomes, both for teachers and students, the source of daily inspiration. Why is it Called \"Basic? ft The school is \"basic\" for several reasons. First, because it takes the push for school renewal back to http\n//www.naesp.org/scl.htm 11/12/99 me casic dcaoui the beginning - to the neighborhood school and to the first years of formal le^ing. Second, it's called \"basic\" because it gives priority to language and to a core of essential knowledge. Finally, the , , . . zK-t really work and seeks to make them available to school IS basic because it identifies practices that reauj every child. What are the Educational Priorities of The Basic School. To achieve excellence for all, the Basic School has four priorities that are considered the essential building blocks ofthe school. Fitted within these priorities are the components of an effective education. The First Priority: The School As Community A Shared Vision: The Basic School is a place where everyone comes together to promote learning. In the Basic School, the separate classrooms are connected by a clear and vital mission. Teachers as Leaders: In the Basic School, teachers are the leaders, with the principal as lead teacher. Parents as Partners: In the Basic School, the circle of co^unity extends to embrace parents. who are viewed as the child's first and most important teachers. The Second Priority: A Curriculum With Coherence no Centrality of Language: In the Basic School literacy is the first and most essential goal All children are expected to become proficient in the written and spoken wort, as well as in mathematics and the arts. The Core ComngtnaUtiett: In the Basic School, all students become well mfomed. They study the various fields ofknowledge - history, science, hterature civics, health, fcr example  which are organized thematically within a framework called \"The Core Commonalities. This is not so much i a new curriculum as it is a new way to think about the curriculum. Measuring Sesults: The Basic School is accountable to parents, to swdents, and to the coi^umty at large. High academic standards are established in both taguage achievement and general knowledge Student progress is periodically evaluated, with assessment always in the service of learning. The Third Priority: A Climate for Learning  r- n T n  c u ,.1 studcnt is encouraged to become a disciplined. Patterns to Fit Purpose: In the Basic School, every  .  J , ,  , 4 1 rii  e-mail, the teaching schedule IS flexible, and student creative, self-motivated learner. Class size is kept sro\u0026lt;iib \u0026amp; \u0026gt; grouping anangements are varied to promote learning- r, n  L 'Tu a  o u 1 available to all students nch resources for leaming- Resources to Enrich: The Basic School makes avan^^i , .  . , , , -ij- ui 1 i. u A J i\u0026lt;:n gives students access to the new electronic tools from building blocks to books. And the school also irUill uiuvivo uiiv ovwvv . that connect each classroom to vast networks of knowle o Support Serrtcafor Children: The Basic School is commined to serving the whole child. Beyond http://www.naesp.org/scl.htm 11/12/991  :  i.- The Basic bcnooi - rage j Oio a solid academic program, the school provides basic health and counseling services and afternoon and summer enrichment programs for students. The Fourth Priority: A Commitment to Character TAe Core Virtues: The Basic School is concerned with the ethical and moral dimensions of a child's life. Seven core virtues-honesty, respect, responsibility, compassion, self-discipline, perseverance, and giving-are emphasized to guide the Basic School as it promotes excellence in living, as well as in learning. Living with Purpose: The core virtues of the Basic School are taught both by word and deed. Through curriculum, school climate, and service, smdents are encouraged to apply the lessons of the classroom to the world around them. Does The Basic School have Specific Educational Goals for All Students? Yes, in addition to the larger objective of excellence for all, the Basic School defines five sharply focused educational goals: First, to communicate effectively. Language, defined broadly to include not just words, but also mathematics and the arts, is not just another subject\nit is the means by which all other subjects are pursued. Second, to acquire a core of knowledge. Students become well informed by learning a core of knowledge, while making connections across the disciplines and relating what they learn to life. Third, to be a motivated learner. Students remain curious and develop both the desire and skills to study on their own. They learn how to gather information and become problem solvers. Fourth, to feel a sense of well-being. Through school support, students become physically healthy, socially competent, and emotionally secure. Fifth, to live responsibly. Students learn by word and deed the core virtues that promote good conduct and citizenship. How is The Basic School Different? First, the school seeks to bring together all the key components of an effective school. Second, the Basic School seeks to build a community in which teachers work together and parents are actively involved. Third, the Basic School gives high priority to a commitment to character and defines core virtues to be taught. Fourth, the most distinctive feature of the Basic School is its curriculum. Most elementary schools have a confusing, fragmented course of study, with teachers often developing lesson plans in isolation and with each grade level disconnected from the others. In the Basic School, the curriculum is organized around eight integrative themes-core commonalities-that spiral upward from kindergarten to the upper grades. By core commonalities we mean those universal experiences shared by all people. These include: the Lf http://www.naesp.org/scl.htm bi. 11/12/99 The Basic School Page 4 of 5 Life Cycle, the Use of Symbols, Membership in Groups, a Sense of Time and Space, Response to the Aesthetic, Connections to Nature, Producing and Consuming, and Living with Purpose. Within these eight themes, every traditional subject or academic discipline can find a home. Finally, the Basic School places great importance on fostering children's love of learning. This means that Basic School students are taught in a way that sparks their interest in learning and makes their school a lively, exciting place. Does The Basic School Require More Money? No, not necessarily. Creative schools have found ways to implement almost all of the recommendations of the Basic School within their existing budget. Such critical issues as clarifyin\ngoals and building community have to do with ideas and attitudes, not money, and that applies to g parent participation and creative teaching, too. Adding technology to the school will require money, of course, but this can be implemented over time. The most important budget issues perhaps relate to providing teacher time and achieving small classes, especially, in the lower grades. Will Basic School Students Meet District and State Standards? Again, assessment is a critically important part of the Basic School. Language skills will be continuously monitored, since proficiency in language is a key objective of the Basic School. In teaching the curriculum, evaluation is embedded in instruction, so students, teachers, and parents can follow the progress being made. Further, any required state or district tests are administered at the Basic School with the confidence that all students will succeed. Students will have learned a core of essential knowledge in context. Can Every School Become a Basic School? Yes, but it's an ongoing process. Sortie ideas can be implemented quickly, while others take more time. What's required is a commitment on the part of everyone- the school board, the principal, teachers, and parents-to support the priorities and proposed practices of the Basic School, to evaluate the current program of the school, and to develop together a plan to implement the recorrimendations. In the end, becoming a Basic School is not a top-down decision, it must be continuously affirmed and sustained at the school level. Ultimately, the aim of the Basic School is not just to build a better school, but, above all, to build a . better world for children. It is our deepest hope that not a single child, let alone a whole generation of children, should pass through the schoolhouse door unprepared for the world that lies before them. There is an urgency to this effort. For Further Information Contact: Mary Ellen Bafumo, The Basic School Network, James Madison University, 101 Roop Hall, Harrisonburg, VA 22807, phone (540) 568-7098, fax (540)-568-3803, or E-mail: bafumome\u0026amp;jmu.edu http://www.naesp.org/scl.htm 11/12/99 me oabic oenooi Page 5 of 5 r PRINCIPAL ONLINE is sponsored by: The National Association of Elementary School Principals T6I5T)uke Slreef ~ .......... Alexandria, VA 22314 3 4 For Additional Information about NAESP contact us at: 1-800-38-NAESP (voice), 1-800-39-NAESP (fax) or E-Mail: naesp(^naesp.ors 4 1 ^Home ^Publications ^Membership \u0026amp; Products ^SpecialProjects Programs Research Forum Students  Government Index 4 Copyright  1996-1998 National Association of Elementary School Principals. All rights reserved. lowered fcrr HlDtlhMbUl MblVKSl HeMtM mTUUMCFJCY Care About Online Privacy? p ri /-3cy Partnership http://www.naesp.org/scl.htm 11/12/99i 1 J 4 1! T H BASIC . SCHOOL A Community for Learning ERNEST L. BOYER The Cam^e Foundation for the Advancement of Teachingi !  i i  } 5 5 i 5 ? I t Prologue: A NEW BEGINNING An Excerpt from: The Basic School: A Community Jbr Learning Ernest L. Boyer The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement Df Teaching ii I i CopjTight  1995 9 The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching 5 hy Lane, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 Confidential, Not for distribution, publication, or citation. j The draft of this report is part of the effort by The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching to explore significant issues in education. The views expressed should not necessarily be ascribed to individual members of the Board of Trustees of The Carnegie Foundation. r  a 5 I s I All rights reserved. No part of this draft may be reproduced in any form without permission from The Carnegie Foundation. ISBN: 0-931050-51-0 Available from: California Princeton Fulfillment SerAdces 1445 Lower Feny Road Ewing, New Jersey 08618 1300) 777-4726 or (609) 883-1759 - I i I s Prologue: A New Beginning o o I ! I i i We propose, in this-report. a new place of learning called The Basic School. The Basic School is not so much an iiistiiiition as it is an idea based on best practice, a comprehensive plan for educational renewal that is, we believe, appropriate for every elementary school. Our goal is to improve the prospects for learning for every child. I I I We call this school basic,  first of all, because it takes the push for school reform back to the beginning, to the first years of formal education. It is basic because it gives priority to language and sugsests a core of knowledge with coherence. Finally, the school we propose is basic\" because it identifies key components of an effective school and brings them all together in a single institutionthe Basic School. ) i1 I I I The purpose of the Basic School is to provide quality education for the more than three million kindergarten children' who enrolled last fall in over fifty thousand public and private elementary schools from Bangor, Maine, to the islands of Hawaii.- Most of these young students arrived at school anxious, but also eager. Some were cheerful, others troubled. Some skipped and ran, others could not walk. This new generation of students came from countless neighborhoods, from a great diversity of cultures, speaking more languages than most of us could name. The urgent challenge the nation's schools confront is to ensure that every child will, with care and guidance, become a confident, resourceful learner. I f Children are, of course, always learning. They learn as they touch the earth, feel the grass, dig into the sand. Children, endlessly responding to the world around them, learn as they chase pigeons in the park, study drifting clouds, I I1 and watch ants scurrying acros.s city sidewalks. \"The child is.\" as Ashley Montagu observed, \"the most avid learner of all living things on this earth.' Yet this maivelous gift of continuous discovery can be diminished or enhanced. and the purpose of the Basic School is to keep the urge to learn alive in everv child. I V I I i For more than a decade. America has been working hard to improve all the nation's schools, and enrich learning for all children. As a result, academic Standards have been raised, teacher cenification requirements have been tightened. and educational innovations have been introduced from coast to coast. Without a doubt, progress has been madewith a decline in school dropouts in some districts as well as modest increase.s in basic skills performance, especially among minority students. n 'i } i Today, America's best schools are among the most outstanding in the world. Others are succeeding, often under difficult conditions, wdth teachers assuming responsibilities that families and communitie,s have not been able to accomplish. But it's also true that far too many of the nation's schools are marginal at best, and that some schools, those in our most troubled neighborhoods. can hardly be called schools, a.s U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley put it.-' In one suburban elementary school in Ohio, a fourth-- grade teacher told us: \"We seem to be working harder, with fewer gains.\" 4 J When we asked elementary school teachers in a national survey how the quality of American education today compares to five years ago, about 40 percent said about the same.\" Thirty-two percent said it's gotten worse. Only 26 percent said it's better.' Parents, we discovered, were even more pessimistic about the progres.s being made. Twenty percent feel the quality of education is better. Forty percent say it'.s worse, compared to five years 5 ago\" (table 1). School success, ultimately, must be measured by .student performance, not opinion polls. Still, no one can be fully satisfied with where we are todaw T/ic Basic Sclinnl  4 I Table 1 I i How Does the Quality of Education in the Nation Today Compare With Five Years Ago I Teachers Parents Better About The Same Worse 26 42 20 40 40 Source: i The Carnegie Foundaiion for the Advancement of Teaching and the Georae H. Gallup International In.siitute. The International Schooling Project. 1994: survey of teachers and survey of parents. We reach one incontrovenible conclusion. The world has changed and schools must change, too. The lives of children who enroll in school today will span a new century. Those who graduate will enter what Peter F. Drucker calls the knowledge society,  a society that requires higher literacy, more technical competence, and lifelong learning. Knowledge has, without question. I I a become_our most precious resource. And if, in the days ahead, educators u n 12 \u0026amp; id 3 cannot help students become literate and well informed, if the comins seneration cannot be helped to see well beyond the confines of their own lives, the nation's prospects for the future will be dangerously diminished. I Clearly, the push for school renewal needs a new besinnins. This time the focus must be on the early years, on clctnsntorv education. Every level of learning is important. No sector should be neglected. But school failure starts very early, and if all children do not have a good besinnins, if they do not receive the support and encouragement needed durins the first years of life, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to compensate fully for the failure later on^ Pmlngiie: \u0026lt;4 ,\\ew Beginning - 5W I A third-grade teacher in Wyoming put the challenge this way: With all the talk about school renewal, there is a tendency to overlook elementary schools. The first years must be recognized as the most essential. Until the elementary school becomes a priority for renewal, education in this country will not make much improvement. And responding to this challenge. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching launched, several years ago, a study of the elementary school. We searched the literature, consulted scholars, conducted national and'international surveys, and sent researchers into schools all across the country. y J cl During school visits, we were struck, time and time again, by the commitment of principals, the eagerness of students, the concern of parents, and most especially by the dedication of teachers, who are, we concluded, the unsung heroes of the nation. Above all, we were struck by the way so many of the nations elementary schools have adjusted dramatically to new demands. We concluded that the elementary school is, as former U.S. Secretary of Education William Bennett put it, a place of hope.\"* Still, this is not the time to be complacent. 5 5 While inspired by dedicated efforts, we also were troubled by the way most teachers work alone and by the weakened partnership between the home and school, a fragmented relationship described by one principal as a lack of community at our school.\" We were troubled, too. by the confusion over what schools should teach and how students should be assessed, issues that go to the very heart of quality education. We also became concerned, while visiting schools, that a rigid daily schedule and poor resources often restrict learning, especially for the least advantaged. Finally, at the very time the nation's children need ethical and moral guidance, we found most schools greatly perplexed about what virtues they should, in fact, be teaching. We are convinced that a new vision of elementary education is urgently required, one that presents a comprehensive, practical plan of action based The Basic ScIhidI  f) I '5^' on best practices, one that would be appropriate for every school. We agree with James Rodenmayer, the principal at Etna Road Elementary School in Whitehall, Ohio, who said to us: There is a growing urgency all over the country about the direction of education and a sense that, nationwide, we must do better, for the sake of our children. How, then, should we proceed? I I 1 J The plan we present in this report is not just another pilot project. It is not yet one more novel experiment.\" Rather, what we have done is to identify practices that really work and put them all together in what we call the Basic School. The piecemeal approach to school reform has been tried. During the past decade, we have had literally hundreds of isolated innovations. Whats needed now is a comprehensive approach to school renewal, one that pulls together the essential elements of an effectix e school and makes them available to every child. 1 3 After completing our research we concluded that the most essential ingredient of an effective schoolthe one idea that holds it all togetheris best described bv the simple word connections. An effective school connects people, to create community. An effective school connects the curriculum, to achieve coherence. An effective school connects cla.ssroom.s and resources to enrich the climate. And an effective school connects learning to life, to build character. a L These four prioritiescommunity, coherence, climate, and characterare the basic building blocks for the Basic School. Fitted within each of these priorities are specific proposalsprograms that, we discovered, really work. The 2oal. then, of the Basic School is to present an overall strategy for renewal, one that seems to fit all institutions, while, at the same time, encour- asina every public and private school to develop, within thislaverarching framework, its own distinctive program. t I I i i Prohiiue: A New Beginning - 7\u0026gt; First: The School AS Co.M.ML'NiTY Building Community. The Basic School has, as the first requirement, a clear and vital mission. The school is a place where every'- one comes together to promote learning. Each classroom is, itself, a community. But in the Basic School, the separate classrooms are connected by a sense of purpose, m a climate that is just, disciplined, and caring, with occasions for celebration. Teachers as Leaders. In the Basic School, teachers are empowered. Working together as teams, they serve as mentors to their students, and have the time and resources needed to be professionally renewed. The principal in the Basic School is lead teacher, the one who guides the school, more by inspiration than directive. Parents as Partners. In the Basic School, the circle of community extends outward to embrace parents, who are viewed as the child's first and most important teachers. A vital pannership is created between the home and school, one that begins during preschool years, is strengthened when the child formally enrolls, and continues from kindergarten to grade five. i I i The Basie School - 8 I ( i i i 1 \u0026lt; Second: A Cl'rricli*um with Coherence The Basic Tools. In the Basic School, literacy is the first and most essential goal. All children are expected to become proficient in the written and spoken word. But in the Basic School, language is defined broadly to include words, numbers, and the arts, the essential tools of learning which, taken together, help create a curriculum with coherence. The Core Commonalities. In the Basic School, all students become well informed. They study, with diligence, the various fields of knowledge, which are organized, thematically, within a framework called the Core Commonalities. These eight commonalities, based on shared human experiences, integrate the traditional subjects, helping students see connections across the disciplines and relate what they learn to life. X Measuring Results. Assessment in the Basic School is, always, in the service of learning. Academic standards are established both in language and the Core Commonalities, with benchmarks to monitor student achievement. The personal qualities of student development also are evaluated carefully by teachers. The Basic School is, in the end, accountable to students, to parents, and to the larger community. Prolugue: New Beginning  9 'fl* Third: A Climate for Learning Patterns to Fit Purpose. In the Basic School, every student is encouraged to become a disciplined, creative, well-motivated learner. Class size is restricted to promote learning, and the teaching schedule and student grouping are flexibly arranged. Connections are made across the generations, to enrich students lives. Resources to Enrich. The Basic School makes available to all students rich resources for learning, from building blocks to books. Libraries, zoos, museums, and parks in the surrounding community become resources, too. And on the threshold of a new century, the Basic School gives all students access to the new electronic tools that connect each classroom to vast networks of knowledge. Services for Children. The Basic School is committed to serve the whole child, acknowledging that a students physical, social, and emotional well-being also relate to learning. Beyond a solid aca- - demic prosram. the school provides basic health and counseling services for students, referrals for families, and a new calendar and clock, with after-school and summer enrichment programs for learning and creative play. The Basic School - 10 I I iI I 1 I I I I I I Fourth: A Commitment to Character The Core Virtues. The Basic School is concerned with the ethical dimensions of a childs life. The goal is to assure that all students who leave school will have developed a keen sense of personal and civic responsibility. Seven core virtues, such as respect, compassion, and perseverance, are emphasized to guide the Basic School as it promotes excellence in learning, as well as living. Living with Purpose. The core virtues of the Basic School are taught by both word and deed. Through the curriculum, through school climate, and through service, students are encouraged to apply the lessons of the classroom to the world around them. Prologue: A New Beginning -11These, then, are the four priorities of the Basic School. The first priority, community, focuses on how people relate to one another. The second priority, coherence, considers what all students should learn. The third priority, climate, deals with effective teaching and learning. The fourth priority, character, considers how the school experience shapes the ethical and moral lives of children. Many proposals presented in this report are already being practiced, to one degree or another, in schools from coast to coast. What we propose to do, however, is bring them all together in the Basic School, while encouraging every elementary school to implement the proposed plan in its own distinctive way. And it is our hope that this reportthis vision we call the Basic Schoolwill be helpful to principals and teachers, in all schools, who are working so diligently to educate the nations children. What we envision, in short, is a continuing commitment to renewal. In the end. the goal of the Basic School is not just, to build a better school, but, above all. to build a better world for children. It is our deepest hope that not a single child, let alone a whole generation of children, should pass through the schoolhouse door unprepared for the world that lies before them. .And there is. we believe, an urgency to this effort. Chilean poet Gabriela Mistral wrote: \"Many things we need can wait. The child cannot. Now is the time his bones are being formed, his blood is being made, his mind is being developed. To him we cannot say tomorrow, his name is today.'' The Basic School  12 a t i 1. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 6 March 1995. I 2, Market Data Retrieval, 7 March 1995. r i i 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Ashley Montagu, Growing Young, 2nd ed. (New York\nBegin and Garvey Publishers, 1989), 121. Richard W. Riley, State of American Education,\" remarks at Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 15 February 1994, 2. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, National Survey of Kindergarten Teachers, 1991. All quotations from kinderganen teachers are taken also from this survey. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, National Survey of Kindergarten Teachers, 1991. All quotations from kindergarten teachers are taken also from this survey. Peter F. Drucker, The Age of Social Transformation,\" Atlantic Monthly, November 1994, 53-80, William J. Bennett, First Lessons: A Report on Elementary Education in America (Washington. DC\nU.S. Department of Educa-  tion, 1986), 1, Cited in a speech by Pat Henry, former president of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers Association, at the Children First Conference for Media, Washington, DC, 15 September 1992\nreprinted in Leading the Way\nChildren First,\" PTA Today, December 1992-January 1993,4-5. Pmlo^iie: A /Vcu- Be^^innirt! - 13 I I I i I i I I I I BASic ScHocn Materials The Basic School: A Community for Learning (report) Introductory Price $10.--ISBN 0-931050-48-0 Lite Basic School: PrologueAN ezo Beginning (excerpt from report) ComplimentaryISBN 0-931050-51-0 Tl-ie Basic School: One Hand Taking Another (video) Introductory Price $45.ISBN 0-931050-49-9 The Basic School: A Conversation with Ernest Boyer (audio) Introductory Price $10.ISBN 0-931050-50-2 The Basic School Package (all above in shelf case) Introductory Price $50.ISBN 0-931050-52-9 Available From: Please Add Shippiug. Bulk Order Discounts Available. Call for Rates. California Princeton Fulfillment Services 1445 Lower Ferry Road Ewing, NJ 08618 (800) 777-4726 or (609) 883-1759 THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING - 5 ivy Lane, Princeton, NJ 08540LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 ) January 10, 2000 TO: Elementary Principals and Brokers FROM: .^/s Dr. Bonnie Lesley\nAssociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Study on Urban Elementary Schools I alerted you earlier by e-mail about the just released study of nine urban elementary schools with high achievement. You will find it very interesting and I urge you to read the whole report. Attached for your convenience is an executive ofthe section on Improvement Strategies. summary of the study, plus a copy Please share this information with your CLT. Attachment BAL/rcmBRIGGS, MONA From: Sent: To: Subject: Winters, Kirk [Kirk_Winters@ed.gov] Tuesday, January 04, 2000 4:14 PM Information from \u0026amp; about the U.S. Department of Education publications \u0026amp; more . Hope for Urban Education: A Study of High-Performing, High-Poverty Elementary Schools NINE URBAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS that have served children of color in poor communities \u0026amp; achieved impressive academic results are the focus of a report Secretary Riley released last month at the Department's third regional Improving America's Schools conference in Chicago. \"What stands out among these schools,\" the Secretary said, \"is a clear \u0026amp; unrelenting focus on high standards, a commitment to serving children \u0026amp; ensuring their academic success, \u0026amp; a collective sense of responsibility \u0026amp; persistence among school staff.\" Below is the executive summary \u0026amp; a list of the schools. Most of the the 150-page report (126 pages) is devoted to indepth case studies* of these 9 schools. The full report is at: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/ This study \u0026amp; report were produced for the Department's Planning \u0026amp; Evaluation Service by the Charles A. Dana Center at the University of Texas at Austin. The 9 schools are... Harriet A. Baldwin School in Boston, Baskin Elementary in San Antonio, Burgess Elementary in Atlanta, Centerville Elementary in East St. Louis, IL, Goodale Elementary in Detroit, Hawley Environmental Elementary in Milwaukee, Lora B' Peck Elementary in Houston, Gladys Noon Spellman Elementary in Cheverly, MD, \u0026amp; James Ward Elementary, Chicago. (All are Title l-funded schools that pool resources through \"schoolwide projects\" to serve all students and improve achievement.) Executive Summary of \"Hope for Urban Education: A Study of Nine High-Performing, High-Poverty, Urban Elementary Schools\" (December 1999) This report is about nine urban elementary schools that served children of color in poor communities \u0026amp; achieved impressive academic results. These schools have attained higher levels of achievement than mos^choois In their states or most schools in th^n'atioh~They'have achieved results in reading \u0026amp; mathematics beyond that achieved in some suburban schools. This report tells the stories of these schools \u0026amp; attempts to explain how these schools changed themselves into high-achieving schools. All nine of the schools used federal Title I dollars to create Title I schoolwide programs. 'I hes~e schools are a powerful affirmatTon of the power of Title I to support comprehensive school improvement efforts. In these schools, many important change efforts were enhanced through the use of federal education resources. On the other hand, although Title I supported the  change efforts, Tjtl^was not the catalyst of the change effort. The true catalyst was'the strong desire of e'ducafdrslo ensure the v acad^lFsuccess bftTie~cRirdren they served. Each of the nine public elementary schools selected had the following characteristics: 1 * The majority of their students met low-income criteria (i.e., they qualified for free or reduced-price lunch). In seven of the schools, at least 80 percent of the students met low-income criteria. ' * The school was located in an ur^n area \u0026amp; did not have selective admission policies. * Student achievement in mathematics \u0026amp; reading was higher than the average of all schools in the state (or higher than the 50fo percentile if ajiation^ly-normed assessment was'used). 'Af least three years of assessment d'afa*were available to gauge the school's progress. * There was not evidence that the school exempted large percentages of students from participation in the assessment program because of language proficiency or disabilities. * The school \u0026amp; district leaders consented to participation in the study in a timely manner. The high-performing, urban schools selected were Harriet A. Baldwin School, Boston, Mass.\nBaskin Elementary School, San Antonio, Texas\nBurgess Elementary School, Atlanta, Ga.\nCenterville Elementaiy School, East St. Louis, 111.\nGoodale Elementary School, Detroit, Mich.\nHawley Environmental Elementary School, Milwaukee, Wis.\nLora B. Peck Elementary School, Houston, Texas\nGladys Noon Spellman Elementary School, Cheverly, Md. On metropolitan Washington, D.C.)\n\u0026amp; James Ward Elementary School, Chicago, 111. Teams of researchers conducted two-day visits to all nine schools. During the visits, the researchers interviewed campus \u0026amp; district administrators, teachers, parents, \u0026amp; other school personnel. They observed classrooms, hallways, playgrounds, \u0026amp; various meetings. Also, they reviewed various school documents \u0026amp; achievement data. \u0026gt;From these data, case studies were written for each of the nine schools. The nine schools were different in important ways. These differences suggest that many urban elementary schools serving poor communities can achieve high levels of student achievement. Also, the differences suggest that schools may be able to achieve academic successes through different means. Some of the differences observed included the following: * Among the nine schools, there were schools with small \u0026amp; larg.e enrollments. Enrollments ranged from 283 studenfs^TBaldwin 'Elerhenfary to 1,171 students at Goodale Elementary. * Although all of the schools served elementary grades, they had different grade teyel configurations, starting as early as pre-kindefgarten at'Hawley.'Peck, \u0026amp; Ward \u0026amp; ending as late as grade eight at Ward. * Student_demoqraphics varied. At six of the nine schools, most students were African American. At one school, most students were Hispanic, \u0026amp; at another most were Asian American. * Only ^o of the_schoo[s used natioriaHy^known comprehensive school reform .rnoJel.sl.ZDne_usecrthe Accelerated School Program \u0026amp; andlh'er used Success for Ail. * Even though none of the schools would have been considered high-performing based on achievement data from five years ago, some of the schoojs_made dramatic lmRpyerng.nt over a three or four-year period, whereas others took five years or longer' Before experiencing dramatic gains in student achievement. * In a few cases, the district office played a major role in the school's improvement efforts. In contrast, there were other cases where the district played a modest role in the 2 improvement process. * A few of the schools managed to make dramatic improvements without great turnover in teaching personnel. In contrast, some schools experienced substantial teacher turnover during the reform process. Beyond these differences, there wereimportant similari^s in the strategies used to improve academic achievefherit. The following strategies were used by many of the nine schools: * School leaders identified \u0026amp; pursued an important, visible, yet attainable first goal. They focused on the attainm^t of this first goal, achieved success, \u0026amp; then used their success to move toward more ambitious goals. * School leaders redirected time \u0026amp; energy that was being spent on conflicts between adults in the school towa^rd service to cKHdren. 'Leaders 'appealed\"to'feachers,' support staff, \u0026amp; parents to put aside their own interests \u0026amp; focus on serving children well. * Educators fostered in students a sense of responsibjlity-.for appropriate behavior \u0026amp; they created an envirbnmeritJo.which students were fikely to behave well. Discipline problems became^f^re as the schools implemented multi-faceted approaches for helping students learn responsibility fortheir own behavior. * School leaders created a collective sense of responsibility \"V\" for school irnprovement. The'shared sense of responsibility was nurtured 5y loirit planning processes \u0026amp; reinforced by efforts to involve everyone in key components of the school's 'work. ' ' ........ . * The quantity \u0026amp; guality of time spent on instructional leadership activities increased. Principals spent more time helpEng tea'cRers attend to instructional issues \u0026amp; decreased the time teachers spent on distractions that diverted attention away from teaching \u0026amp; learning. Also, principals put other educators in positions that allowed them to provide instructional leadership. School leaders constantly cH^lenged'teachers \u0026amp; students to higher levels of academic attainment. They used data to identify, acknowledge, \u0026amp; celebrate strengths \u0026amp; to focus attention \u0026amp; resources on areas ofneed. * Educators aligned instruction to the standards \u0026amp; assessments requiredTyme state orthe school ^strict. T eachers'S \" administrators worked together to understand precisely what students were expected to know \u0026amp; be able to do. Then, they planned instruction to ensure that students would have an excellent chance to learn what was expected of them. * School leaders got the resources \u0026amp; training that teachers perceivedlFie^eeded' to get their students to achieve at high leT/el^Iri'particular, school leaders made sure that teachers feiriiRe they had adequate materials, equipment, \u0026amp; professional development. * School leaders created opportunities for teachers to work, plil^'i leaiTTl^^hefarpunff in^guctio^ was 'structured' to ensure that coITaboratioKafdund instructional issues became an important part of the school day \u0026amp; the school week. * Educators made efforts to win the confidence \u0026amp; respect of parents' primarily by improving the achievement o'f students. Then educators built strong partnerships with parents in support of student achievement. 3 *  School leaders created additional time for instruction. In some cases, efforts focused on creating addition^'time for attention to critical instructional issues during the school day. in other cases, efforts focused on creating additional time beyond the regular school day. / * Educators persisted through difficulties, setbacks, \u0026amp; failures~rh^'ite~of challenges \u0026amp; frustrations, school leaders did not stop trying to improve their schools. These findings suggest the following recommendations: * Build the capacity of principals to provide instructional leadership. Federal, state \u0026amp; local education agencies should promote efforts to build the capacity of principals to provide the quality of instructional leadership demonstrated by the principals in the nine schools studied. ways that provide additional p to schools. hSeral, state, \u0026amp; local * Channel resources in ihjtructlQ'narieadefsFfip education agencies'should consider other ways to increase the quantity of instructional leadership available to schools, such as the development of instructional facilitator or specialist positions within schools. * Create clear, measurable, \u0026amp; r^rous school accountability ^vTsron's.' Thefederal governrri^t'should continue to encourage states \u0026amp; districts to frame rigorous school accountability requirements. However, a focus on adequate yearly progress is insufficient. Many educators will be motivated to higher levels of performance if state \u0026amp; district policies define exemplary academic achievement. * Ensure that accounta^lity provisions are accompanied by adequa^te strgfegie^s to build capacity \u0026amp; provide support? In considering' requirements foradequate yearly progress, states \u0026amp; districts should set ambitious requirements but also provide high levels of support. One of the most important supports is time for school personnel to engage in processes that align instruction to standards \u0026amp; assessments. * Along with accountability, provide schools adequate flexibility \u0026amp; support to use that flexibility well. Federal, state, \u0026amp; local education agencies should ensure that accountability provisions are coupled with adequate resources for schools \u0026amp; reasonable flexibility in the use of those resources. Principals \u0026amp; school decision-making committees need high quality training that helps them use data to focus resources on critical areas of instructional need. * Infuse the tenets of comprehensive school reform into other federal education programs. Th^federargovernment's focus on cornprehefTs'ivesChodl reform should be expanded \u0026amp; infused into other federal education programs. However, emphasis does not need to be placed on the adoption of models of reform as much as upon the principles of reform, as defined in the Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Program legislation. * Use legislation, policy, \u0026amp; technical assistance to help educators create regular opportunities for true professional development Professional developmentneedsfddecompletely rethoughfin a way that results in more effective teaching \u0026amp; improved student achievement. State \u0026amp; federal resources should support the costs associated with the provision of high-quality, school-based professional development that increases the amount of time educators spend working with \u0026amp; learning from each other. * Provide resources for increasing the quantity of time made avallaBre'ldr in^ruclion'.' State \u0026amp; federal resources' should suppoft effdtfslo'increase the quantity of time made 4 available for instruction. After-school programs, \"Saturday Schools,\" \u0026amp; extended-year programs are important vehicles for ensuring that students meet challenging standards. * Strengthen legislation \u0026amp; provide technical assistance to encourage schools to builTthe capacity orteacRersTS parents for increasing parentarTnvolverrient aUschool. Paper cofn^fance with existin^federal parentarinvolvement requirements is inadequate to improve schools. The capacity of educators to work with parents must be broadened. Also, educators must work to build the capacity of parents to support the education of their children. * Research i^needed to better understand how school districts carTbeftehsupport the improvement of teaching ^'learning in RI^-poveTfyschools. DTsfricts can play important roles in st^portihg-schbol change efforts. Unfortunately, there has been little research directed to understanding the role of districts in supporting high-performing, high-poverty schools. To subscribe to (or unsubscribe from) EDlnfo, address an mail message to: listproc@inet.ed.gov Then write either SUBSCRIBE EDINFO YOURFIRSTNAME YOURLASTNAME in the message, or write UNSUBSCRIBE EDINFO (if you have a signature block, please turn it off) Then send it! Past EDlnfo messages: http://www.ed.gov/MailingLists/EDInfQ/ Search: http://www.ed.gov/MailingLists/EDInfo/search.html Past ED Initiatives: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/EDInitiatives/ Daphne Hardcastle, Peter Kickbush, \u0026amp; Kirk Winters U.S. Department of Education kirk_winters@ed.gov 5 Hope for Urban Education\nImprovement Strategies http\n//www.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html Hope for Urban Education - December 1999 Improvement Strategies The primary purpose of this research effort was to generate a deeper understanding of how these nine urban elementary schools changed in a way that resulted in high levels of academic achievement for their students. There were several important change strategies that were used by multiple schools. In this section of the report, these change strategies are described with examples from a few of the schools. Targeting an Important, Visible, Attainable First Goal In several of the schools, new principals walked into difficult environments with problems ranging from student discipline, to teacher morale, to parent dissatisfaction, to academic lethargy. In response to what must have felt like overwhelming chaos, principals identified one issue or goal upon which they could focus immediate attention and give an unambiguous message that the school was changing. They sought to identify an issue where they could make progress quickly. The focus varied in response to the issues that were perceived as important at each school. At Baldwin and Hawley, the first efforts were to improve student discipline and create a safe and orderly environment. At Spellman, efforts were made to reduce the disruptions to teaching and increase the schools focus on academic instruction. At Peck, the principal disbanded the schools two, ethnically separate parent-teacher organizations and instituted a unified Parent-Teacher Association. At several of the schools, principals tried to make the physical environment more attractive for children and more conducive to learning. 1 of9 By targeting a visible, attainable goal, principals were able to give students, parents, and teachers clear indicators of change in just a few weeks or months. These early accomplishrnents helped reduce or eliminate excuses and created a readiness for additional (often more difficult) changes. By focusing on one issue, principals were able to direct their energies in a way that would have a high likelihood of success. This first success became the cornerstone of future successes. Refocusing Energies on Service to Children In prior years, teachers, principals, and parents in many of the schools spent considerable time on conflicts among the adults at school. Often these conflicts siphoned away valuable energy that should have been devoted to the improvement of teaching and learning. Principals in most of the nine schools were skillful in redirecting the energy expended on such conflicts. School leaders challenged teachers, paraprofessionals, union leaders, and parents to elevate their focus beyond self-interest to a concern for the well-being of the students. This was not done as a one-time event or an occasional sermon. Instead, principals were constantly reminding the adults about the effect of decisions on students. The principals appealed to teachers, staff, and parents to put aside small differences and unite in service to students. At Burgess, principal Carter challenged the staff to move from a teacher-focused school to a child-focused school. Often in discussions about important school decisions, the principal would ask the faculty to consider what was in the best interest of students. At Peck, principal Goodwin asked the faculty to put children first, regardless of disagreements. The staff learned, in part, from the manner in which the principal articulated child-focused rationale for her decisions. Goodwin encouraged teachers to talk about their reasons for entering the teaching profession. She tried to learn about their goals and what she called \"the desires of their hearts.\" Then she appealed to those desires to serve children well as she called upon every staff member to refocus their efforts on the improvement of the school. In several cases, school leaders helped teachers refocus energies during planning processes. By engaging in such processes and discussing \"what we, together, can do for children,\" principals were able to refocus energies in ways that coincided with improvement plans. Once plans were developed, the 1/5/00 10:29 Ah Hope for Urban Education: Improvement Strategies http\n//www.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.Utm refocus energies in ways that coincided with improvement plans. Once plans were developed, the message was reinforced often, particularly in times of conflict. As an example, at Baldwin, some teachers resisted changes in curriculum and instruction. One teacher said, \"You have to have a willingness to let them go through their resistance. Then you focus them on the fact that this is for the good of the kids.\" At Baskin, when performance data were reviewed, it was done in ways that were not intended to be critical of teachers. In contrast, the review was focused on the academic needs of children. At Goodale, the principal did not allow much energy to be expended on projects, efforts, or discussions that had minimal influence on the personal or academic growth of students. In staff meetings, grade level meetings, or in other gatherings, the principal frequently refocused the staffs energy toward issues that had a substantial influence on the personal or academic success of students. The result of the refocusing process was not only a decrease in tensions but also an increase in the extent to which students were likely to feel respected, valued, and appreciated. Visitors to these schools quickly sense that teachers and other staff members genuinely love and care for the students. Building Students Sense of Responsibility for Appropriate Behavior and Creating an Environment in Which Students Are Likely to Behave Well In all nine schools, often in dramatic contrast with their environments in past years, discipline problems were rare. The schools used many approaches to improve student behavior, focusing on helping students assume responsibility for their behavior and on creating school environments that made it easy for students to behave appropriately. At several of the schools, time was set aside to establish clear rules and high expectations for student behavior. Teachers, administrators, parents, and often students worked together to establish simple rules that would help create a much more pleasant environment for teaching and learning. Often, rules were established that would help prevent behavior problems before they started. For instance, at Peck students walked in the hallways with their arms folded. This pattern of behavior helped reduce the possibility of conflicts as students walked throughout the school. In all of the schools, many efforts were made to acknowledge and even celebrate positive behavior. For instance, the Buddy Reading Program at Ward and the SPARK program (Spellman Acts of Random Kindness) at Spellman helped encourage students to interact with their peers in a supportive manner. At Peck, students earned opportunities to seek positions of responsibility in the classroom. At Spellman, a banner was flown when the school achieved a fight-free day. At Hawley, students earned the chance to participate in intramural sports. Clear and consistent rules, consequences, and rewards helped students learn to assume responsibility for their own behavior. When consequences were regular and predictable, it was easier for students to behave appropriately. The predictability of these results seemed to be positively associated with the visibility of the principal and other school leaders. The visibility of principals on playgrounds, in hallways, and in classrooms helped underscore that the rules were important and they would be enforced. At times, rules were eliminated or modified when they were not necessary. For instance, at Peck there were many students (and some teachers) who were frequently late arriving at school in the momings._ Instead of investing a substantial amount of energy into disciplining people for being tardy, the principal instituted \"Peck time.\" The beginning and ending times for the school day were moved back 15 minutes. In other words, children began school fifteen minutes later and ended their school day fifteen minutes later. Parents, teachers, and students saw the change as an effort to help them succeed at being on time. Tardiness was dramatically reduced. Training for teachers was an important component of efforts to implement discipline plans. At Peck, teachers received training in the districts Consistency Management Discipline Plan. At Goodale, teachers participated in efficacy training that focused on building a sense of efficacy and responsibility in students. At many of the schools, the regular collaboration among teachers included attention to 2 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 AHope for Urban Education: Improvement Strategies http://www.ed.goy/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html in students. At many of the schools, the regular collaboration among teachers included attention to strategies for helping students maintain exemplary behavior. Student responsibility for their own behavior was also nurtured by the development of student leadership activities. For instance, at Goodale and Hawley, peer mediation programs gave students important opportunities to support each other in working out problems in a constructive manner. As well, extensive uses of cooperative learning strategies at schools such as Peck provided many opportunities for student leadership. The improvements in student behavior were also influenced by the changes in tlie extent to which children came to understand that they were valued and respected. At Baldwin, as in all of the nine schools, principal Lee knew all of the students by name and knew many of their families. The personal relationships among students and school staff created a powerful context for good behavior. At Burgess, teachers gave students time to talk about important emotional stresses in their lives. At several of the schools, counselors or social workers helped students know that they had a safe place to talk about personal concerns. Nonetheless, teachers, counselors, social workers, principals, and other support providers emphasized high expectations for student behavior, regardless of the circumstances in childrens lives. They listened and provided support that helped students continue to meet behavioral expectations, as well as academic expectations, even when students faced troubling situations. When behavioral problems emerged, they were dealt with in a prompt, objective manner that demonstrated respect for students and helped them learn responsibility. For instance, at Goodale, students were rarely suspended. Principal Batchelor believed that removing a student from school did nothing to increase the students sense of responsibility for his or her behavior nor to increase the schools sense of responsibility for educating the student. At many ofthe schools, the involvement of parents was a key component of their disciplinary efforts. Parents reported that they were supportive because they perceived that school leaders were fair disciplinarians who had the best interest of their children at heart. Ultimately, student behavior was also improved by the improvement of academic instruction in classrooms. Students were more likely to be actively engaged in learning. They were more likely to be excited about the level of challenge and rigor in their curriculum. They were more likely to be positive about their chances to succeed academically. Thus, there was less of a need for students to seek attention through negative behavior. Improved instruction led to improved discipline, which led to even better instruction. Creating a Collective Sense of Responsibility for Improvement An important improvement strategy at each of the nine schools centered on creating an environment in which all educators shared a sense of responsibility for school improvement and the attainment of the schools goals. At several ofthe schools, this joint sense of responsibility was modeled by the principal, nurtured by joint planning processes, and reinforced by efforts to involve everyone in key components of the schools work. Principals at these schools emphasized the importance of each individuals contribution to the work of the school. Principals modeled their commitment to collective responsibility by including the input of various staff members in decisions. Often teachers were given the responsibility of making important decisions. In other cases, principals made key decisions but they gave teachers and other staff substantial opportunities to contribute their thoughts and ideas. Planning processes provided avenues for the involvement of many staff and faculty. For instance, the Accelerated Schools Program provided opportunities for many Centerville staff members to get involved in identifying school needs and establishing a vision for the schools future. At Hawley, staff members participated on committees established in response to critical issue areas identified by the staff. These structured opportunities for involvement helped emphasize that staff members shared responsibility for school improvement. The principal refused to allow teachers to think that he would fix all of the schools problems. The staff learned that they all shared responsibility for getting all children to achieve at high levels. 3 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 ANHope for Urban Education\nImprovement Strategies http\n//www.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html at high levels. Collective responsibility became a part of the common language of the school. At Centerville, Peck, and Ward everyone talked about teamwork and the extent to which they were working as a team. At Goodale and Burgess educators talked about themselves as part of a \"family\" of adults responsible for the well-being of \"their\" children. At Baskin, principal Payne said, \"No one can do it alone.\" At Ward, principal Wilcher emphasized the importance of getting the staff to feel that they were working wilh her and not for her. The sense of collective responsibility resulted in staff members taking on new and different roles. At Spellman, the institution of the Canady block-scheduling approach resulted in almost all of the schools ancillary personnel participating in the teaching of reading. Similarly, at Peck many staff members helped support the Success for All reading program. At Hawley, the school social worker sponsored the after-school math club. At many of the schools, teachers voluntarily exceeded expectations. The involvement of staff members in a variety of activities central to the success of the school helped create a deeper sense of professional responsibility among them. As professionals, teachers and other staff were expected to contribute to an understanding of the schools problems, the analysis of possible solutions, and the implementation of commonly agreed-upon approaches to improvement. Increasing Instructional Leadership At all nine schools, the amount and quality of time spent on instructional leadership activities was substantially increased. First, principals spent a substantial amount of time engaged in instructional leadership activities. Second, other school faculty were positioned in ways that allowed them to provide instructional leadership at the school. Principals tended to spend a large percentage of their time in classrooms. For instance, at Burgess, Carter reported that she spent 40 percent of her time in classrooms, observing teaching and helping improve instruction. At Centerville, principal Butler was described as a teacher of teachers. As one teacher explained, \"She n gets in there with you and shows you. She teaches and shows you to make sure that you understand. Similarly, teachers at Peck and Goodale reported that their principals were frequently in classrooms- watching, reacting to and reinforcing good teaching techniques and providing helpful suggestions. In addition to the leadership provided by principals, almost all of the schools asked other educators to provide instructional leadership to the school staff. For instance, Warren, the former principal at Baskin, created an instructional guide position from another administrative position. This person, Payne, coached teachers on instructional strategies and later became the school principal. At Burgess and Spellman, there were instructional specialists who provided instructional assistance and support to teachers. At Goodale, Title I resource teachers assumed instructional leadership functions as they helped teachers address instructional improvement issues. At Peck, a master teacher was hired to help teachers with writing instruction while the Success for All Coordinator supported teachers in improving reading instruction. At Ward, an assistant principal was responsible for helping the principal improve instruction in classrooms and head teachers provided addition^ assistance to their peers in improving daily classroom instruction. By encouraging and training multiple instructional leaders, former principal Breen at Ward helped prepare his successor, Wilcher, and other leaders who have become administrators in other Chicago schools. As another example of instructional leadership among the nine schools, principals kept teachers and other school personnel focused on improving instruction. At Goodale, when school planning efforts veered to a discussion of improving the parking lot, principal Batchelor, helped refocus the group on improving instruction. At Hawley, Principal Helminiak supported the School Beautification Committee, but made it clear that the priority had to be on improving student achievement. Often, principals kept the faculty focused on instruction by removing distractions. At Spellman, Liebes insisted that the 90-minute reading block was \"sacred\" and would not be interrupted. Even on days shortened because- of snow. 4 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 Ah/Hope for Urban Education: Improvement Strategies http://www,ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html reading block was \"sacred\"_and would not be interrupted. Even on days shortened because of snow, everyone would have 90 minutes for reading and language arts.  One way principals and other school leaders demonstrated instructional leadership was by getting teachers to use achievement data to improve instruction. For example, at Baldwin, Lee helped teachers use data on student literacy levels to improve reading instruction. Additionally, the princip^ helped teachers use disaggregated Stanford 9 test scores to identify students in need of additional academic support. At Goodale, Batchelor helped ensure that the school s professional development plans, as well as other important plans were based, at least in part, on student results from the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP). At Hawley, principal Helminiak helped teachers use student assessment data to identify areas of strength and weakness and use such data in planning improvement strategies. At Baskin, the instructional guide helped teachers use data to understand specific objectives in mathematics that needed extra attention. At Centerville, the principal used the Accelerated Schools Program to help teachers understand and use data to improve teaching. Principals constantly challenged the school staff to higher levels of achievement. They highlighted and celebrated the successes of students and teachers in a way that reinforced exemplary efforts and gave a message of hope. The walls of classrooms and hallways were visual celebrations of the achievement of students. Regularly, school leaders took the time to acknowledge the successes and special efforts of students, parents, teachers, and other staff members. As goals were achieved, school leaders generously praised the efforts of all contributors, and then artfully redirected the entire school toward even higher goals for the achievement of their students. Aligning Instruction to Standards and Assessments At the nine schools, students performed well on assessments because they were taught what the district or the state expected them to learn. Principals and teachers did not leave student performance to chance. They meticulously ensiled that children were being taught the knowledge, concepts, and skills articulated in state or district standards and measured in annual assessments. At Burgess and Centerville, curriculum alignment processes helped teachers understand the relationship between what they taught and how students performed on standardized tests. The curriculum alignment processes were unportant opportumties for teachers to talk about expectations, teaching, and student work. Furthermore, the alignment processes gave teachers a chance to understand precisely what students were expected to know and the extent to which students would be expected to demonstrate mastery. At Spellman, instructional specialists and teachers worked together to create perfomiance-based practice assessments. Teachers used the data from those assessments to improve instruction. For many of the teachers, the process gave them a much deeper understanding of what instruction was needed for students to perform well on the assessment. Alignment processes also helped ensure that teachers would be able to teach all of the knowledge and skills expected to be learned during the school year. For instance, at Baskin, the principal and the instructional guide led teachers in curriculum alignment projects in science and mathematics that gave teachers a road map for student improvement.\" Teachers no longer had to guess if they were covering all the content tested by the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills. They worked together to develop plan that would ensure adequate coverage of all important content by-testing time each spring. a Getting Teachers the Resources and Training Perceived Necessary to Teach At several of the schools, substantial energy was devoted to making sure that teachers felt like they had all of the resources they considered necessary in order to get students to reach the schools academic goals. In particular, principals and other school leaders made sure that teachers felt like they had adequate materials, equipment, and professional development. At Baldwin, teachers reported that the principal \"went to the n* degree\" to get needed instructional materials. At Goodale, teachers who had transferred from other Detroit schools were astonished at the manner in which the principal and the Title I resource teachers were able to get teachers the materials they requested in a timely manner. At Ward, teachers reported, \"If teachers need it, Wilcher [the 5 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 AMHope for Urban Education: Improvement Strategies http\n//www.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html they requested in a timely manner. At Ward, teachers reported, \"If teachers need it, Wilcher [the principal] gets it.\" When assessment data, principal observations, or analyses of student work suggested that students were not learning an important concept or skill, the principal or school planning teams made sure that resources were allocated to help teachers learn better strategies for teaching the skill. Teachers, principals, and instructional specialists from within the school often provided this training\nhowever, there were times when training from outside sources was needed. In such cases, principals either arranged for experts to come to the school and provide training to the staff or arranged opportunities for staff persons to attend workshops, seminars, or conferences where they could access the appropriate training. When necessary, the school provided substitute teachers so that faculty could attend training sessions. Often such training was attended by groups of teachers and administrators. Therefore, when the group returned to school, they could support each other in carrying out the practices learned. Also, they could assist other staff in learning the new strategies, concepts, or techniques. For instance during one semester, at Ward, a group of teachers participated in weekly math and science classes held at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Teachers attended classes during the school day and substitute teachers were provided. Then, experts from the institute visited the teachers in their classrooms and provided coaching. Teachers learned new skills that they were able to apply in their classrooms and practice with the support of their school administrators and fellow teachers. Often, teachers perceived that the support provided through access to materials, equipment, and training was critical to their success. They tended to see the schools investment as a tangible indicator of support. As a result, teachers responded with a greater willingness to support school initiatives. Perhaps, teachers felt more effective as a result of this support and were more willing to exert maximum effort. Perhaps, when teachers perceived that they had been given what they deemed necessary to teach well, there were fewer excuses for poor performance. Whatever the reason, this support was extremely important to teachers and was an important part of the success at several of the schools. Often the schools used Title I funds to provide materials, instructional equipment, and professional development. These schools used the flexibility provided by the Title I schoolwide program option to improve services to all students. In some cases, (e.g., at Goodale) Title I teachers still saw some students on a pull-out basis, yet the majority of the Title I funds were used to support the improvement of the entire school. When Title I funds ran short, some of the schools (e.g., Centerville, Baldwin, and Goodale) acquired resources from other grants to help meet these needs or combined Title I dollars with other resources. At Baskin, money from an unused professional position was diverted to purchase additional instructional materials. At Hawley, Title I and technology resources were combined to get computers into classrooms and provide associated professional development for teachers. Creating Opportunities for Teachers to Work, Plan, and Learn Together At all nine schools, leaders created regular opportunities for teachers to work, plan, and learn together around instructional issues. Without time for collaboration on instruction, many improvements would have never been conceived or implemented. Many of the schools created blocks of time during which teachers met and planned together. At Baldwin, a primary team (kindergarten through second-grade teachers) and an elementary team (third through fifth-grade teachers) each met twice a month. At Baskin, a 90-minute block of uninterrupted' planning time was created for each grade level twice a week. At Hawley, the principal ananged the schedule in a way that used \"banked\" time (additional minutes at the beginning or end of each day) to carve out time for professional development. At Peck, the principal rearranged the schedule to provide common planning times for the staff to engage in horizontal (same grade level) and vertical (different grade levels) planning. Twice a week the entire staff came together to share experiences and strategies that achieved positive results. Often planning times focused on important instructional issues. For instance, at Baldwin, teachers 6 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 AN'Hope for Urban Education\nImprovement Strategies http\n//www.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html Often planning times focused on important instructional issues. For instance, at Baldwin, teachers carefully reviewed student work in comparison with academic standards and discussed opportunities for improving instruction. At Spellman, this time was used to create practice performance assessments, score the assessments, and identify common areas of academic strength and need. Often these planning times became opportunities for teachers to share and learn from each other. For instance, at Burgess teachers gave reports on what objectives were being taught and how they were getting students to leam the objectives. Time was set aside for classroom visits and sharing. At Hawley, many of the professional development activities were organized and presented by teachers to their colleagues, based on the school improvement plan. In other cases, collaboration times were sometimes used as opportunities for teachers to study and research options for instructional improvement. For instance, at Baldwin teachers researched options for literacy programs before choosing one that felt appropriate for their students. Although these collaborations generally had an academic focus, they did not always start as such. For instance, at Baskin collaboration was established when teachers started going out to lunch together once a week. At Burgess, collaborations began with staff dinners, social gatherings, and team-building sessions. Building a comfort level was sometimes an important precursor to getting teachers to discuss their teaching practices openly. In some cases, school leaders set aside space for teachers to plan and work together. The new kind of II. 'teacher workroom\" helped teachers collaborate. At Baskin a special workroom was established that allowed teachers the space to meet, work together, and leam from each other. Similarly, Peck Elementary is in the process of developing such a space. Mentoring programs provided another vehicle for teachers to work and plan together. Specifically, Centerville and Ward had established mentor programs that were particularly designed to support new teachers. Team teaching at Spellman (as part of the Canady model) required teachers to work with one of the schools specialists during a 90-minute block. At Goodale, shared professional development experiences often became a starting point for collaborations among teachers. Teachers would return from such events and work together toward implementation of strategies learned. Teachers at these nine schools were constantly learning about academic content and academic instruction. Often, they learned as much from each other as they learned from any other source. Their planning efforts were central to the improvements in instruction at the schools. Winning the Confidence and Respect of Parents and Building Partnerships with Them At all nine schools, educators engaged in a wide variety of efforts to win the confidence and respect of parents. Educators did not simply seek to involve parents in token activities. Instead, educators sought a meaningful partnership with parents. Successful partnerships would never have been established if parents did not see tangible evidence of the schools concern for their children. As the school made efforts to adapt to the needs of children, parents were willing to exert greater effort to support the school. The teachers and principals of the nine schools helped parents believe that the school could provide great opportunities for their children. Parents responded positively to those efforts with an outpouring of support in various forms. Parents talked about what teachers had done for their children and the kind of place the school had become. They articulated a confidence that the school staff had their childrens best interests at heart. The conventional wisdom suggests that parental involvement leads to improved achievement\nhowever, in these schools, there was also evidence that the reverse was trueimproved school achievement led to increased parental involvement. Parents were more willing to be supportive because they saw evidence that educators cared about their children and worked hard to improve achievement. Of course, this increased parental involvement then became an important tool for generating further improvements in academic learning. 7 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 .AVHope for Urban Education: Improvement Strategies http.//WWW.ed.gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html An important step in building partnerships with parents was making them feel like they were welcome as equals at school. Educators at Baldwin, Centerville, Spellman, and Ward described \"open-door policies\" that encouraged parents to visit the school and visit their childs classroom. At Baskin, teachers and administrators stood outside the school in the morning as parents dropped off their children. They invited parents to come in and have coffee and doughnuts and chat about their childs progress. Similarly, at Goodale, parents were invited to attend \"Snack and Chat\" sessions with teachers during lunch. At Centerville and Peck, parent centers were established that gave parents a place to meet, organize activities, and participate in enrichment classes. At Peck, the principal showed the school office staff how to greet and work with parents in a way that made them feel welcome. Often educators made small but significant extra steps that helped parents feel welcome. For instance, at Baskin, child care was provided during parent-teacher conferences. At Spellman, the schools automated phone service was used to remind every parent about PTA meetings. At Peck, the principal made personal phone calls to parents to encourage them to attend planning meetings. School personnel helped build partnerships by giving parents important ways to contribute and by acknowledging the important ways in winch parents already contributed to the schools success. At Baskin, many parents were involved in planning activities. Furthermore, those parents were encouraged to express their opinions and share their ideas. At Hawley, parents were invited to attend family nights with food and fun, but also, at these events, parents were asked to share their opinions, ideas, and desires for their children. At Peck, parents were asked, \"What do you think we need to do to help make Peck a better school?\" At these schools, parents were treated as if they were highly valued consultants with important ideas and insights. Parents were also given important ways to contribute to their own childs academic success. At Baskin, videotapes were used to inform parents about activities in their childs classroom and to help parents understand what children were learning and how they could help at home. At Burgess, parents participated in the Saturday school program. Parental participation was encouraged and structured so parents could learn strategies they could use with their children at home. Similarly, Burgess parents got training in how to help their children prepare for the science and social science fair. At Centerville, parents participated in family science nights and family math nights that provided many ideas that could be replicated easily at home. PTA meetings at Centerville were used to teach parents strategies for assisting their children with schoolwork. Of course, parents were also given important opportunities to volunteer at school. However, the schools made important efforts to make sure that parents felt their time was well spent. At Burgess, teachers participated in workshops designed to help them learn how to plan for the use of volunteers in their classrooms. At Centerville, the school developed volunteer job descriptions based upon needs identified by staff. Parents were given the opportunity to fill those jobs that best matched their talents and available time. Parents became important contributors to the success of these schools. Parents contributed ideas, time, and assistance that helped make the schools more responsive to the needs and strengths of children. By helping at home, helping at school, or helping in the community, parents helped the schools improve the academic success as well as the personal success of students. Creating Additional Time for Instruction Each ofthe nine schools created additional time for academic instruction. In some cases, efforts focused on creating additional time for attention to critical instructional issues during the school day. In other cases, efforts focused on creating additional time beyond the regular school day. At Baskin, Baldwin, Peck, and Spellman, school leaders created additional time during the school day for attention to reading. In each school, there was a 90-minute period devoted to literacy. Furthermore, at each school, almost all staff were involved in teaching reading during this period, thereby reducing adult-to-child ratios. At Baskin, teachers used assessment data to change instructional groupings that 8 of 9 1/5/00 10:29 AhHope for Urban Education: Improvement Strategies http://www.ed:gov/pubs/urbanhope/improvement.html 9 of 9 provided more intensive instructional time (three-to-one groupings twice a week) for students in need of additional assistance. At Burgess, Baldwin, Hawley, Peck, and Ward there were after-school programs intended to create additional opportunities for students to learn important content and skills. At Centerville, teachers provided valuable tutoring for students during lunch periods. Educators at the schools assumed that they could get their students to reach high academic standards\nhowever, they recognized that additional time was often necessary to ensure student success. Persisting through Difficulties, Setbacks, and Failures None of the principals and none of the teachers interviewed reported that the transformation of their school was easy. In fact, there were many reports of difficulties, challenges, and frustrations. Perhaps, a key difference between these schools and other less successful schools is that educators in these schools persisted. They refused to give up the dream of academic success. Initially, at Spellman, some of the staff did not like the idea of having instructional specialists and rebelled against using them. At Baldwin, some teachers perceived that the mandate to improve learning was an affront to them. At Peck, parents circulated a petition and demanded that the school board remove the new principal. In Wilchers second year as principal at Ward, teachers had to deal with a district reorganization and a slow building rehabilitation project that hampered preparation for the beginning of the school year. These difficulties and others might have been sufficient to derail improvement efforts\nhowever, the school leaders persisted. At Peck, the principal kept asking herself if her actions were in the best interest of children. When she answered affirmatively, she knew she should continue. Also, at Peck, as was the case at Burgess, the support of district office administrators was sometimes crucial in helping the principals hold the course. On the other hand, there were times when principals felt the need to fend off district office directives that threatened their reform efforts. Some principals described efforts to resist district pressure and avoid hiring teachers who had been removed from positions in other schools. Some principals told how they preserved the teachers time for collaboration and resisted district efforts to involve their staff in district-wide professional development activities that did not address the needs of their students or teachers. Some principals described other district policies that could have diffused their schools focus on academic improvement. Often those principals either negotiated compromises or found ways to comply that were minimally disruptive to the schools improvement efforts. Perhaps, the persistence of school leaders was influenced primarily by their deep commitment to the students and families they served. They perceived their work, less as a job, more as a mission. They persisted because they believed in themselves, they believed in their school staffs, and they believed in the ability of the children to succeed. -###- PBEV TDinerences .Among the Nine Schoolsl ur NEXT [Recommendations I 1/5/00 10:29 AJv4 i EARLY CHILDHOOD/ELEMENTARY LITERACY INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI LITTLEROCK, AR 72206 PHONE (501) 324-0517 FAX (501) 324-0504 TO: Elementary Principals FROM: .^^^Price, Director of Early Childhood/Elementary Literacy DATE: February 6, 2001 SUBJECT: Early Childhood Publication from U.S. Department of Education I would like to recommend that you request this recent publication from the U.S. Department of Education: Building Strong Foundations for Early Learning: The U.S. Department of Educations Guide to High-Quality Early Childhood Education Programs It is an excellent source and guide of information on the hallmarks of high-quality early childhood programs. It offers quality standards to be used during planning for preschool programs. The quality indicators and outcomes will be useful as you work with your Campus Leadership Teams to develop your school improvement plans. I tried to obtain copies for all of you, but to no avail! They will not send multiple copies to one address. You must request your own (free) personal copy by calling: Toll Free - 1-877-433-7827 at the U.S. Department of Education. This is truly a valuable resource!\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_314","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Mathematics/Science''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Mathematics/Science''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/314"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nMATHEMATICS/SCIENCE0-1 ozm5 zmmTo1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Mathematics/Science Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to secondary science teachers, Jan. 11, 1999, on ninth grade physics implementation. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to principals, Aug. 25, 1999, on the deployment of mathematics/science lead teachers. Mathematics Program Descriptiondocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Science Program Descriptiondocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. K-12 Currie ilum Implementation Plandocument prepared to submit to the National Sen ace Foundation in April 2000. CPMSA Staffingdocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Professional Development Plan for Mathematics and Sciencedocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Little Rock CPMSA Strategic Plan, September 2000February 2002document prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Memorandum from Vanessa Cleaver to eighth grade mathematics teachers. May 9, 2000, on the extended-year Algebra I program. 10. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to a parent, Mar. 23, 2000, providing research base for the middle school mathematics program, the Connected Mathematics Project (CMP). 11. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary and middle school principals in June 14, 2000, Learning Links on the research and theory behind new mathematics curricula\nattached article, Wheres the Balance in Math Instruction? 12. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to parents, Nov. 9, 2000, with information about research behind LRSDs adoption of the elementary mathematics program. 13. E-mail from Debbie Berry to Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 17, 2000, expressing appreciation for attendance at a national conference on new mathematics curriculum. 14. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Feb. 14, 2000, Learning Links on national study on how best to teach mathematics\nattached article from Education Week, Forget Math Feud, Take Broader View, NRC Panel Urges. -/o/ 'Vy -V/-515. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Aug. 23, 2000, Learning Links on standards- based mathematics\nattached article, Spread the Word by Lee Stiff. 16. Research Report on new mathematics curriculum used in decision-making: Preliminary Comparison of Michigan State Wide Testing\nResults in STC Adopted Districts, June 18, 1998. 17. Research Report on Exemplary Promising Mathematics Programs, Eisenhower National Clearinghouse. 18. Research Report on Connected Mathematics as one of the Exemplary Promising Mathematics Programs, Eisenhower National Cleaminghouse 19. Research Report, Middle Grades Mathematics Textbooks: A Benchmarks-Based Evaluation, Project 2061. 20. Research Report, Investigations in Numbers, Data and Space: Validation Study- - Pretest and Posttest Results, Scott Foresman, Jan. 12, 2001.1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICl INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 S. PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 January 11, 1999 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Secondary Science Teachers (ennis Glasgow, Director of Mathematics and Science Informational Meeting about Ninth Grade Physics i i 5 1 1 ! The Board has approved high school course offerings for 1999-2000 that include physics as a required course for all ninth grade students. An informational meeting about ninth grade physics including certification and training issues for teachers will be held at 4:00p.m. in room 18 at the IRC on Wednesday, January 13. I know ninth grade physics seems like a drastic move to the casual observer, however, it is based on sound logic. Physics is the most fundamental of all science disciplines. Physics serves as the foundation for learning much of biology, chemistry, and earth science. The reason that physics has traditionally been a senior level course is the high level and amount of mathematics required of students to learn traditional high school physics. Since only 17% of our student population take physics now, some strategy was needed to serve a greater percentage of our students. A committee of teachers discussed the issue and recommended that a new NSF funded program. Active Physics, be used as the first year physics curriculum resource for most students and that the course be moved to the ninth grade. i 1 Active Physics was developed in association with the American Association of Physics Teachers and the American Institute of Physics. The program is designed to be used by students as early as the ninth grade and focuses on the beauty, excitement, and usefulness of physics. It doesnt contain so much math and reading. Each chapter of Active Physics begins with a challenge-develop a sport that can be played on the Moon\nbuild a home for people with a housing crisis\npersuade your parents to lend you the family car\nand so on. The course focuses on physics that is relevant to students everyday life. Everyone should be able to successfully learn physics concepts presented in this manner. I i i 2 Not only should Active Physics be fun for students, it should be exciting and fun to teach. Extensive training and materials and supplies will be provided for each teacher. Since physics teachers are in short supply, the District plans to help existing science teachers gain the twelve hours of physics needed for certification. The courses that will be offered will be tailored to our teachers needs-they wont be regular college engineering physics courses or courses that required trig or calculus. Teachers with 8 hours of physics will need just one four hour course, teachers with 4 hours will need two courses, and teachers with no hours will need to take three physics courses. Stipends will be paid for your 1 summer time to take the courses, and the District will offer tuition reimbursement for the course!s). Teachers who need to take more than one course can be placed on a deficiency removal plan (DRP) and have up to two years to take the courses. Active Physics should be no more difficult to teach than physical science. In fact with the training planned, it should be easier to teach. I would like for present junior high science teachers, high school Science Technology teachers, and any other interested science and/or math teachers to come to the informational meeting to find out about the course, the certification process, and ask any questions that might come to mind. Ninth grade physics should be a great niche for those of you who want to become part of this exciting effort to better serve our high school students. If you cant come to the meeting but know that you want to move to the high school ninth grade physics slot or just need more information, please call and let me know (324-0518). I am getting a head count. CC: Dr. Bonnie Lesley Dr. Richard Hurley Brady Gadberry High School Principals ii i i I I J I! ii2L- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTHPULASKI ST. LIITLE ROCK, AR 72206 August 25, 1999 TO: Principals FROM: SUBJECT: Dennis Glasgow, Director of Mathematics and Science Deployment of Math/Science Lead Teachers I 1 am pleased to announce that the District has just employed/assigned a number of lead teachers to help facilitate the implementation of standards-based mathematics and science curricula in our classrooms. Six (6) elementary math/science lead teachers are on board as well as a middle school math, a middle school science, and a high school math lead teacher. Each elementary lead teacher has been assigned a cluster of about 5 elementary schools from those that do not currently have a science, math, or curriculum specialist. The cluster assignments are included after this memo. The lead teacher assigned to your school will develop a schedule so that she will be in your school one day each week. The primary job goal of each elementary lead teacher is to help your teachers implement Investigations in grades 4-5 and Science and Technology for Children for grades 1 -5. Trish Killingsworth and Lola Perritt will work through the math, science, or curriculum specialist at the six elementary schools that already have specialists. The middle school math lead teacher will help teachers with implementation of the Connected Mathematics Project in grades 6-8. The middle school science lead teacher will work with sixth grade teachers implementing Science and Technology for Children and with 7*' and 8* grade teachers in moving toward standards- based instruction. The high school math lead teacher will help teachers prepare students for the algebra and geometry end of course exams and will facilitate the use of a more standards- based approach in our high school math classrooms. The objectives for the lead teachers are included in a three-page document that follows. Also included in this document is a compilation of the ideas that the Campus Leadership Teams generated during the Institute to help gain parental support for our new standards- based mathematics and science programs. Perhaps your school can use some of these ideas. I am confident that the new standards-based mathematics and science programs, if they are implemented as intended, will increase student achievement and help us meet our NSF performance targets. The lead teachers will help this happen in your school. Your lead teacher will be in your school soon, if she hasnt already been there, to talk with you about her plans. _ Please call me if you need more information. II Math/Science Lead Teacher Assignments 1 I ELEMENTARY MATH/SCIENCE Cassandra Harding Antonette Finney Terry - 20 Mabelvale -16 Meadowcliff -13 Franklin -10 (Math focus) Fair Park - 9 Forest Park -17 Pulaski Hts. -17 Baseline -14 Rightsell -11 Dodd - 11 Annita Paul Renee Kovach Fulbright - 20 Mitchell -12 Cloverdale -19 Chicot -18 Jefferson -18 Wakefield -15 Wilson -13 Woodruff -12 Geyer Springs -11 Paula Smith Rockefeller -18 Otter Creek -12 Badgett - 9 Bale -13 Brady -15 Trish and Lola Carver Booker Gibbs Williams Washington King HIGH SCHOOL MATH Marcelline Carr Daryl Newcomb  McDermott -18 Western Hills -12 Garland -12 Romine - 7 (Science focus) Watson -18 MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH Docia Jones All middle schools MIDDLE SCHOOL SCIENCE Rene Carson All middle schools All High Schools INFRASTRUCTURE FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE The current infrastructure for mathematics and science is inadequate to provide sustained professional development and classroom support for teachers as they implement standards-based mathematics and science curricula. Presently, one elementary mathematics specialist, one secondary science specialist, and two elementary math/science specialists provide the training and support for all teachers. I To improve the infrastructure for mathematics and science, the 50 schools in the District will be divided into clusters that are each assigned a specialist. Five of the thirty-five elementary schools already have school-based math and/or science specialists. The other thirty schools will be divided into 6 clusters with 5 schools each. The 8 middle schools will make a cluster and the 5 high schools will make a cluster. An elementary lead teacher for mathematics and science support will be assigned to each of the 6 elementary clusters, a mathematics lead teacher and a science lead teacher will serve the cluster of middle schools, and a mathematics lead teacher and a science lead teacher will serve the five high schools. These ten lead teachers plus the specialists already based at individual schools will provide professional development and classroom level support for the mathematics and science teachers in their cluster. 3 The ten lead teachers will be funded in the following manner: I 4 - National Science Foundation Grant 1 - Title VI ft 3 s i 2.5 - Class-size Reduction Allocation 2.5 - District-funded or other funds to be sought 1 a The goal, objectives, and activities for the lead teachers aie as follows: 9 i S f -3 Goal: To facilitate the change from a traditional mathematics and science curriculum to a standards-based curriculum for the purpose of increasing the enrollment and achievement of students in mathematics and science. Objective 1: Provide professional development for mathematics and/or science teachers in the assigned cluster on District adopted standards-based math and science curricula and related topics such as cooperative learning, constructivist approach, inquiry learning, and problem solving strategies that are integral to standards-based pedagogy. Activities: 1. Receive training at the District-level to become proficient irf all the standards- based mathematics and science modules that are used in the cluster schools. 2. Identify first hand, through classroom visitations, the critical professional development needs of teachers in cluster schools.3. Schedule time for cluster teachers to participate in professional development to address the identified needs. 4. Identify highly successful teachers who can serve as models for other teachers and facilitate the visitation process. Objective 2: Provide weekly classroom support for teachers who are implementing standards-based curricula. This support will include encouragement, extra hands, mini-teaching, material resources, trouble shooting, and other technical support deemed necessary. Activities: 1. Schedule visitations to the schools so that each school is visited about once a 5 i ! 2. 3. 4. week. During each school visitation work with as many teachers as can be productively included. During the school visitations, provide immediate teachers with as much immediate technical assistance and support as possible and catalogue other needs for later attention or for referral to the District level. Visit with the principal of the school each time it is visited to keep him/her up to date on successes and needs. ) Objective 3: Provide opportunities for teachers to dialogue about experiences in implementing the standards-based curricula and provide follow-up professional development for cluster teachers to address observed/identified needs. Activities: i i ! t 1. 2. 3. 4. Schedule user conferences for teachers at cluster schools to share information about successes and concerns about the implementation of standards-based curricula. Identify successful implementers for other cluster teachers to visit to get ideas and information about effective implementation strategies. Identify needs for follow-up professional development and provide it for cluster teachers. Facilitate meetings between teachers with the same interest or concern to promote dialogue and problem solving. I ! i I Objective 4: Assess the implementation success of the teachers/schools in the cluster and evaluate the effectiveness of the standards-based programs in achieving desired student results._ Activities: - 1. Help implement District approved assessment tools in cluster schools. 2. Receive training on alternative assessment methods. 3. Assist teachers in cluster schools in embedding authentic assessment into their classroom teaching: 4. Gather data as requested/needed by the District. 5. Assess on a quarterly basis the degree to which the cluster schools are meeting District evaluation criteria.Objective 5: Serve as a liaison to the District Mathematics and Science Office and CPMSA Office for the purpose of aligning District resources and technical provided to the schools and providing additional District-level training. Activities\nsupport 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Attend District-level meetings to help determine needs for professional development or other support across the District. Receive training on all District standards-based curricula adopted for the levels of the assigned cluster schools. Report successes/concems to the District Math/Science and NSF Offices. Communicate to parents and the community about the systemic changes in mathematics and science iiicluding the standards-based curricular implementation. Provide information to the District Communications Office about cluster activities to be included in District publications. i ! !Elementary Schools Gain parental/community support for standards-based mathematics and science. Workshops for teachers to get on board Student demo program for parents Class observations Newsletters Take-home games Sell the teachers Flyers to parents at registration Home videos Homework packets Information at Open House Publicize results of schools that have tried it Use parent coordinators Family Math \u0026amp; Science night Parent information meetings, i.e., Muffins for Mom, Doughnuts for Dad Research - Proof of success locally and nationally Partner Participation Parenting classes Media exposure Parent committee to learn curriculum and teach other parents Background on why we are changing General meeting provided by math department on research Individual student/staff/parent testimonials Explain grading structure Homework center Parent mentors Parent conference script for teachers Web Site (Math page, science page) Team competitions Parent work sessions Exhibition Day(Products, Projects) Math section in Parent Handbook Math/science fair Awards assembly per semester Training of tutors in new programs Examples in parent center Develop parent manual Celebrate results Check-out activities 5 S.MIDDLE SCHOOLS Gain-parentai/community support for standards-based mathematics and science. Family Math \u0026amp; Science Night Involve neighborhood businesses in incorporating math/science in the work - Invite parents Involve untapped resources, i.e., retired teachers, community stakeholders Involve PARK, Learning Clubs, etc with new ways of teaching math and science Offer training sessions for parents Compose letter explaining changes and data that supports that change. Insure every math teacher has been inserviced Parent observation/participation should be encouraged Strong teacher support outside of school  Access to research for parents Multi-lingual communication Main channels on T.V., coverage on Community Service Math department information session Discuss with parents during orientation Teachers explain to students Teacher newsletter to parents prior to new unit Open House presentation/demonstration Target commimity churches to provide tutoring at their sites Provide training/workshops for potential tutors in standards-based mathematics Target neighborhood associations to enlist their support Teachers go into community and teach parents new approaches Pre/Post Growth assessment Tri-fold information handout Media blitz for school newspaper/newsletter and district newsletter LRSD Website Town Hall information meetings Math teachers motivate kids to share methods with parents on the first night 'ft J I -\"3 - V aHigh Schools Gain parental/community support for standards-based mathematics and science and Active Physics. Family math and science night with physics activities included. Printed media campaign to educate parents (orientation, registration, newsletters, school newspaper, etc) 9 weeks syllabus sent home to parents Student journals to be shared with parents Demonstrations during Open House Research data on ACT/SAT after higher math and science Task force to disseminate infomation to parents/community Staff development for teachers Parent observation of classrooms Student competitions similar to science fairs- Recruit elementary students/parents to shadow physics students Target/Market plan to minority parents Host Informational (Q \u0026amp; A) session for parents/community (Town Hall Meeting) Media coverage on television, district channel Sell the students: incentives Science Homework Center hotline Science Lab in community centers Change course name3 h ^,\\\u0026gt;C Mathematics Program Description Little Rock School District General Program Components The K-12 mathematics program in the Little Rock School District, as are all LRSD curriculum programs, is designed according to the following components: 1. Curriculum Content and Skills Standards that are aligned with the national curriculum standards and the Arkansas Mathematics Curriculum Frameworks. Board policy lA states that Academic content standards will be developed, with grade- and course-level benchmarks, in reading/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. The regulations also require that each curriculum program reflect the following exit standards\n\u0026gt; Adequately master reading, writing, speaking, listening (communication), critical and creative thinking, and mathematical skills sufficient for effective, efficient functioning.  Locate and use needed information from printed materials and/or other resources.  Identify problems and needs, apply problem-solving strategies, and analyze information for meaning and/or action.  Use tools of technology at an effective, efficient, flexible, and adaptable level.  Have knowledge of basic historical, geographic, political, literary, and scientific information, and use such knowledge in day-to-day decisions.  Appreciate and understand cultural differences, the arts and humanities, current happenings, and ways to predict or influence future events.  Establish and maintain effective and supportive intrapersonal, interpersonal, and cooperative relationships, and civic and social responsibility.  Demonstrate self-direction as an active life-long learner and demonstrate self-respect, self-esteem, self-understanding, and a physically and mentally balanced healthy life. Policy IG further requires that the curriculum at all levels of its development in the Little Rock School District will be standards-based and define what students should know and be able to do at the conclusion of each grade level or course. To ensure that the curriculum standards apply to all students and that high expectations are in place for all. Policy IGA requires the following: The staff responsible for the design and/or delivery of all special programs, including but not limited to, special education. Title I, English-as-a-Second Language, migrant education, gifted and talented education, 504 programs, alternative 1education programs, etc. are to ensure that their programs reflect the district- adopted grade-level/course standards and benchmarks and are coordinated with the overall curriculum plan. Special programs will adapt instruction, pacing, materials and assessments, as appropriate, to meet the unique needs of the students served. Policy IGE requires that all curriculum guides be aligned with the Arkansas curriculum frameworks, the LRSD academic content standards and benchmarks, and the assessments administered by LRSD and the State of Arkansas, including College Board Advanced Placement examinations and the ACT. tl Cumculum documents that describe the Little Rock School District mathematics program are as follows:  K-12 Mathematics Standards/Benchmarks  K-8 Benchmarks (publication for parents)  A Parent and Student Guide to Learning in Middle School, 2000-01 (publication for students and parents)  A High School Student and Parent Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements, 2000-01 (publication for students and parents)  Middle School Curriculum Catalog (publication for school-level staff)  High School Curriculum Catalog (publication for school-level staff) 2. Assessments to measure student progress toward achievement of the challenging mathematics content and skills standards. These assessments include all those in the Districts formal assessment program, as well as those that are teacher created and embedded in instruction. As teacher skills improve, they are moving more and more toward seamless instruction and assessment. Student assessments provide teachers frequent data to evaluate not only how individual students are performing, but also how they may need to modify their instructional strategies to create more student success. 3. Effective teaching strategies that are research-based or best practice. Such strategies are those that are constructivist in nature, that lead to student understanding of complex concepts and their applications, and that lead to student success in demonstrating successful performance relating to the achievement of the content and skills standards for the course. 4. Selection and use of materials (such as software, textbooks, manipulatives, calculators, etc.) that assist both in teaching and in learning and that lead to student success in achieving the curriculum content and skills standards. 5. Professional development that supports teachers in their understanding of the grade-level or course standards, in the design of appropriate assessments to measure student success, in the design of rubrics or scoring guides, in the acquisition of the skills and understandings necessary to develop effective 2teaching strategies, and in the use of appropriate materials (software, textbooks, manipulatives, calculators, etc.). The districts professional development program includes both in-classroom coaching and follow-up training. New topics for training are determined based upon interpretations of student achievement data and on the demonstrated needs of teachers (as determined through classroom observations and teacher surveys). 6. Program evaluations that are conducted in year 2 of the curriculum guide development cycle. The regulations in IGE-Rl require that program evaluations for each curriculum program be conducted prior to the revision of new curriculum guides and that the recommendations be used in the design of the guide. Program Definition in Revised Desegregation and Education Plan The Districts revised plan, approved by the federal court in spring 1998, included several obligations for the reform of the Districts mathematics program. They are as follows: Section 5.3: Mathematics. LRSD shall implement the following strategies to improve mathematics instruction. Section 5.3.1: Revise the mathematics curriculum to include a smaller number of concepts at each level, the use of manipulatives, and problem solving and critical thinking, and train teachers on its implementation. Section 5.3.2\nDevelop appropriate assessment devices for measuring individual student achievement and the success of the revised curriculum. Section 5.3.3: Provide resources for early intervention with students with mathematical problems and for training teachers on early intervention\nand Section 5.3.4: Revise mathematics curriculum to increase the number of students successfully completing Algebra I and higher-level mathematics courses. Section 5.3.5. Adopt as a goal that all students in regular classes will complete Algebra and Geometry by the end of their eleventh grade year and that students will be proficient in mathematics by graduation. LRSD shall provide assistance to those students experiencing difficulty with Algebra and Geometry. A copy from the Districts Interim Compliance Report as of March 15, 2000, relating to these obligations is attached in the appendix to this section. Magnet Programs The Little Rock School District has made a major investment over the years in several magnet schools and magnet programs within schools to further its desegregation efforts and to provide special programming for students with specialized interests. The following schools feature magnets in the area of mathematics and science: 3Carver I Jementary SchoolScience and Mathematics Magnet School An extra hour of science per week is provided by the Science Specialist, her assistant, and the classroom teacher in a fully equipped state-of-the-art science laboratory. The students work in small groups to discover solutions to challenging problems through hands-on experiments. Every other week the science specialist plans with each grade level to implement the District curriculum intergrated with literacy instruction. Each child in grades 3-4-5 participates in a choice of science fairs, which include Science, Mathematics, and Invent America. All classrooms have their choice of animals to study and care for throughout the year. Students are encouraged to house them at the homes during summer and all vacations. Science becomes real life at Carver. Williams Elementary SchoolBasic Skills Magnet School A full-time curriculum specialist provides support for science and mathematics through school-wide activities, such as the science/ mathematics fair, demonstrations, experiments, and a continuous search for professional development activities that are aligned with the school improvement plan. She has also created a science/mathematics laboratory where she schedules more complex experiments than can be done in the regular classroom. In addition, she schedules resource speakers and field trips that support the standards-based curricula in mathematics and science. She shares her expertise with all teachers in planning for the delivery of each instructional module and in assessing student understanding and progress. Washington Elementary Magnet School and King Elementary Interdistrict School both have science and mathematics labs and full-time curriculum specialists who support teachers in the implementation of high quality science and mathematics instruction. Maim Middle SchoolScience Magnet School Each student in this school takes a second science course each year in grades 6-8Science Lab 6, Science Lab 7, and Science Lab 8. Students at Mann participate in a wide variety of co/extra-curricular activities related to their specialization area of science and mathematics. Henderson Middle SchoolHealth Sciences Magnet Program Each student in this program (school within a school) takes a second science course: Health Science 6, Health Science 7, and Health Science 8. Henderson is also one of the original technology schools in the District, with computers in every classroom and a virtual classroom established in partnership with the University of Arkansas for Medical Science (UAMS). 4Parkview High SchoolScience Magnet School Students at Parkview High School must five units in a Career Focus: Two units of biology beyond Biology I\nand One semester of chemistry beyond Chemistry I\nand Two units of German or Latin\nand One semester of Applied Statistics and Technical Writing\nand Yearly Project. Science courses that are unique to Parkview High School are as follows: Microbiology (1/2) Qualitative Analysis (1/2) Applied Statistics/Technical Writing (1/2) Environmental Health (1/2) Human Anatomy and Physiology (1/2) Organic Chemistry (1/2) Students specializing in science and mathematics at Parkview also participate in a wide variety of related co/extracurricular activities. University Studies Program Hall High School began in fall 1999 a partnership with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR). A university professor and a high school teacher co-teach designated courses through which students at grades 11-12 may earn dual creditboth high school credit toward graduation and college hours. In fall 2000 the first mathematics course will be offered: Pre-Calculus A and B (high school credit) and UALRs College Algebra (college credit) Lab Schools Throughout 1999-2000 some of the staff have worked with teams of staff and parents at each of four secondary schools in southwest Little Rock to design plans for curriculum enhancements and the improvement of student achievement. Those four schools are Mablevale Middle, Cloverdale Middle, McClellan High, and Fair High. The plans that are emerging (and for which external funding will be sought to supplement district funds in support of implementation) all involve emphases on science and technology-related programs. By the end of summer 2000 more definitive information will be available on these plans, and they will become another major component in the Districts agenda for the next several years. As an example, Mablevale Middle is proposing an emphasis on Environmental Science. And Fair High School has already developed a partnership with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to feed students from Fair directly to the new Information Technology program at UALR. Two new courses will be offered at Fair in 2000-2001: Applications of Mathematicsa web-based pre-calculus course\nand Enterprise Information Sciencea project-oriented laboratory course in information technology. A summer program on the UALR campus has also been developed to 5provide Fair High students with mathematics and science knowledge and skill development. Two elementary schools were added to this study and planning initiative, Fair Park Elementary and Stephens Elementary (to open in fall 2000). Fair Park Elementarys plan includes an emphasis in Environmental Studies\nand Stephens Elementary will include major emphases in technology applications and economics. Graduation Requirements-Mathematics Students in the Little Rock School School District may earn diplomas in one of four ways\n1. Students may graduate from the Accelerated Learning Center with a total of 21 units, including three units of mathematics: Algebra I or Algebra I Pre-AP Concepts of Geometry or Geometry or Geometry Pre-AP Algebra II or Algebra II Pre-AP or Statistics or Statistics AP Students may take Algebra I Pre-AP for high school credit in grade 8. The Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) is an alternative high school for over-age, credit-deficient students. The curriculum is technologically supported and competency based so that students can move to the next course as soon as they complete the previous one. The required 21 units for graduation are the minimum required by the State of Arkansas. 2. Students may graduate from any of the five comprehensive high schools with a total of 24 units of credit, including at least three units of mathematics: Algebra I or Algebra I Pre-AP Concepts of Geoemtry or Geometry or Geometry Pre-AP Algebra II or Algebra II Pre-AP or Statistics or Statistics AP Students may take Algebra I Pre-AP for high school credit in grade 8. Some few advanced or gifted students also take Geometry Pre-AP and/or Algebra II Pre-AP during middle school, but the State of Arkansas allows only one credit in mathematics taken in middle school to count toward high school graduation. 3. To encourage as many students as possible to pursue a more rigorous and challenging high school program, the Board of Education also established a recommended curriculum for high school graduation. It includes 27 units of credit, including four units of mathematics\nAlgebra I or Algebra I Pre-AP Geometry or Geometry Pre-AP Algebra II or Algebra II Pre-AP One additional unit of advanced mathematics Students may take Algebra I Pre-AP for high school credit in grade 8. Some few advanced or gifted students also take Geometry Pre-AP and/or Algebra II Pre-AP during middle school, but the State of Arkansas allows only one credit 6in mathematics taken in middle school to count toward high school graduation. 4. Students who have identified learning disabilities may graduate under a plan designed by their lEP committees. These plans generally track the Districts requirements for all students, except that some courses may be adapted courses for students in the Resource Room or in Self-Contained settings. Career Focus Arkansas requires each graduate to have earned a minimum of three units in one area of Career Focus. Students who wish to complete their Career Focus in science and/or mathematics will complete the following: Two units of one foreign language\nand One additional unit beyond Common Core requirements in science or mathematics\nor Three units beyond the Common Core requirements from upper-level mathematics and/or science courses. Students who pursue the recommended graduation plan must complete a minimum of four units in the Career Focus. Pre-Advanced Placement CoursesMathematics The Little Rock School District has long offered advanced,' honors, or enriched courses in the core curriculum areas for advanced students. Effective fall 1999, the District standardized those courses and named them all as Pre-Advanced Placement, grades 6-10 or 6-11. The regulations in IGE-Rl state the following: Pre-Advanced Placement courses, beginning in grade 6, will reflect LRSD standards and benchmarks and shall be aligned with the College Boards syllabus requirements for Advanced Placement courses, incrementally building in students the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in Advanced Placement courses and examinations. ... Curriculum program staff are responsible for ensuring that the curricula for Pre-AP and AP courses are qualitatively different from the curricula of parallel regular-level courses. The regulations in IHBB-R state that identified gifted/talented students are to be placed in Pre-Advanced Placement courses at the middle school level. At the high school level, students who are gifted/talented in mathematics are placed in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. Other options include seminars, mentorships, dualenrollment (with concurrent university credit) and/or independent study. These courses are not, however, limited to gifted/talented students. 7Policy IHCC establishes the Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement program for the Little Rock School District as a vehicle for providing quality educational opportunities for all its students through a rigorous, challenging curriculum. Importantly, the policy also mandates that there be no barriers to participation in Pre- Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses due to ethnicity, race, gender, national origin, creed, socioeconomic level, or handicapping condition. Further, District staff are required to include in its professional development program for teachers and counselors training in identifying and encouraging increasing percentages of students to participate in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. The following Pre-Advanced Placement mathematics courses are offered in the Little Rock School District: Mathematics 6 Pre-AP Mathematics 7 Pre-AP Mathematics 8 Pre-AP Algebra I Pre-AP (grade 8) Algebra II Pre-AP Geometry Pre-AP Trigonometry and Advanced Algebra Pre-AP Desegregation Compliance One of the major issues in the Districts 1998 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan relates to African-American enrollment in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. The obligations are as follows: Section 2.6: LRSD shall implement programs, polices, and/or procedures designed to promote participation and to ensure that there are no barriers to participation by qualified Afidcan-Americans in ... advanced placement courses ... and the gifted and talented program. Section 2.6.1: LRSD shall implement a training program during each of the next three years designed to assist teachers and counselors in identifying and encouraging Afidcan-American students to participate in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. Section 2.6.2: LRSD shall implement programs to assist Afidcan-American students in being successful in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. In the appendix attached to this section is the text from a document filed on March 15, 2000, with the federal court in Little Rockthe Interim Compliance Report, which includes details of the activities that have been completed in response to the above-stated obligations. These pages document the Districts efforts to ensure that students are not tracked academically and that increasing percentages of Afidcan-Americans emoll in both Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. 8Also attached in the appendix for this section is a recent report published by the Division of Instruction that documents progress to date in increasing enrollment and success of African-American students in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. A summary of the findings follows:  The total enrollment of African-American students in AP courses has increased from 471 in 1997-98 to 695 in 1999-2000a 48 percent increase.  The total eiuolhnent in AP courses for all students has increased from 1435 in 1997-98 to 1791 in 1999-2000a 25 percent increase. Improvements are the result of the following:  Improved recruitment of students by teachers and counselors for AP course enrollment.  Addition of several new AP courses to the LRSD curriculum.  The Boards decision in December 1998 to make all AP courses available in all five high schools.  Inclusion of enrollment in AP courses as one of the Quality Index indicators (the LRSD school accountability system).  Change in regulations so that students may now enroll in a Pre-AP or AP course if they earned at least a C in the previous course.  Increased awareness of goals through the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, NSF Project, policies and regulations adoption, and professional development. National Origin Issues In March 1999 the Office of Civil Rights conducted a routine compliance review of the programs for second-language students in the Little Rock School District. They found the District out of compliance in several areas. Rather than endure the expense and time for lengthy litigation, the District voluntarily entered into a Commitment to Resolve agreement with OCR. One of the obligations in that agreement relates to this issue of student access to special opportunity programswhich include the Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement mathematics courses and the University Studies program at Hall High School. The policy regulations in IHBEA-R state the following: The District will ensure that LEP students have equal access to the Gifted and Talented programs and Pre-AP and AP couses at the secondary level throughout the District and to the University Studies program at Hall High School. The District will provide parents of LEP students information about any opporfimities, requirements, selection criteria, or general information regarding the G/T program, Pre-AP and AP courses, and the University Studies program that is provided to the parents of non-LEP students. 9Screening tests should be in the language of the students, if at all practicable. If nonverbal tests are adminstered, the instrucnons should be in the language of the students. Staff who administer GT screening tests to LEP students must have received training on addressing the needs of LEP students. Elementary Mathematics (K-5) Courses The adopted curriculum standards and grade-level benchmarks define the curriculum for grades K-5. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. In addition, teachers use the released items from the State Benchmark Examinations and the sample Gateway assessment items that are provided through the states Smart Start program to assess student growth. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. The District has adopted Investigations in Number, Data, and Space to support its K-5 curriculum. This program is a complete K-5 mathematics curriculum that supports all students as they learn to think mathematically. Investigations has been carefully designed to engage students in key mathematical content as they develop number sense, learn to visualize and describe geometrical relationships, and collect and analyze real data. As they explore mathematical problems in depth, students work together, use a variety of concrete materials and appropriate technology, and express their mathematical thinking through talking, drawing, and writing. The first four curriculum standards for mathematics are embedded throughout the Investigations curriculum as noted below: Standard 1: Mathematics as Problem Solving. In each investigation, students consider problems, develop a variety of strategies to solve them, and share their solutions. Standard 2: Mathematics as Communication. Students are involved in building, drawing, representing, writing, and talking as part of their mathematics work. They develop their own strategies for representing and recording and are introduced to a repertoire of useful ways of utilizing concrete materials, pictures, tables, graphs, and charts. Standards. Mathematics as Reasoning. Units of study are designed to support teachers and students as they move away from a view of mathematics as a series of facts and procedures to be memorized toward a view of mathematics as a discipline in which one can use all the resources at at hand to reason about mathematical problems. Standard 4. Mathematical Connections. Most units are structured around connected mathematical ideas: addition and subtraction always appear together, as do multiplication and division. The connection is also made between the 10 conventional mathematical symbols, terms and notation, and the MEANING of mathematical operations and relationships. The following Investigations modules address the curriculum standards as noted: Grade 1 Modules Mathematical Thinking at Grade 1 (Introduction) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 11. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Statistics and Probability Patterns and Relationships Building Number Sense (The Number System) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 10. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Measurement Patterns and Relationships Survey Questions and Secret Rules (Collecting and Sorting Data) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 11. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Statistics and Probability Patterns and Relationships Quilt Squares and Block Towns (2-D and 3-D Geometry) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 11. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Statistics and Probability Patterns and Relationships 11 Number Games and Story Problems (Addition and Subtraction) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Patterns and Relationships Grade 2 Modules Mathematical Thinking at Grade 2 (Introduction) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 11. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Statistics and Probability Patterns and Relationships Coins, Coupons, and Combinations (The Number System) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 11. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Statistics and Probability Patterns and Relationships Does It Walk, Crawl, or Swim? (Sorting and Classifying Data) Standards 1-4 (See above.) Standard 11. Statistics and Probability Shapes, Halves, and Symmetry (Geometry and Fractions) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 9. Standard 10. Standard 12. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Geometry and Spatial Sense Measurement Fractions and Decimals Patterns and Relationships 12 Putting Together and Taking Apart (Addition and Subtraction) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Patterns and Relationships How Long? How Far? (Measuring) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 10. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Measurement Patterns and Relationships Grade 3 Modules Mathematical Thinking at Grade 3 (Introduction) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Patterns and Relationships Things That Come in Groups (Multiplication and Division) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Patterns and Relationships Flips, Turns, and Area (2-D Geometry) Standards 1-4 Standard 9. Standard 10. (See above.) Geometry and Spatial Sense Measurement Standard 13. Patterns and Relationships From Paces to Feet (Measuring and Data) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 9. Standard 10. (See above.) Estimation Geometry and Spatial Sense Measurement 13 Standard 11. Statistics and Probability Standard 13. Patterns and Relationships Landmarks in the Hundreds (The Number System) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Patterns and Relationships Combining and Comparing (Addition and Subtraction) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 10. Standard 11. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Measurement Statistics and Probability Patterns and Relationships Fair Shares (Fractions) Standards 1-4 Standard 9. Standard 12. Standard 13. (See above.) Geometry and Spatial Sense Fractions and Decimals Patterns and Relationships Exploring Solids and Boxes (3-D Geometry) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Geometry and Spatial Sense Patterns and Relationships Grade 4 Modules Mathematical Thinking at Grade 4 (Introduction) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 1. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Patterns and Relationships 14 Arrays and Shares (Multiplication and Division) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 9. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Geometry and Spatial Sense Patterns and Relationships Seeing Solids and Silhouettes (3-D Geometry) Standards 1-4 (See above.) Standard 9. Geometry and Spatial Sense Landmarks in the Thousands (The Number System) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Patterns and Relationships Different Shapes, Equal Pieces (Fractions and Area) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 9. Standard 10. Standard 12. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Geometry and Spatial Sense Measurement Fractions and Decimals Patterns and Relationships Money, Miles, and Large Numbers (Addition and Subtraction) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 10. Standard 12. (See above.) Estimation Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Measurement Fractions and Decimals Packages and Groups (Multiplication and Division) Standards 1-4 Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 13. (See above.) Number Sense and Numeration Concepts of Whole Number Operations Whole Number Computation Patterns and Relationships 15 Grade 5 Modules Mathematical Thinking at Grade 5 (Introduction) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 8. Standard 12. (See above.) Number and Number Relationships Number Systems and Number Theory Computation and Estimation Patterns and Functions Geometry Picturing Polygons (2-D Geometry) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 1. Standard 8. Standard 13. (See above.) Number and Number Relationships Number Systems and Number Theory Computation and Estimation Patterns and Functions Measurement Name that Portion (Fractions, Percents, and Decimals) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 1. Standard 8. Standard 10. (See above.) Number and Number Relationships Number Systems and Number Theory Computation and Estimation Patterns and Functions Statistics Between Never and Always (Probability) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 10. Standard 11. (See above.) Number and Number Relationships Number Systems and Number Theory Computation and Estimation Statistics Probability Building on Numbers You Know (Computation and Estimation Strategies) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 6. Standard 7. Standard 9. (See above.) Number and Number Relationships Number Systems and Number Theory Computation and Estimation Algebra 16 Containers and Cubes (3-D Geometry: Volume) Standards 1-4 Standard 5. Standard 7. Standard 12. Standard 13. (See above.) Number and Number Relationship Computation and Estimati Geometry Measurement Middle Schools (Grades 6-81 Mathematics Courses The adopted curriculum standards and course benchmarks define the curriculum for grades 6-8. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. In addition, teachers use the released items from the State Benchmark Examinations and the sample Gateway assessment items that are provided through the states Middle Start program to assess student growth. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. The District has adopted the Connected Mathematics Program to support its grades 6-8 curriculum. This curriculum is devoted to developing student knowledge and understanding of mathematics that are rich in connections- :onnections among core ideas in mathematics, connections between mathematics and its applications in other school subjects, connections between the planned teaching/leaming activities and interests of middle school students, and connections with the applications of mathematical ideas in the world outside school. The curriculum is organized around interesting problem settingsreal situations, whimsical situations, or interesting mathematical situations. Students explore problems, work in cooperative groups, use a variety of concrete materials and appropriate technology to conjecture, test, and generalize their mathematical thinking through writing, drawing, and talking. Computation skills are embedded and reinforced in each unit. The following four curriculum content standards are embedded in all CMP units\nStandard 1. Mathematics as Problem Solving. All the CMP units are divided into investigations which present problems for the students to solve. The entire curriculum is built around these problems in contexts that are interesting to the students. Many of the contexts have validity in the real world. Others use fantasy of mathematics as a context. Standard 2. Mathematics as Communications. Emphasis is placed on the students discussing the problems in class, talking through their solutions, and learning how to communicate their solutions to a more general audience. They learn how to communicate by using different kinds of representations such as graphs, tables, formulas, or written explanations of arguments. 17Standard 3. Mathematics as Reasoning Through discussing the problems and solutions, the students learn to reason about the mathematics. They leam that mathematics is man-made, that it is arbitrary, and good solutions are arrived at by consensus among those who are considered expert. Standard 4. Mathematics as Connections Each unit connects the mathematics to other areas of mathematics and to applications of mathematics in the real world. All the investigation problems are set in contexts with opportunity provided to reflect on the connections. Standards 5-13 are emphasized in the curriculum units of each grade level. A correlation of the standards within each module are displayed in an attached in the appendix to this section of the Update to the Annual Report. High School (Grades 9-12) Mathematics Courses The adopted curriculum standards and course benchmarks define the curriculum for grades 9-12. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. In addition, teachers will use the released items from the State Benchmark Examinations to assess student growth. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. The courses listed below have been standards-based for several years. District leaders have concentrated on providing appropriate teacher training to support teachers in understanding the standards, in developing their content knowledge, in adopting effective teaching strategies, in creating assessments, and in the appropriate use of materials (calculators, software, Internet resources, textbooks, manipulatives, etc.). Curriculum maps for each course have been developed so that teachers can see the correlations between the standards and the assessments and between the standards and the materials that have been adopted. Courses offered for high school credit include the following: Algebra I Algebra I Pre-AP Concepts of Geometry Geometry Geometry Pre-AP Algebra II Algebra II Pre-AP Trigonometry and Advanced Algebra (Effective fall 2001, this course will be dropped from the curriculum. Students completing Algebra I-II and Geometry who wish to enroll in a fourth year of mathematics will take Pre-Calculus Pacesetter Mathematics\nthose who want a fifth year will take Calculus.) 18 Trigonometry and Advanced Algebra Pre-AP (Students taking this course will be prepared to take an AP Calculus course or to take college-level calculus.,* Pre-Calculus (dual credit with UALR at Hall High only) Pre-Calculus Pacesetter Mathematics (to be offered in all five high schools in 2000-01) Applications of Mathematics (a web-based pre-calculus course to be piloted at Fair High only, in collaboration with UALR, in 2000-01) Statistics Statistics AP ACT Preparation: Mathematics (a one-semester review of the mathematics that is tested on the ACT/SAT examinations) Calculus Calculus AB Advanced Placement Calculus BC Advanced Placement All below-level or remedial mathematics courses were dropped from the curriculum, effective fall 1999. If schools offer remedial courses, they are not allowed to grant high school credit for them. All regular-level courses are taught according to the adopted standards and course-level benchmarks. These courses are taught at grade-level. The District is considering the adoption of the I Can Learn Algebra I laboratories to support the curriculum for this course. A decision will be made by the Board of Education on April 27, 2000, regarding this adoption. This software was developed, according to the information provided by the ERL Enterprises, to assist teachers in implementing the National Content Standards and attaining Goals 2000. It achieves this technological breakthrough by elevating classroom computers from enrichment and remediation to create the first full-time, self-paced curriculum teaching tool. I Can Learn Algebra is a comprehensive mathematics curriculum meeting NCTM standards with algebraic content relevant to real-world applications. More work is in progress to identify the teaching strategies and appropriate instructional materials to renew the Algebra I-II and Geoemtry curricula. To date, the Districts focus has been on professional developmentespecially in the delivery of more effective teaching strategies. Pre-Calculus Pacesetter Mathematics is taught according to the syllabus and standards provided by the College Board for this program. Pacesetter Mathematics teaches precalculus through modeling.  It incorporates curriculum and assessment standards of NCTM.  It is based on the premise that all students should aspire to and can achieve excellence.  It presents students with real-world problem-solving tasks from the economy, growth, pricing, interest, inventory, scheduling, seasonality, and production. 19  It promotes conceptual learning through mathematical modeling\nasks students to generate experimental data and develop mathematical models to reach solutions to problems.  It provides structure for student-centered problem solving.  It makes extensive use of graphing calculators as a technological tool.  It specifies course standards and objectives.  It uses assessments based on standards and objectives.  It provides structured ongoing student assessment plus end-of-year assessment.  It is an instrument for expanding and deepening students knowledge, application skills, and communication in the language of mathematics. Pacesetter Mathematics offers summer institutes, electronic communication links, and inservice training for mathematics teachers. As noted above in the course list, Pacesetter Mathematics will become the regular-level fourth-year mathematics course no later than fall 2001. Students now taking Trigonometry and Advanced Algebra will take Pacesetter Mathematics. All Pre-AP courses are taught above grade-level and must be qualitatively differentiated from the regular-level curriculum and aligned both with the AP courses to which they lead and the ACT transition documents. All AP courses are taught according to the College Board syllabi provided for Advanced Placement courses. Improvement of African-American Student Achievement Section 2.7 of the Districts Revised Desegregation and Education Plan states the following: LRSD shall implement programs, policies, and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students. Attached in the appendix to this section are the pages from the Interim Compliance Report that was filed with the federal court on March 15, 2000, that discuss the Districts efforts thus far in this area of critical importance. These pages include the following topics:  How LRSD aligned all its planning efforts to ensure coherence.  An explanation of the LRSD Student Success Model.  A list of the policies that have been approved to ensure high expectations for all students.  A list of the administrative regulations that are now in place.  A discussion of the curriculum content standards and grade-level and course benchmarks.  A discussion of the work in progress to develop Instructional Standards with a list of the resources that have been consulted. 20  A list of the programs that have been created or refined to ensure student success. This section is not specifically about mathematics or science, but, rather, student achievement in general. 21 4Science Program Description Little Rock School District General Program Components The K-12 science program in the Little Rock School District, as are all LRSD curriculum programs, is designed according to the following components: 1. Curriculum Content and Skills Standards that are aligned with the national curriculum standards and the Arkansas Science Curriculum Frameworks. Board policy lA states that Academic content standards will be developed, with grade- and course-level benchmarks, in reading/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. The regulations also require that each curriculum program reflect the following exit standards:  Adequately master reading, writing, speaking, listening (communication), critical and ci native thinking, and mathematical skills sufficient for effective, efficient functioning.  Locate and use needed information from printed materials and/or other resources.  Identify problems and needs, apply problem-solving strategies, and analyze information for meaning and/or action.  Use tools of technology at an effective, efficient, flexible, and adaptable level.  Have knowledge of basic historical, geographic, political, literary, and scientific information, and use such knowledge in day-to-day decisions.  Appreciate and understand cultural differences, the arts and humanities, current happenings, and ways to predict or influence future events.  Establish and maintain effective and supportive intrapersonal, interpersonal, and cooperative relationships, and civic and social responsibility.  Demonstrate self-direction as an active life-long learner and demonstrate self-respect, self-esteem, self-understanding, and a physically and mentally balanced healthy life. Policy IG further requires that the curriculum at all levels of its development in the Little Rock School District will be standards-based and define what students should know and be able to do at the conclusion of each grade level or course. To ensure that the curriculum standards apply to all students and that high expectations are in place for all, Policy IGA requires the following\nThe staff responsible for the design and/or delivery of all special programs, including but not limited to, special education. Title I, English-as-a-Second Language, migrant education, gifted and talented education, 504 programs, alternative education programs, etc. are to ensure that their programs reflect the district- adopted grade-level/course standards and benchmarks and are coordinated with the overall curriculum plan. Special programs will adapt instruction, pacing, materials and assessments, as appropriate, to meet the unique needs of the students served. Policy IGE requires that all curriculum guides be aligned with the Arkansas curriculum frameworks, the LRSD academic content standards and benchmarks, and the assessments administered by LRSD and the State of Arkansas, including College Board Advanced Placement examinations and the ACT.\" Curriculum documents that describe the Little Rock School District mathematics program are as follows\n K-12 Science Standards/Benchmarks  K.-8 Benchmarks (publication for parents)  A Parent and Student Guide to Learning in Middle School, 2000-01 (publication for students and parents)  A High School Student and Parent Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements, 2000-01 (publication for students and parents)  Middle School Curriculum Catalog (publication for school-level staff)  High School Curriculum Catalog (publication for school-level staff) 2, 3. 4. Assessments to measure student progress toward achievement of the challenging mathematics content and skills standards. These assessments include all those in the Districts formal assessment program, as well as those that are teacher created and embedded in instruction. As teacher skills improve, we are moving more and more toward seamless instruction and assessment. Student assessments provide teachers frequent data to evaluate not only how individual students are performing, but also how they may need to modify their instructional strategies to create more student success. Effective teaching strategies that are research-based or best practice. Such strategies are those that are constructivist in nature, that lead to student understanding of complex concepts and their applications, and that lead to student success in demonstrating successful performance relating to the achievement of the content and skills standards for the course. Selection and use of materials (such as software, textbooks, manipulatives, calculators, etc.) that assist both in teaching and in learning and that lead to student success in achieving the curriculum content and skills standards. 5. Professional development that supports teachers in their understanding of the grade-level or course standards, in the design of appropriate assessments to measure student success, in the design of rubrics or scoring guides, in the acquisition of the skills and understandings necessary to develop effective teaching strategies, and in the use of appropriate materials (software, textbooks, materials for scientific experiments, kits, etc.). The Districts professional development program includes both in-classroom coaching and follow-up training. New topics for training are determined based upon interpretations of student achievement data and on the demonstrated needs of teachers (as determined through classroom observations and teacher surveys). 6. Program evaluations that are conducted in year 2 of the curriculum guide development cycle. The regulations in IGE-Rl require that program evaluations for each curriculum program be conducted prior to the revision of new curriculum guides and that the recommendations be used in the design of the guide. Magnet Programs The Little Rock School District has made a major investment over the years in several magnet schools and magnet programs within schools to further its desegregation efforts and to provide special programming for students with specialized interests. The following schools feature magnets in the area of mathematics and science\nCarver Elementary SchoolScience and Mathematics Magnet School An extra hour of science per week is provided by the Science Specialist, her assistant, and the classroom teacher in a fully equipped state-of-the-art science laboratory. The students work in small groups to discover solutions to challenging problems through hands-on experiments. Every other week the science specialist plans with each grade level to implement the District curriculum intergrated with literacy instruction. Each child in grades 3-4-5 participates in a choice of science fairs, which include Science, Mathematics, and Invent America. All classrooms have their choice of animals to study and care for throughout the year. Students are encouraged to house them at the homes during summer and all vacations. Science becomes real life at Carver. Williams Elementary SchoolBasic Skills Magnet School A full-time curriculum specialist provides support for science and mathematics through school-wide activities, such as the science/ mathematics fair, demonstrations, experiments, and a continuous search for professional development activities that are aligned with the school improvement plan. She has also created a science/mathematics laboratory where she schedules more complex experiments than can be done in the regular classroom. In addition, she schedules resource speakers and field trips that support the standards-based curricula in mathematics and science. She shares her expertise with all teachers in planning for the delivery of each instructional module and in assessing student understanding and progress.Washington Elementary Magnet School and King Elementary Interdistrict School both have science and mathematics labs and full-time curriculum specialists who support teachers in the implementation of high quality science and mathematics instruction. Mann Middle SchoolScience Magnet School Each student in this school takes a second science course each year in grades 6-8Science Lab 6, Science Lab 7, and Science Lab 8. Students at Mann participate in a wide variety of co/extra-curricular activities related to their specialization area of science and mathematics. Henderson Middle SchoolHealth Sciences Magnet Program Each student in this program (school within a school) takes a second science course: Health Science 6, Health Science 7, and Health Science 8. Henderson is also one of the original technology schools in the District, with computers in every classroom and a virtual classroom established in partnership with the University of Arkansas for Medical Science (UAMS). Parkview High SchoolScience Magnet School Students at Parkview High School must five units in a Career Focus: Two units of biology beyond Biology I\nand One semester of chemistry beyond Chemistry I\nand Two units of German or Latin\nand One semester of Applied Statistics and Technical Writing\nand Yearly Project. Science courses that are unique to Parkview High School are as follows: Microbiology (1/2) Qualitative Analysis (1/2) Applied Statistics/Technical Writing (1/2) Environmental Health (1/2) Human Anatomy and Physiology (1/2) Organic Chemistry (1/2) Students specializing in science and mathematics at Parkview also participate in a wide variety of related co/extracurricular activities. University Studies Program Hall High School began in fall 1999 a partnership with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR). A university professor and a high school teacher co-teach designated courses through which students at grades 11-12 may earn dual creditboth high school credit toward graduation and college hours. In fall 2000 the following science courses will be offered: Biology IIA (first semester of Biology II) and UALRs course: Science of Biology (3 hours) Physics I Pre-AP and UALRs course: Elementary Physics I-II (6 hours) Lab Schools Throughout 1999-2000 some of the staff have worked with teams of staff and parents at each of four secondary schools in southwest Little Rock to design plans for curriculum enhancements and the improvement of student achievement. Those four schools are Mablevale Middle, Cloverdale Middle, McClellan High, and Fair High. The plans that are emerging (and for which external funding will be sought to support implementation) all involve emphases on science and technology-related programs. By the end of summer 2000 more definitive information will be available on these plans, and they will become another major component in the Districts agenda for the next several years. As an example, Mablevale Middle is proposing an emphasis on Environmental Science. And Fair High School has already developed a partnership with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to feed students from Fair directly to the new Information Technology program at UALR. Two new courses will be offered at Fair in 2000-2001: Applications of Mathematicsa web-based pre-calculus course\nand Enterprise Information Sciencea project-oriented laboratory course in information technology. Graduation Requirements-Science Students in the Little Rock School School District may earn diplomas in one of four ways\n1. Students may graduate from the Accelerated Learning Center with a total of 21 units, including three units of science: Physical Science or Physics I Biology I One additional unit of science The Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) is an alternative high school for over-age, credit-deficient students. The curriculum is technologically supported and competency based so that students can move to the next course as soon as they complete the previous one. The required 21 units for graduation are the minimum required by the State of Arkansas. 2. Students may graduate from any of the five comprehensive high schools with a total of 24 units of credit, including at least three units of science: Physics I (Active Physics) or Physics I Pre-AP Biology I or Biology I Pre-AP Chemistry I or Chemistry I Pre-AP 3. To encourage as many students as possible to pursue a more rigorous and challenging high school program, the Board of Education also established a recommended curriculum for high school graduation. It includes 27 units of credit, including four units of science: Physics 1 (Active Physics) or Physics I Pre-AP Biology I or Biology I Pre-AP Chemistry I or Chemistry I Pre-AP One additional unit of science 4. Students who have identified learning disabilities may graduate under a plan designed by their lEP committees. These plans generally track the Districts requirements for all students, except that some courses may be adapted courses for students in the Resource Room or in Self-Contained settings. Career Focus Arkansas requires each graduate to have earned a minimum of three units in one area of Career Focus. Students who wish to complete their Career Focus in science and/or mathematics will complete the following: Two units of one foreign language\nand One additional unit beyond Common Core requirements in science or mathematics\nor Three units beyond the Common Core requirements from upper-level mathematics and/or science courses. Students who pursue the recommended graduation plan must complete a minimum of four units in the Career Focus. Pre-Advanced Placement CoursesScience The Little Rock School District has long offered advanced,' honors, or enriched courses in the core curriculum areas for advanced students. Effective fall 1999, the District standardized those courses and named them all as Pre-Advanced Placement, grades 6-10 or 6-11. The regulations in IGE-Rl state the following: Pre-Advanced Placement courses, beginning in grade 6, will reflect LRSD standards and benchmarks and shall be aligned with the College Boards syllabus requirements for Advanced Placement courses, incrementally building in students the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in Advanced Placement courses and examinations. ... Curriculum program staff are responsible for ensuring that the curricula for Pre-AP and AP courses are qualitatively different from the curricula of parallel regular-level courses. The regulations in IHBB-R state that identified gifted/talented students are to be placed in Pre-Advanced Placement courses at the middle school level. At the high school level, students who are gifted/talented in mathematics are placed in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. Other options include seminars, mentorships, dualenrollment (with concurrent university credit) and/or independent study. These courses are not, however, limited to gifted/talented students. Policy IHCC establishes the Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement program for the Little Rock School District as a vehicle for providing quality educational opportunities for all its students through a rigorous, challenging curriculum. Importantly, the policy also mandates that there be no barriers to participation in Pre- Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses due to ethnicity, race, gender, national origin, creed, socioeconomic level, or handicapping condition. Further, District staff are required to include in its professional development program for teachers and counselors training in identifying and encouraging increasing percentages of students to participate in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. The following Pre-Advanced Placement science courses are offered in the Little Rock School District: Science 6 Pre-AP Science 7 Pre-AP Science 8 Pre-AP Physics I Pre-AP Biology I Pre-AP Chemistry I Pre-AP Advanced Science/Theoretical Research Pre-AP Desegregation Compliance One of the major issues in the Districts 1998 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan relates to African-American enrollment in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. The obligations are as follows: Section 2.6: LRSD shall implement programs, polices, and/or procedures designed to promote participation and to ensure that there are no barriers to participation by qualified African-Americans in ... advanced placement courses ... and the gifted and talented program. Section 2.6.1: LRSD shall implement a training program during each of the next three years designed to assist teachers and counselors in identifying and encouraging African-American students to participate in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. Section 2.6.2: LRSD shall implement programs to assist Afncan-American students in being successful in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. In the appendix attached to this section is the text from a document filed on March 15, 2000, with the federal court in Little Rockour Interim Compliance Report, which includes details of the activities that we have completed in response to the above-stated obligations. These pages document the Districts efforts to ensure that students are not tracked academically and that increasing percentages of African-Americans emoll in both Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. Also attached in the appendix for this section is a recent report published by the Division of Instruction that documents progress so far in increasing enrollment and success of African-American students in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses. A summary of the findings follows:  The total enrollment of African-American students in AP courses has increased from 471 in 1997-98 to 695 in 1999-2000a 48 percent increase.  The total enrollment in AP courses for all students has increased from 1435 in 1997-98 to 1791 in 1999-2000a 25 percent increase. Improvements are the result of the following:  Improved recruitment of students by teachers and counselors for AP course enrollment.  Addition of several new AP cov 'ses to the LRSD curriculum.  The Boards decision in Decern jer 1998 to make all AP courses available in all five high schools.  Inclusion of enrollment in AP courses as one of the Quality Index indicators (the LRSD school accountability system).  Change in regulations so that students may now enroll in a Pre-AP or AP course if they earned at least a C in the previous course.  Increased awareness of goals through Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, NSF Project, policies and regulations adoption, and professional development. National Origin Issues In March 1999 the Office of Civil Rights conducted a routine compliance review of the programs for second-language students in the Little Rock School District. They found the District out of compliance in several areas. Rather than endure the expense and time for lengthy liltigation, the District voluntarily entered into a Commitment to Resolve agreement with OCR. One of the obligations in that agreement relates to this issue of student access to special opportunity programs. The policy regulations in IHBEA-R state the following: The District will ensure that LEP students have equal access to the Gifted and Talented programs and Pre-AP and AP couses at the secondary level throughout the District and to the University Studies program at Hall High School. The District will provide parents of LEP students information about any opportunities, requirements, selection criteria, or general information regarding the G/T program, Pre-AP and AP courses, and the University Studies program that is provided to the parents of non-LEP students. Screening tests should in the language of the students, if at all practicable. If nonverbal tests are adminstered, the instructions should be in the language of thestudents. Staff who administer GT screening tests to LEP students must have received training on addressing the needs of LEP students. Elementary Science (K-5) and Grade 6 (Middle School) Courses The adopted curriculum standards and grade-level benchmarks define the curriculum for grades K-6. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. The District has adopted Science and Technology for Children to support its K-6 science curriculum. Each of the four units in each grade level of STC provides students with an opportunity to explore science concepts and phenomena firsthand, to reflect on their observations, to share them with classmates, and to apply their learning in new situations. STC is fully aligned with the National Science Education Standards that were published by the National Research Council in 1996. The content standard. Unifying Concepts and Processes, is embedded throughout the K-6 curriculum modules: Systems, Order, and Organization. In each module, students learn to think and analyze in terms of systems. Evidence, Models, and Explanation. Using evidence to understand interactions, students learn to predict changes in natural and designed systems. Constancy, Change, and Measurement. Students learn that some systems remain constant, some systems change, and that different systems of measurement are used for different purposes. Evolution and Equilibrium. Throughout the modules, students learn that evolution is a series of changes that accounts for the present form and function of objects, organisms, and natural and designed systems. They also learn that equilibrium is a physical state in which forces and changes occur in opposite and off-setting directions. Form and Function. Students learn that form and function are complementary aspects of objects, organisms, and systems in the natural and designed world. The following is the display of the relationship between the instructional modules (units) for each grade levels and the other science curriculum standards that are being addressed. Grade 1 Weather Science as Inquiry Physical Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Solids and Liquids Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Comparing and Measuring Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Grade 2 The Life Cycle of Butterflies Science as Inquiry Life Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Soils Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Changes Science as Inquiry Physical Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Balancing and Weighing Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Grade 3 Plant Growth and Development Science as Inquiry Life Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Rocks and Minerals Science as Inquiry Physical Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Chemical Tests Science as Inquiry Physical Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Sound Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Grade 4 Animal Studies Science as Inquiry Life Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Land and Water Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Electric Circuits Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Motion and Design Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Grade 5 Microworlds Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Ecosystems Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Food Chemistry Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Floating and Sinking Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Grade 6 Experiments with Plants Science as Inquiry Life Science Earth and Space Science History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Measuring Time Science as Inquiry Physical Science Earth and Space Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Magnets and Motors Science as Inquiry Physical Science Life Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes The Technology of Paper Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology Science in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Middle Schools (Grades 7-8) Science Courses (See Grade 6 above.) See the previous section for a discussion of grade 6 curriculum. The adopted curriculum standards and course benchmarks define the curriculum for grades 7-8. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. The District has adopted Science and Life Issues (SALI) to support its grade 7 curriculum, effective fall 2000. Science and Life Issues focuses on the life sciences and on personal decision-making. The program is divided into three thematic segments, each aligned with the national science standards and each intended to facilitate greater depth of understanding and to provide opportunities for students to link their learning on various topics. 1. 2. My Body and Me. Students investigate concepts and issues related to sustaining life. A major goal of this unit is to provide a sound foundation for rigorous, evidence-based decision making about health issues, such as the appropriate use of medication and nutritional requirements in the human diet. For example, students simulate the role of placebos in studies of medication for human use. After further investigating the range of human variability, students consider what types of personal health decisions they would make. Living Partnerships. Students investigate the relationships between humans and the physical and living environment. Evolution and ecosystems are the focus of this part of the course. Adaptations in human physiology are reconsidered in light of their evolutionary implications. Activities involve students in maintaining small ecosystems, such as terraria or aquaria, investigating local ecosystems, and exploring examples of the relationships between humans and other organisms. For example, students investigate the interaction between humans and dogs, including dogs behavior and other adaptations, the effect humans have had on dogs (through breeding), and the cultural effect their domestication has had on humans. 3. Using Tools luid Ideas. Students investigate the ways in which humans use tools and ideas to adapt their external environment. Such adaptation is examined in terms of the nervous system, behavior, and the unique ways in which people are able to modify their surroundings. They explore issues related to the wide variety of physical, linguistic, technological, and biotechnological adaptations that increasingly determine the nature and quality of human life. Human adaptations for communication, for example, range from the use of language and other symbolic systems to modem information technology\nphysical adaptations range from simple tools to robotics. Issues explored include the ethical implications of these rapid changes in technology. A copy of the conelation of the National Science Standards and the units in this program are attached in the appendix to this section. The District has adopted the Issues. Evidence, and You to support its grade 8 science curriculum, effective fall 2001. Issues, Evidence and You (lEY) is an integrated experience-based science course for grade 8. In addition to the la\u0026gt;oratory materials used in teaching this course, students are issued journals, in which they keep their writing relating to investigations, where they record the outcomes they obtain, and where they write up their analysis of the data they collect and the inferences and conclusions that data suggest. A copy of the correlation of the National Science Standards and the units in this program are attached in the appendix to this section. High School (Grades 9-121 Science Courses The adopted curriculum standards and course benchmarks define the curriculum for grades 9-12. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. The courses listed below have been standards-based for several years. District leaders have concentrated on providing appropriate teacher training to support teachers in understanding the standards, in developing their content knowledge, in adopting effective teaching strategies, in creating assessments, and in the appropriate use of materials (calculators, software, Internet resources, textbooks, manipulatives, etc.). Curriculum maps for each course have been developed so that teachers can see the correlations between the standards and the assessments and between the standards and the materials that have been adopted. Courses offered for high school credit include the following: Physics I (Active Physics) Physics I Pre-AP Biology I Biology I Pre-AP Chemistry I Chemistry I Pre-AP Physics II AP Human Anatomy and Physiology Biology IIA (first-semester course offered at Hall High only in the dual-credit program with UALR) Biology II AP Chemistry II AP Geology and Space Science Environmental Science AP Advanced Science and Theoretical Research Pre-AP Microbiology (one semester\nParkview Magnet only) Qualitative Analysis (one semester\nParkview Magnet only) Applied Statistics and Technical Writing (one semester\nParkview Magnet only) Environmental Health (one semester\nParkview Magnet only) Human Anatomy and Physiology (one semester\nParkview Magnet only) Organic Chemistry (one semester\nParkview Magnet only) All regular-level courses are taught according to the adopted standards and course-level benchmarks. These courses are taught at grade-level. Physics I (Active Physics) All regular-level freshman students in the Little Rock School District are required to take Physics I (Active Physics), effective fall 1999. From this course, they may also take Physics I Pre-AP, which is taught at a more theoretical level and will lead them to Physics II AP. Active Physics is a different species of physics course. It has the mechanics, optics, and electricity of traditional courses, but not where one would expect to find them. In a traditional physics course, forces are taught in the fall, waves in the winter, and solenoids in the spring. In Active Physics, students are introduced to physics concepts on a need- to-know basis as they explore issues in Sports, Medicine, Predictions, Communications, Transportation, and Home. The content of the course is carefully aligned with the following National Science Standards: Physical Science Unifying Concepts and Processes Science as Inquiry Science and TechnologyScience in Personal and Social Perspectives History and Nature of Science Biology I and Chemistry I The adopted curriculum standards and course benchmarks define the curriculum for Biology I and Chemistry I. The formal assessment program (described elsewhere in section 6 of this Update to the Annual Report) provides measurements of student progress. In addition, teachers will use the released items from the State Benchmark Examination in Biology I to assess student growth. They also use teacher-created assessments, including observations of student performance to determine progress. Biology I and Chemistry I have been standards-based for several years. District leaders have concentrated on providing appropriate teacher training to support teachers in understanding the standards, in developing their content knowledge, in adopting effective teaching strategies, in creating assessments, and in the appropriate use of materials (lab equipment, software, Internet resources, textbooks, etc.). Curriculum maps for Biology I and Chemistry I have been developed so that teachers can see the correlations between the standards and the assessments and between the standards and the materials that have been adopted. Program materials will be updated during the next regular adoption cycle for science, which is during the 2000-2001 school year. Biology I and Chemistry I both have Pre- Advanced Placement courses that uses the College Board Pre-AP materials. Eight biology and chemistry teachers attended the College Board sponsored AP/Pre-AP training in February 2000. The training focused on effective curriculum and teaching strategies to prepare students for enrollment and success in AP Biology II and AP Chemistry II. Regular-level Biology I and Chemistry I will adopt high quality programs and materials during the 2000-2001 school year, and all teachers will receive professional development related to those programs and materials. Chemistry in the Community (ChemCom) and Biology, a Community Context (BioCom) are resources that are currently being piloted in some schools. These or programs of similar quality will be adopted for use during the 2000-2001 school year. Pre-AP Science Courses All Pre-AP courses are taught above grade-level and must be qualitatively differentiated from the regular-level curriculum and aligned both with the AP courses to which they lead and the ACT transition documents. Advanced Placement Courses All AP courses are taught according to the College Board syllabi provided for Advanced Placement courses. Improvement of African-American Student Achievement Section 2.7 of the Districts Revised Desegregation and Education Plan states the following: LRSD shall implement programs, policies, and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of Afncan-American students. Attached in the appendix to this section are the pages from the Interim Compliance Report that was filed with the federal court on March 15, 2000, that discuss the Districts efforts thus far in this area of critical importance. These pages include the following topics:  How LRSD aligned all its planning efforts to ensure coherence.  An explanation of the LRSD Student Success Model.  A list of the policies that have been approved to ensure high expectations for all students.  A list of the administrative regulations that are now in place.  A discussion of the curriculum content standards and grade-level and course benchmarks.  A discussion of the work in progress to develop Instructional Standards with a list of the resources that have been consulted.  A list of the programs that have been created or refined to ensure student success. This section is not specifically about mathematics or science, but, rather, student achievement in general. 5 K-12 Curriculum Implenientation Plan The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics published Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics in March of 1989. The Little Rock School District and other school districts and institutions of higher education realized that math programs under implementation at the time didnt measure up to the standards. The District began steps to systemically move to a more effective mathematics and science program for all students as early as 1991. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) organized a Deans Committee that included the Dean of the College of Education, the Dean of the College of Science and Mathematics along with faculty from those two colleges and elementary and secondary teachers from the central Arkansas area. The Deans Committee met monthly to discuss how UALR could change its mathematics courses to meet the needs of students and teachers in the public schools. From that beginning corporate support and Eisenhower funds were gained to fimd the first Math Crusade course. District teachers began taking the 3-hour Math Crusade course through UALR in 1991. Later, the Arkansas Department of Higher Education applied for and received funding from the National Science Foundation to fund the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI). Substantial involvement from higl,er education was realized when UALR faculty members worked alongside math and science leaders to become trainers for the Arkansas Crusades: K-4 Crusade, Math Crusade, Science Crusade. From 1991 to the end of ASSI in 1999 over 300 LRSD teachers participated in the six-hour graduate course known as K-4 Crusade. Most of these teachers took the course through UALR where it was team taught by College of Education faculty and public school teachers with masters degrees. About 60 science teachers participated in the three-hour graduate course known as the Science Crusade and about 80 teachers participated in Math Crusade. Science Crusade and Math Crusade were offered through UALR and other state institutions of higher education and were team-taught by university math and science faculty and public school teachers (adjunct professors). All three Crusade courses were organized around the national standards in mathematics (NCTM, 1989) and the draft standards for science which were published by the National Research Council in the National Science Education Standards (1996). The number of teachers who participated in Crusades training represented over 50% of all LRSD science and math instructors. The District embedded the national standards (and correlated state curriculum frameworks) in practice and policy. The LRSD Strategic Plan (1995) that was approved by the Board of Directors included the establishment of standards in the core curricular areas of math, science, reading/language arts, and social studies and stated that 9 out of 10 students would meet or exceed those standards. The Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (1998) included a goal to increase the number of students successfully completing algebra I and higher level mathematics courses and that all students would be proficient in mathematics by graduation. Board Policy lA (1999) required that curriculum standards be adopted in the core subject areas. Related policies require that professional development, adopted programs, and curriculum materials all address and support the Districts standards. The above background is given to illustrate that the District has been moving to standards-based math and science programming for about a decade now. Most of the normal professional development that math and science teachers have participated in over the past 10 years has been geared to helping students achieve the national standards. A renewed and intensified effort to become totally standards-based was undertaken with the awarding of the CPMSA grant from the National Science Foundation in 1998. Following is the year by year plan for curriculum implementation starting with 1998-99 and extending until 2002-2003. Year 1998-99 In 1998-99 the Board approved curriculum standards for mathematics and science for grades K- 12. Professional development for math and science teachers during that year informed teachers about the standards and how the existing resources could be used to address the standards. Over 50% of math and science teachers, grades K-12, had previously been participants in a sustained program of 45 clock-hours to 90 clock-hours of standards related training through the Arkansas Crusades. All teachers made some level of shift from what they were doing toward what they needed to do to address the Districts standards. Principals were inducted into the standards-based movement during a two-day Principals Institute Retreat held at the Clarion Resort in Hot Springs, Arkansas in 1997. The two-day retreat was focused on providing principals with knowledge and tools to start improving math and science programs in their schools. Partial funding from the Central Arkansas Math/Science Business Education Partnership was used to support the Institute. The Principals Institute of 1998-99 also focused on mathematics and science. All principals rotated through concurrent sessions where they participated in model standards-based activities presented by science and math specialists. The purpose of this experience was to show principals what standards-based math and science should look like in their schools. All school counselors attended a full day inservice entitled Raising the Bar in January of 1998. Topics on the agenda were TIMSS report. National Math and Science Standards, SAT-9 results, enrollment data for upper level math and science courses, and success rate for students in upper level courses. Frances Brown, Director of Academic Services for the College Board, presented on the role of counselors and teachers in getting students prepared for and enrolled in higher level courses. Counselors have had annual sessions related to progress in student enrollment and success in higher level math and science courses. Several teachers asked to pilot some standards-based math and science materials. A total of 18 teachers representing all teachers at Romine Elementary School and the fourth grade teachers at Jefferson piloted Investigations in Number. Data and Space and 6 teachers at Rockefeller and Chicot piloted Science and Technology for Children modules. Year 1999-2000 Benchmarks were developed by committees of teachers in math and science for each Board adopted curriculum standard. The benchmarks are knowledge, skills, and attitudes that students must gain along the way to ensure that students meet the grade level standards by the end of each year. Each teacher in the District attended professional development on the newly developed benchmarks aimed at aligning instruction with the benchmarks. Teachers spent time identifying the instructional content and strategies that they would use to address the benchmarks. All high school science teachers participated in a two-day professional development session coordinated by ACT, Inc. entitled The Instruction-Assessment Link. The activity required teachers to map their instruction in terms of ACT Assessment objectives. Science teachers worked in vertical teams to ensure that important content and skills were appropriately addressed in the 9-12 high school science sequence. Middle school and high school teachers of mathematics participated in professional development to further align the grades 6-12 mathematics sequence to make sure that the mathematics program at each step includes the important content/skills prerequisite to success at the next step in the sequence. The goal of the mathematics program is for all students to reach the grade-level standards and at the same time to be well prepared for entry in the next challenging mathematics course in the sequence leading to high school graduation. The Little Rock School Districts graduation requirements include rigorous and challenging mathematics requisites for all students such as algebra I for all students, geometry for all students, and a third algebra-based course for all students. The third course may be either algebra II or statistics. Increasing numbers of students are completing the recommended curriculum that includes a fourth unit of mathematics. Applied math, consumer math, basic math and other such courses have not been offered to district students for several years. In 1999-2000 the District established by Board Policy IGE Pre-Advanced Placement courses, beginning in grade 6, that will reflect LRSD standards and benchmarks and the College Boards syllabus requirements for Advanced Placement courses, incrementally building in students the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in Advanced Placement courses and examinations. On February 25-26, 2000 one hundred and eleven (111) secondary mathematics and science teachers from the District attended a two-day AP/Pre-AP conference in Little Rock. The conference focused both on the content and skills that students need to be successful in AP math and science courses and the pedagogy teachers need to deliver the content and skills to students. The one-hundred and eleven math and science teachers who participated were out of a total to two-hundred-one (201) total teachers at the secondary level in math and science. In 1999-2000 the District began implementation of high quality mathematics and science programs with a significant number of teachers. A high quality mathematics or science program is one that addresses curriculum standards and benchmarks at each grade level or course that reflect district/state/national standards. Second, a high quality mathematics or science program includes classroom instruction that fully addresses those standards and embodies research-based teaching strategies and techniques that have proven successful in assuring that all children learn the standards. Third, a high quality math or science program has assessment embedded in instruction that determines on a day-to-day basis if students are learning the standards. Fourth, a high quality math or science program has adopted materials that support and facilitate teaching and assessing the standards. Fifth, a high quality math or science program includes intensive and sustained professional development that focuses on the standards for every teacherThe current year (1999-2000) implementation plan for high quality mathematics is summarized in the following chart. Grade Level/ Course Grade 3 Math Grade 4 Math Grade 5 Math Grade 6 Math Grade 7 Math Grade 8 Math High school Pre-calculus AP Calculus Number/% of Teachers 99/100% 92/100% 89/100% 19/100% 17/100% 18/100% 3/18% 6/100% Schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools 2 of 5 high schools All 5 high schools Adopted Program Investigations in Number, Data and Space__________________ Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space__________________ Connected Math Project Connected Math Project Connected Math Project Pacesetter Pre-Calculus College Board AP Program Full implementation or Replacement module___________ Replacement module Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Replacement Modules Replacement Modules Full implementation Full implementation The current year (1999-2000) implementation plan for high quality science is summarized in the following chart\nGrade Level/ Course Grade 1 Science Grade 2 Science Grade 3 Science Grade 4 Science Grade 5 Science Grade 6 Science Grade 9 Physics AP Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Environmental Science Number/ % of Teachers 104/100% 98/100% 99/100% 92/100% 89/100% 21/100% 19/83% 14/100% Schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Adopted Program Science and Technology for Children________________ Science and Technology for Children_____________ Science and Technology for Children________________ Science and Technology for Children________________ Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children________________ Active Physics College Board AP Program Full implementation or Replacement Module Replacement Module Replacement Module Replacement Module Replacement Module Replacement Module Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Year 2000-2001 During 2000-2001 math and science teachers will work in vertical teams (College Board Vertical Teams) to refine the Pre-AP courses from grades 6-11 to make sure all participating students are being adequately prepared to enroll in and succeed in AP Courses in math and science. In addition science vertical teams will revisit the Curriculum Standards and Benchmarks for high school science to make doubly sure they are totally aligned with national/state standards for science and the districts assessment program. As all math and science courses are being strengthened and improved, additional high quality programs will be implemented across the K-12 spectrum. The 2000-2001 implementation plan for high quality mathematics programs is summarized in the following chart. Additions from the previous year are highlighted in red. Grade Level/ Course Grade 2 Math Grade 3 Matli Grade 4 Math Number/% of Teachers 98/100% 99/100% 92/100% Schools Adopted Program Grade 5 Math Grade 6 Math Grade 7 Math Grade 8 Matli *Grade 9 Algebra I High School Pre-Calculus AP Calculus 89/100% 19/100% 17/100% 18/100% 12/100% 10/59% 6/100% All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools -All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Investigations in Number. Data and Space Investigations in Number. Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Connected Math Project Connected Math Project Connected Math Project I CAN Leant Algebra 1 computer course Pacesetter Pre-Calculus College Board AP Program Full implementation or Replacement module Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation * Pending Board approval at the April 27 Board Meeting The 2000-2001 implementation schedule for high quality science programs is summarized in the following chart. The additions to the plan from the previous year are highlighted in red. Grade Level/ Course Number/ %of Teachers Schools Adopted Program Grade 1 Science 18/18% 7 elementary schools Science and Technology For Children Full implementation, Replacement Module(s), or Training Only Full implementation Grade 1 Science Grade 2 Science Grade 2 Science Grade 3 Science Grade 3 Science Grade 4 Science Grade 4 Science Grade 5 Science Grade 5 Science Grade 6 Science Grade 7 Science # Grade 8 Science Grade 9 Physics # Grade 10 Biology # Grade 11 Chemistry AP Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Environmental Science 86/82% 34/35% 64/65% 20/20% 79/80% 35/38% 57/62% 23/26% 66/74% 21/100% 16/100% 16/100% 19/83% 20/100% 14/100% 14/100% 28 elementary schools 11 elementary schools 24 elementary schools 7 elementary schools 28 elementary schools 14 elementary schools 21 elementary schools 9 schools 26 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Life Issues (SALT) - Lawrence Hall of Science Issues, Evidence and You (SEPUP)__________________ Active Physics Biology, A Community Context (BIOCOM) and otiier possible programs Chemistry in the Community (CHEMCOM) and other possible programs College Board AP Program 2 Replacement Modules Full implementation 2 Replacement Modules Full implementation 2 Replacement Modules Full implementation 2 Replacement Modules Full implementation 2 Replacement Modules_________ Full implementation Full implementation Training Only Full implementation Training Only Training Only Full implementation # Training for 2001-2002 implementation will be provided. Training will be provided on the named program as well as other possible programs for biology and chemistry in preparation for the normal State textbook/program adoption process during the 2000-2001 school year. Year 2001-2002 The 2001-2002 implementation schedule for high quality math programs is summarized in the following chart. Additions from the previous year are highlighted in red. Grade Level/ Course Number/% of Teachers Schools Adopted Program Grade K Math 109/100% All 35 elementai'y schools Investigations in Number, Data and Space Full implementation, Replacement module, or Training Only Full implementation Grade 1 Math 104/100% Grade 2 Math 98/100% Grade 3 Math 99/100% Grade 4 Math 92/100% Grade 5 Math 89/100% Grade 6 Math 19/100% Grade 7 Math 17/100% Grade 8 Math 18/100% All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools Investigations in Number. Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Cormected Math Project Connected Math Project Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation * Grade 9 Algebra 1 Grade 9-10 Geometry Grade 9-11 Algebra 2 High School Pre-Calculus AP Calculus * 12/100% 22/100K. 30/100% 10/59% 6/100% All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Pending Board approval on April 27, 2000 Connected Math Project\nPre- AP algebra 1 will use the College Board Pre-AP Program I CAN Learn Algebra 1 computer course To Be Selected Standards-based programs\nPre-AP geomeny will use the College Board Pre-AP Program To Be Selected Standards-based programs\nPre-AP algebra 2 will use the College Board Pre-AP Program Pacesetter Pre-Calculus College Board AP Program Full implementation Full implementation Training only Training only Full implementation Full implementation The 2001-2002 implementation schedule for high quality science programs is outlined in the following chart. Additions from the previous year are highlighted in red. Grade Level/ Course Grade 1 Science Grade 2 Science Grade 3 Science Number/ %of Teachers 104/100% 98/100% 99/100% Schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools Adopted Program Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Full implementation or Replacement Module Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Grade 4 Science Grade 5 Science Grade 6 Science Grade 9 Physics Grade 10 Biolog)' 92/100% 89/100% 21/100% 19/83% 20/100% Grade 11 Chemistry 14/100% AP Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Environmental Science 14/100% Year 2002-2003 All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Active Physics Biology, A Community Context or other appropriate program that teachers recommend\nPre-AP Biology will use the College Board Program Qiemistry in the Community or other appropriate program that teachers recommend\nPre-AP Chemistry will use the College Board Program College Board AP Program Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementatio i The implementation schedule for high quality mathematics programs for 2002-2003 is summarized in the chart below. Additions from the previous year are highlighted in red. Grade Level/ Course Grade K Math Grade 1 Math Grade 2 Math Grade 3 Math Grade 4 Math Grade 5 Ma Grade 6 Math Grade 7 Math Grade 8 Math Number/% of Teachers 109/100% 104/100% 98/100% 99/100% 92/100% 89/100% 19/100% 17/100% 18/100% Schools Adopted Program All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools All 8 middle schools Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Connected Math Project Connected Math Project Connected Math Project\nPre- I AP algebra 1 will use the Full implementation, Replacement module, or Training Only Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation *1Grade 9 Algebra 1 Grade 9-10 Geometry Grade 9-11 Algebra 2 High School Pre-Calculus AP Calculus * 12/100% 22/100% 30/100% 10/59% 6/100% All 5 high schools All 5 high sch\u0026lt;x)ls All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Pending Board approval on April 27, 2000 College Board Program for Pre- AP________________________ I CAN Leam Algebra 1 computer course To Be Selected Standards-based programs\nPre-AP geometry will use the College Board Pre-AP Program To Be Selected Standards-based programs\nPre-AP algebra 2 will use the College Board Pre-AP Program Pacesetter Pre-Calculus College Board AP Program 1 Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation The 2002-2003 implementation schedule for high quality science programs is outlined in the following chart. Grade Level/ Course Grade 1 Science Grade 2 Science Grade 3 Science Grade 4 Science Grade 5 Science Grade 6 Science Grade 9 Physics Grade 10 Biology Grade 11 Chemistry Number/ %of Teachers 104/100% 98/100% 99/100% 92/100% 89/100% 21/100% 19/83% 20/100% 14/100% Schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 35 elementary schools All 8 middle schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools All 5 high schools Adopted Program Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Science and Technology for Children Active Physics\nPre-AP physics will use the College Board Pre- AP Program Biology, A Community Context or other appropriate program that teachers recommend\nPre-AP Biology will use the College Board Pre- AP Program Chemistry in the Community or other appropriate program that teachers recommend\nPre-AP Chemistry will use the College Board Pre-AP Program Full implementation or Replacement Module Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation Full implementation AP Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Environmental Science 14/100% All 5 high schools College Board AP Program Full implementation By the end of year 2002-2003 all grade levels and courses at all schools will have high quality mathematics and science programs. Standards-Based Mathematics And Science Implementation Update The Little Rock School District is involved in a process of systematically moving toward full standards-based programming in mathematics and science at every grade level and in every course with all teachers at all schools. Full standards-based programming has several identifiable attributes. First, curriculum standards and benchmarks at each grade level or course that address district/state/national standards must be in place. Second, classroom instruction must fully address those standards and must embody research based teaching strategies and techniques that have proven successful in assuring that all children learn the standards. Third, assessment must be embedded in instruction that determines on a day-to-day basis if students are learn\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_371","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Middle Schools''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Middle Schools''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/371"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nMIDDLE SCHOOLSoo_\u0026gt;, zn zmm (A on Middle Schools 1. Memorandum to middle school principals from Bonnie Lesley in July 28, 1999, Learning Links: attached speech by Hayes Mizell, Six Steps to an Achieving Middle School. 2. Memorandum to middle school principals in March 3, 1999, Learning Links: attached article, Middle Grades Education Initiative from SREB. 3. Memorandum to middle school principals in March 3, 1999, Learning Links: attached article from SREB, Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades\nReadiness for Success. 4. Memorandum to middle school principals in March 3, 1999, Learning Links: attached article from SREB, Improving Teaching in the Middle Grades\nHigher Standards for Students Arent Enough. 5. 6. 1. Memorandum to middle school principals in Mar. 22,2000, Learning Links with attached copy of Quality Middle School Leadership by David Weller. Memorandum to middle school principals in Oct. 4, 2000, Learning Links\nattached article, The Middle Years: Are US Middle Schools Up to the Task? E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff, July 14, 2000\nattached speech by Hayes Mizell, Battling for Middle Grades Reform. -A/? 1 I I I -L '?/?5/'79 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PUTASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 I July 27, 1999 i TO\nMiddle School Principals II FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley\n^ssociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Advise to Middle Schools I Linda Austin found on the internet the attached copy of a speech by Hayes Mizell. You will want to share it, we think, with your staff. It is a powerful outline of how to improve student achievement! BAL/adg Attachment i i I i f i II Page 1 of 10 Home I LatgstUpdates | Ngws^ | MiddleWeb Index | Reforming Schools ! A | I j attended by middlejchool teachers and administrators from throughout was Director of the Program for Student Achievement the school district. Mizell is at the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation.] i Six Steps to an Achieving Middle School ! ! d aX wiih So PP'' Oilb say thal Fd t' Citing recent data from state assessments, the National Assessment of increase levels of student achievement. I assume hed,er schools ------need to you are here because you are professionals who recognize that many students are not performing up to their academic potential  and state to demonstrate that you Student nArTnrmorr -.1^_____  , . or because you are student performance in your classrooms and schools. can increase levels of me say it again. mcrease student achievement. Yes, parents are their children's achievement ht H . i, their children's k or your experience. Yes, communities can and th developmental opportunities they need to build self-^ dence ^d the desire to achieve, but community support is no substitute for what should be the schools' academic focus. If you cannot help your studenU achieve at higher levels, who can? Will and Effort Produce Results 1 IJmow your work is complicated by great obstacles. There are classes that are too big. There are too -r--------------------------r* -------- a------xxiVAv oiv uiat arc 100 and learning. There roo many their minds but learning. There are even some of your students who seem to have eveiything on L....... colleagues unwilling to invest the time and effort are too many it takes to develop and apply the new attitudes. behaviors, knowledge skUls necessary ,o increase sr^fen, ichie^^ Xher Xes are daunting, and you know better an I that It is not easy to overcome them. It takes steady, hard http://www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html unmI I I ! I Page 2 of 10 work. That is what you tell your students it takes to achieve, and it applies to you as well. We live in a culture that values convenience, short-cuts, expediency, and painless learning Teacher^\nmboT'or  of this culture. They look for the progrm, or TthTd T \u0026gt;' their jobs easier. Indeed, there are a bl of resources in the education marketplace, and some of them are helpful, but if educators properly, nearly all these resources require more rather than less work. There a ^2E|^I^H^^ntachieyen^ Raising the performance levels of your students means that yon as * to also EerfonumijgtoTj^ use them are no shortcuts to Let us assume that everyone here wants to increase student achievement, and that each of you has the will and IS prepared to exert the effort it.takes to reach that goal. How do you go about it? WeU I cannot develop and prescribe what I would call an IRP - an Individual Refon^ ! fo Jach of middfe^Lhoo!\" T Z T Imou canhim your schools into achieving middlesclwls. In fact, I believe there are a series ofstens vou can tekp tn you go about it? Well, I next level. are a series of steps you can take to take your schools to the Not merely schools that include grades six through eight and that are now called \"middle schools \" Not merely schools that perhaps include teams, advisories, exploratoiy wheels, block scheduling and \"-'y hoes  , .lIo'iXT\" about the developmental characteristics of the young adolescents they are teaching. These, cl^actenstics of \"middle schools\" but they do not automatically produce schools. \" There are too many educators who' are ft, .are ,_____ _______'achieving middle -A satisfied with just being a middle school but who do Jand processes as the foundanonforlfanlfoiming '' their schools into achieving middle schoiilsl --------------------------------------~ What Is an Achieving Middle School? ^Mo I mean by \"achjeyin^middle^^ whose mission, ethos, culture, structure _gani^n cumculum, co-curnculum, and instruction is explicitly dedicated tn the .^gryjtudeg^ every a^Tin the~building. It is a school where fromthe time a visitor walks in the front door there is no doubt that the schools focus is on advancing the achievement of every student ^d^eyety adult. It is not a school where the administrators and teachers assume they know all they Xe h\",Th''d'^ In the achTeving teach Jd .To\nha.fliaa!lhave something to. ^d learn. This belief is stated and restated, and it is a fundamental of the school. operating principle I WMt to briefly outline six steps towards becoming an achieving middle school. But let up front that I am not going to include some \"basics\" in these steps. For example, I say that everyone m your schools, from principals to school secretaries W uvavh^L lu luuu service custodial staff must come to school each day prepared to care about every student they encounter. You cannot have an achieving middle school unless it is me say right am not going to to teachers to food service and an authentically caring middle school. I m not going to say that your schools have to be safe\nnot only free of violence, harassment, and mn TTll ri 3 II AM omAniT ct-nzl ante _x___i  .  intimidation among students, but between teachers and students. No school 7 ^tuuciits, out oeiween teachers and students. No school can be an achieving midglesc^ol unless both students and staff feel safe. But there i^^^^S^hS^Emd7fs^feW^ nvpr nnlTAn onH fhot ic 1110+ 00 vxvvix overlooked and that is just as basic. Middle schools have to be safe for student.s uiai Ddsic. .vname schools have to be safe for students and adults to express theu- opinions, disagree, and even debate. Students and adults have to know they will be heard and http://www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html 7/27/99?age J 01 10 that constructive dialogue will be practiced and honored. I am not going to say that everyone in your schools, from administrators to teachers to classified staff to students, have to demonstrate respect for one another. No school can be an achieving middle school unless every person practices mutual respect every day. I am not going to say that your school has to be more dedicated to students who are low-performin\nsocially alienated, or otherwise at the margins than to all other students. No school can be an achieving middle school unless it allocates more talent, effort, and other resources to the students most in need. ig, I am not going to include any of these practices in the steps its takes to become an achieving middle school because all of them are fundamental. If there is anyone here who does not know that caring. respect, safety, and disproportionate attention to those with the greatest needs is basic to an achieving middle school, there is nothing I can say that will help you. No matter what other steps you may take, if you ignore these \"basics\" you will never have achieving middle schools. Now let us consider the six steps. Step One: Make Achievement the Primary Purpose Forge a consensus among all the adults in the school that advancing achievement is the school's primary purpose. This step may be obvious, but it is surprising how many schools are not really clear about their overarching purpose. These schools typically have a whole list of \"priorities\" even though it should be clear that not everything can be a priority. It simply is not possible to give equal attention to every issue or concem. Some things are more important than others and the most important of all is student achievement. If the adults in the school -- from the administrators to the teachers to the classified staff - do not agree on that, then it will be difficult, if not impossible, for the school to become an achieving middle school. I Of course, it is not easy to get agreement that the school's primary purpose is to advance achievement. There are teachers who, as one principal said, \"consider themselves to be the last independent contractors.\" In other words, they believe that once they have been hired by the school system, it is their God-given right to do what they want in the way they want to do it. \\\\Tien administrators and other teachers in the school allow this attitude to prevail, there can be no achieving middle school. At one low-performing school I visited, I learned that some teachers act as though participating in faculty meetings is an optional activity\nsometimes they participate, sometimes they do not. While it is essential for faculty meetings to be well-organized and substantive - many schools now use these meetings for staff development - it speaks volumes when teachers believe they can build a firewall between what they do and the welfare of the school. This is why in so many middle schools there may be one or two very good teams, but many more teams that are mediocre or worse. In the achieving middle school, teachers cannot do their own thing and principals cannot hide in their offices or devote themselves almost exclusively to adrninistrative tasks. Instead, there have to be visible manifestations of trust, give-and-take, extra effort, community, and mutual accountability among adults in the school, all focused on improving the performance levels of both students and adults. Unless there is agreement that this is the school's central focus, and unless administrators. 4 ii http://www.niiddleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html 7/27/99( Page 4 of 10 teachers, and classified personnel work together, there can be no achieving school. Step Two: Identify Everyone's Talents and Interests I 1 Systematically identify and use the talents, abilities, and interests of all adults and students in the school, as well as students' families. I I As most of us experience school, it is a place where there is an underlying assumption that students do not know certain things and it is the school's responsibility to help them learn those things. This is a deficit approach to education_where the emphasis is on what students do not know and cannot do rather than on what they do know and can do. In schools where there are students who come from low-income families, or those who speak little or no English, or those who are from an ethnic or racial group different from the majority of teachers in the school, it is not unusual that these factors influence educators' assumptions about what students know and can do, or their academic potential. The achieving middle school acknowledges this reality and seeks to compensate for it by systematically developing an inventory of the talents, abilities, and interests of each.student_and a^lt in the school. The purpose of this process is twofold: it makes concrete the school's belief that every I i person in the school is valued and has something to contribute, and it provides the school's administrators and teachers with a complete list of the human resources available to advance the achievement of individuals within the school community. The process of developing this inventory could commence with the new school year by focusing on the class of rising sixth graders and the school's staff. It could then be repeated with each successive class of sixth graders, as well as updated for each class as it progresses through grades seven and eight. The task of developing the inventory and the database of talents, abilities, and interests could probably best be organized and carried out under the leadership of a small committee of school staff, students, and representatives of students' families I It is important to understand that the use of the inventory would not be to identify people to perform support functions unrelated to increasing achievement. The purpose is not to find people who will bake more and better cookies, or answer the telephone in the school office, or accompany students on field trips, but to uncover and put to work the human resources that otherwise go unidentified, unacknowledged, and unused in every school. Even though people would have to volunteer to participate in the inventory and to share their talents with others, I am confident that most people would welcome the opportunity. Consider the possibilities: Students who speak a language that teachers and other students do not speak could provide basic, practical instruction in that language. Any teacher, regardless of the subject they teach, who likes youth literature could organize and facilitate book discussion groups with students. Students who are computer whizzes could help teachers improve their technology skills. School staff who have hobbies such as chess or gardening or photography could help students develop these skills. Each of these teaching and learning experiences might occur on a small scale, between individuals or in small groups, but the objective would be for them to be pervasive and sustained so that everyone in the school, not just students, is seeking to achieve a new proficiency. If these activities were pervasive, they could develop a powerful climate of achievement. Step Three: Use Standards to Define Learning Goals http\n//www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html 7/27/99Embrace and use content and performance standards to clearly delineate student learning goals, and engage teachers, students and families in understanding what these standards mean. 1 i I I i If your school system and schools want middle school students to achieve at higher levels, the students have to know what you expect them to achieve, and the level of proficiency they rnust demonstrate as evidenc^Tth^h^ have achieved it. In the past, and perhaps in too many classrooms 'today, the curriculum has been the textbook, even though schools did not really expect that students would learn everything in the textbook. Instead, the schools played a guessing game with students, saying, in effect, \"Here is this book\nwe will cover what we can, and we think it is really important for you to learn some of what is in the textbook. We will not tell you what it is we expect you to learn, but at different points during the school year we will give you a test to determine if you have learned it. If you study what is in this textbook and if you are very good at guessing what we think you should learn, you will perform well on the tests.\" This, of course, is not a process that fosters either good teaching or significant learning. If schools really understand standards and use them effectively, standards can be a pathway tojaore effective teaching and deeperleaming. Standards should result from asking the question, \"What should students know and be able to do as a result of dieir educational experiences in the middle grafres?\" The challenge is for the standards that ansv ,\nr that question to be concrete and limited. They should not be a long list of more standards than it is possible for teachers to address or more than it is possible for students to learn, but restricted to what is most important for students to know and to be able to do. ! I 1 i When standards meet this criterion, they can be a constructive force for better teaching and deeper student learning. The focus becomes what students should learn, and what and how teachers should teach to cause students to perform at standard. If a student does not meet standards, the responsibility is shared equally by the student, the teacher, and the school. The student has to make greater effort. The teacher has to change his or her instruction. The school has to provide the student more time for learning, perhaps different learning contexts, and certainly additional opporttmities to demonstrate that he or she can perform at standard. The purpose of standards is not to penalize students but for teachers and schools to take whatever actions are necessary to cause students to meet the standards. Step Four: Focus Staff Development on Student Achievement Reform staff development so it is rooted in what teachers and administrators need to know and be able to do to increase student achievement, and evaluate the results of staff development. If student achievement is going to increase, teachers and administrators will have to make it happen. But they cannot increase student achievement unless they have and apply the attitudes, behaviors, knowledge, and skills that are correlates of increased student achievement. We know that if for whatever reasons teachers believe that students cannot achieve much, the results will be that the students do not achieve much. We know that if teachers are not deeply knowledgeable about the subjects they teach, and if they do not manifest a contagious excitement about those subjects, students will not believe those subjects are important and they will not devote much effort to learning them. We know that if principals do not i J 1, http://www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.htinl 7/27/99focus their faculties on high quality instruction and student work, and if they do not consistently monitor and seek to improve teachers' instruction, then significant increases in student achievement will not occur. ( ( i { Even though we know all this, most school systems and schools do not effectively use the greatest resource available to them-- staff development -- to increase the performance leyels_qteachers and administrators. Most staff development is not carefully conceived or narrowly targeted to help teachers and administrators develop and use the specific skills they need to increase student achievement. Even worse, staff development is almost never rigorously evaluated to determine what educators learned or how effectively they applied what they learned to their classrooms and schools. Few school systems and schools invest enough in staff development, but most do not really know what their total expenditures are because staff development activities are diffuse, spread across many different functions and programs. In the achieving middle school, however, the principal and the school leadership team treat staff development as a precious resource. They carefully analyze the school's budget and its activities to identify both the money and the time that the school can use for staff development. They also identify staff development that is required by other entities such as the central office of the school system or the state department of education. With this information as background, the leaders of the achieving middle school then use student performance data to identify the students' and teachers' greatest learmng needs. If, for example, the math performance of students is not what it should be, the school's leadership team engages mathematics teachers and the central office's math consultant in developing staff development that will most likely increase the teachers' effectiveness in raising student achievement. The school does not stop there, however. It also creates and implements a process for determining whether and how the teachers benefited from the staff development, and whether and with what effect they are adapting their instruction to use what they learned. This process of evaluation helps the school learn from the professional development experiences of its staff, and over time increases the school's understanding of what types of staff development are most effective. ! I I I i I Step Five: Engage Everyone in Discussions of Student Work Collectively engage teachers, administrators, site councils, and students'families in analyzing and discussing the quality of student -work. How does a school know whether students are achieving? How does it know that the rate at which they are achieving is satisfactory? Sadly, most schools are dependent on the results of standardized assessments. In one sense these schools have turned over accountability for monitoring student progress to either the state or the central office of their school system. The schools rely almost totally on assessment reports from the state or district to gauge the academic progress their students are making. _ Given the high-stakes nature of these assessments I suppose it is not surprising that schools are so dependent on them for information about student progress, but this is not healthy for schools or their students. These tests serve a purpose, but at best they are snapshots of what students know and can do\nthey do not provide schools with a sophisticated, comprehensive understanding of students' levels of performance or their academic growth. 4 : http\n//www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html 7/27/99rdgc , 01 110 5' While the achieving middle school disaggregates and studies the results of standardized assessments to learn what to change about curriculum and instruction, it does not stop there. The achieving school also engages teachers and administrators, and as many representatives of students' families as possible, in systematically examining student work over time. This usually occurs in small groups, such as department or team meetings, but faculty meetings and special evening programs are also appropriate venues. At these meetings teachers bring samples of actual student work to analyze and discuss. -This works best in schools where teachers are committed to using rubrics that describe varying levels of the quality of student work, from excellent to poor, for a specific assignment. Rubrics can also help teachers engage students in understanding the quality of work the teachers are seeking. Some teachers involve their students in developing the rubric for a particular assignment while others collaborate with students to develop a generic rubric for all work students produce. In other words, rubrics can help students understand the teachers' expectations and the criteria teachers use to assign a grade to the work students submit. There are a number of different protocols for how a group of people might examine student work but - at one middle school it works like this\nOnce a week the social studies teachers meet after school for two hours to examine and discuss student work. A teacher brings to the group a selection of work students completed in response to a major assignment. The teacher begins the session by explaining the content standard for the assignment addressed. She goes on to explain why and how she developed the assignment\nin other words, how she intended the assignment to help students develop the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the specific content standard. The teacher then describes the rubric she developed to assess the quality of the students' work. Finally, the teacher discusses several pieces of student work which are illustrative of the range of students' performance on the assignment. At that point, the teacher's colleagues ask questions and provide feedback. They may praise the link between the specific content standard and file assignment. They may make suggestions for strengthening the assignment, or critique certain elements of the rubric. But this process is not a show-and-tell for the teacher to proudly show off the best work of her class. Instead, it is an opportunity for a group of professionals to think hard about and discuss the relationship between their instruction and the performance of their students. This cannot occur unless each teacher is willing to learn from his or her colleagues, and unless there is enough trust and security among the teachers that they can give and take constructive criticism. The objective of the collaborative examination of student work is to improve teacher practice so it V' I i will improve studen?performance.~This can be one of the most effective types of staff development, buTlike other potentially powerful investments in education it requires sustained conumtment and li 1 j effort. Examining student work is important because the bottom line in the achieving middle school is what students actually know and can do, not just how they perform on tests. In fact, the focus on student performance is a higher standard than focusing on test performance. None of us earn our livings by how we perform on tests, but all of us earn our livings by demonstrating every day what we know and can do. Student work is the window that enables us to understand what students actually know and can do, and how well they know and can do it. However, this process is only one component of the I http://www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html 7/27/99Page 6 01 10 framework for increasing student achievement. That framework includes these elements: (a) there_ must be challenging md engaging curriculum that is standards-based\n(b) th^instruction of teachers must be rooted in their knowledge of the content they are teaching md then skillful use of pedagogy to engage students in learning that contentTfc) teachersjnust hsyelopTirgh-quanfy assi_g^nts for the specific Dumose of causing students to progress towards perfom^jl: stmdard\nmd (d) teactos mustcollaborativ^^d.consistently.analyzestudentwrkjodet^ineif^ete^ers instruction md assignments are producii^Jthe .quality of work students must demonstrate to perform at standard. If not then temhCTS must chmge their practice to achieve this result. It is only when all these pieces are in place, consistently md faithfully implemented, that student performance will increase significmtly. Step Six: Make High School Success a Primary Goal Focus the school on encouraging and preparing nearly all students in grades six, seven, and eight to enroll and succeed in high school courses leading to post-secondary education. statement that one hears often whenever there is a discussion about the purpose of There is a statement that one hears often whenever there is a aiscussion auoui j.c ux education: \"Well, you know, not everyone needs to go to college or should go to college. It is quite possible to make a good living md be happy without going to college.\" This is usually followed by . . ..... ii________u..- IC moVino mnrp mnnp an anecdote about a relative who did not go to college but has a good job and is making more money than another relative who did go to college. It is of course, true that there are some highly motivated, strong willed, energetic, and creative people with only a high school education but who are successful in spite of it. It is also true that in the next millennium there will be fewer and fewer jobs for such people. But even before we get to the year 2000, there is compelling data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics about the value of college education: *In 1996, college graduates earned nearly 75 percent more thm high ^hool graduates. * Each year of post-secondary education raises wages by about eight percent. * By ages 28 to 32 the real earnings growth of men with a high school education or below is about one percent annually while male college graduates have m annual real wage growth of five percent each year. * The likelihood of a worker experiencing a period of unemployment decreases as the worker's education level increases. Now I ask you, in light of these facts, why would a middle school not intentionally encourage_ai^ prepare nearly every sixth, seventh, md eighth grader to enroll md, sucked in high school \u0026lt;^21^ tn post-secondary eaucation? If middle schools really wmt the b^for their students, if they r'e^ly^ttFpre^ them for the twenty-first century, why are they not encoura^ng and prepmng nearly every middle school student to seek md obtain as much education as possible. I believe this what m achieving middle school must do. I want to point out that when I use the term \"post-secondary education\", I mem my level of education beyond high school, not just four years of college. \"Post-secondary should include '5 httD I //www .mi ddl ew eb. com/HMchsrlotte. html 7/27/991 Page 9 of 10 technical education, two-year colleges, or any structured educational opportunities that require a high school diploma and have other entrance criteria. The same type of post-secondary education is not appropriate for everyone, but it is both appropriate and necessary to encourage and prepare nearly all middle school students for some type of post-secondary education. This does not mean that the middle school has any business deciding or even suggesting a specific type of post-secondary education for a particular student. It certainly does not mean that the school should assign students to classes based on what the school believes or assumes about what class is best preparation for a specific type of post-secondary education for a particular student. This is not the role of the achieving middle school. Instead, the school educates all students about all the many different types of post-secondary education available to them. The school does not make judgments that some students are not smart enough or that their families do not have enough money for the students to pursue higher education. Rather, the school instills in all students the desire to seek additional education after high school. The achieving middle school seeds and nurtures students' interest in post-secondary education. It understands that student aspiration precedes student determination, and that in all matters the \"what\" must come before the \"how.\" I I i I But encouraging students to pursue higher education requires much more than handing out brochures, or pairing students with mentors, or even creating opportunities for students to spend time at postsecondary institutions. Students have to develop the self-confidence that with effort they can perform at higher levels. This begins with middle school teachers and administrators consistently communicating their belief that higher education is a desirable goal for students, and each day driving home their expectations that students will produce quality work in middle school. This, of course, presents a problem. Many middle school teachers and administrators do not believe that nearly all students can or should prepare for post-secondary education, and they do not expect them to produce high quality work in middle school. In these cases, the attitudes and behaviors of the educators communicate so powerfully that anything else they may do has little effect. Middle school students are very discerning about how much their teachers care about and expect of them, and how well teachers prepare and how hard they work to help students develop academically. Therefore, it is essential for middle school educators to get their attitudes and behaviors straight before they_set put to encourage and prepare nearly all middle school students to pursue post-secondary education. Tackling this issue has other profound consequences for schools. To honestly prepare students to take high school courses leading to post-secondary education, it will be necessary to eliminate low level V __________J __________ 11 Jin nlrallonoinCT biah rnntAnt PAlir^P^ th^At flTft  I courses and to ensure that nearly all students participate in challenging, high content courses that are aligned with the high school courses. I know what you are thinking: How is this possible when so _ many of your students come to middle school with poor literacy and math skills? Of course it is not possible if your middle schools are structured and operated as they do now. That is the point. No school can become an achieving middle school by merely tinkering here or tweaking there, making just a few changes at the margins and hoping for the best. If middle schools are to advance significantly the achievement of all students, the schools will have to restructure, retool, and reallocate. More teachers will have to invest more time and effort in developing mastery of the content they teach, and becoming more skillful in causing students to perform at standard. The curnculum will have to become more engaging and challenging. The school day, week, and perhaps even the school year will have to change to create more time for high quality staff development and much more time for student learning. Above all, attitudes will have to change. http://www.middleweb.com/HMcharlotte.html 7/27/991 Page 10 of 10 Educators have to believe that they can reform their schools fundamentally, and central office leaders to whom they are accountable have to believe it also. Unless teachers and principals believe that middle school reform is both necessary and possible, and unless they have both the permission and support of central office leaders, it will not be possible for middle schools to become achieving schools. Are You Really So Powerless? i 1 These, then, are the six steps to develop an achieving middle school. At best, they represent a fiamework, not a recipe. Because each middle school is different, each will have to take the six steps in its own way. This is not a process for the timid, and I encourage you to be courageous and bold. Though I know the challenge of these six steps is great, it is not as great as the challenges that will confiont your students if you do not take these steps. I During the next millennium they will face an increasingly complex and competitive world. Some of you may be tempted to shrug your shoulders and say, \"It does not make any difference what I do. Whatever I do, some of my students will succeed, some will not.\" Yes, that is the human condition, but are you really so powerless that you cannot change lives? Are you really saying that you cannot make a significant difference in how your students prepare for the future? I do not believe that, and I hope you do not. But what is more important is what your students believe. Each day they take a leap of faith. They come to school believing that you have their best interests at heart and that no matter what, you will help them prepare for the future. I 1 I Your students almost never tell you that. Quite often some of them act as though they believe just the opposite, throwing your best efforts back into your face. But the truth is that even these students believe in you and are counting on you. I will bet there are some people in this audience who know that is true because once, many years ago, they were such students. In spite of their behavior or their apparent lack of motivation, some teacher convinced them that they could achieve. So do not ever believe that you and your schools cannot make a profound difference in the lives of all your students. The challenge is to reform your schools and your teaching so that all students, not just some students, achieve at significantly higher levels. This is why you must make middle schools work well, and move on to make them achieving middle schools. As it says in the scriptures^.\"those who are well do not need a physician\" (Luke 5:31). Thank you. Back to the \"Hayes Mizell Reader'2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 March 2, 1999 TO\nMiddle School Principals FROM: SUBJECT\nDr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Student Achievement and the Middle School Plan The Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) has three excellent articles opi their web page under the topic, Middle Grades Education Initiative. The first of these three is attached, Educations Weak Link\nStudent Performance in the Middle Grades. Note on page 5 the passage I have marked. The new awareness of the weak level of academic achievement at the middle school level is a heads-up for us as we plan our implementation of the middle school concept. We can avoid the mistakes made in earlier implementations. I Please see also on page 9 the results of state testing programs. Also, youll want to note at the bottom of that page the characteristics of a high performing school  a very similar list to the one I gave you at the principals meeting. These ideas are again reinforced on page 13 in the list of differences between high and low performing schools. In LRSD we want to be high performing. Attachments I BAL/rcm I I ( I I Middle Grades Initiative 2/28/99 12:40 AM Middle Grades Education Initiative Intemation^, national and regional reports paint a picture of an American educational system in which childhood programs, begin lagging behind in the middle grades and finish high school near the back of the pack. uuuicgiaucs The Southern Regional Education Board, using a grant from the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation achievement in the middle grades. Through a series of four reports, the SREB s lyhddle Grades Education Initiative is focusing on problem areas in the regions middle grades the w^ link in education. In the reports are suggestions for how to improve the middle grades and student performance at that level and beyond.  1 suggestions for how to improve the middle grades and The following are the first three reports in that series. Educations Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades: Readiness for Success Improving Teaching in the Middle Grades: Higher Standards for Students Arent Enough [ i Comments For additional information, please contact Sondra Cooney at (404) 875-9211, Ext. Home . About SREB Education Data Educational Policy Legisiativ Action Publications c Search SREB 1 http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/iniddlegrades.html Page 1 of 1 ! 1 JEducation's Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM SREB Educations Weak Link [Student Performance in the Middle Grades ^o^thern Regional Education Boards Middle Grades Education Initiative This ^s the first in a series of reports funded by a grant from the Edna McConnell Clark Foun^nrt nr, The middle grades  grades five through eight  are the weak link in Amoi-inon eignm graaers who twk the NAEP mathematics examination in 1996 scored below the h^c level _ indicting they lack the fundamental skills most Americans would agree high school. are needed to be successful in Tte Nalional Assessment stafsltcs for the SREB states patnt an even more disturbing picture. Consider  Almost 50 percent of eighth-graders are below the basic level  Even in thehiehest-np.rfnrmino -n. MbAw UA/Iun mv Uiaoiv level 111 Hiath the highest-performing SREB stotes (Maryland, Texas and Virginia) more than 40 percent of eighth-graders are below the basic level Virginia), more than 40 * nearly twothiris of eighth-graders are below the basic level. (Figure 1) A ^^tional Pattern of Underachievement Eighth-grade performance indicators from the National Assessment of ^u^tional ProBi^ .dkUwwlllO WIJILJ,  Can do arithmetic but do not understand and OMI V wj A to  memonze facte and answer specific science questions but cannot annlv the ^owledge nor understand the reasoning behind scientific mncontc- reasoning behind scientific concepts- and  Have only some of the reading skills necessary to be successful in grade-level work. To be literate does not mean that we all must be physicists, astronomers mathematicians erarv cnties Tf Hope mpan tKot _u i___ui. A j , , inainemaucians I * J ----------**** xAAMoi. daiionoine literary critics. It does mean that we should be able to read and understand 1 --------------- aiiu uiiucrsta business or science and make good and accurate decisions about heal th an article about or our daily lives. and economic issues in Figure 1 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Scoring Below Mathematics Level Basic http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weaklink hfEducation's Weak Link\nStudent Performance in the Middle Grades zmmuw 2/28/99 12:41 AM iviii mmw S: SiUMW Mi \"T ?! SS*1^  S!\nX.'KW \u0026lt;\u0026gt;K *\u0026gt; fWW  SbS-s.\n, 4( iW ' li \u0026gt;-  WlwSuMMii Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Scoring at the Proficient or Above on Mathematics Level chart2.gif (100841 bytes) NAEP J996 Mathematics: /depart Card/or the Nation and the States, National Center for Education Statistics * Fourteen of e 15 SREB sutes participated in the 1996 NAEP\nOklahoma did not participate. ^\"8 science: Too many students do not have the basic skills. Students have not a^uired the solid foundation of knowledge and skills in core academic areas .J V 11  .... --------------------WAW cjtwAAj Hi WIV aUlUClIIIL flicks necessaiy to do challengmg work in high school or to go on to further education in colleges and umversities. In 13 of 14 SI^B states with National Assessment data, more students score below the basic level in mathematics in eighth grade than in fourth grade. The achievement gap is not only at the basic level. There are too few students in the SREB region who score at the proficient level on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Fewer than 25 percent of eighth-grade students in all SREB states score at the proficient level in mathematics  level that may signal that students are ready to do challenging work in high school. (Figure 1) Figure 2 Percentages of Eighth-Grade Students at Mathematics Performance Levels on the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress http://www.sreb.org/Prograins/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.htm Page 2 of 11 I i I r 4^  I : 1 J  R w s \u0026amp; r i ****** '**** i a u w K t u 1 a1 Education's Weak Link: Student Perfonnance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM ! 1 I i I TOK White , SREB *\nNation Black SREB Nation Hispanic SREB Nation Total Percent of Students 59% 68 24 15 14 13 Advanced 3% 5 .1 .1 .7 .9 perfonnance levels Proficient and above Basic and above 1 Below Basic W 30'' 73 24 27 39 37 27' 76 73 61 63 3 4 8 8 j i Shading - StatisticaUy significant differences between SREB and nation 1 Basic and above includes proficient and advanced percentages Fourteen of the 15 SREB states participated in the 1996 NAEP\nOklahoma did I not participate. Assessment suggests tSZy E *\u0026gt; fr' National I  Eighth-graders in SREB states who and science have lower NAEP nationwide. i receive B or C grades in mathematics scores than students with similar grades standards for middle graders than the rest of the nation what does this maAemati^ for^rS?And mean for course work in of low academic standards in the in the I Finally, how does the poor performance of our middle grades affect the - ernnnmiAc that -------------. i aiicvi me econoniies that depend on an educated work force to economies of SREB states ramate? If eighth-graders are not prepared to rva n Kl A ... i . be successful in high school the ?rpr rpoinn unit  *8nt-graders are not prepared tc for business, indX SucLoT^  qualified gr^uates Where are the student performance gaps? There is a tendency to blame I i I I i not account for the range of differences in nation as a whole. SREB states have more lower-income families. The gap between NAEP scores for a f who are more often from when comp^ed with white students is sirnil^Ld unaaeptoW^gJ^fortoh^Sra'' d the nation. (Figure 2) a^cpuiuiy large, tor both the SREB region and I i ) 5 * \"\"\"\"\"'e families in the lower achievement SREB region have scores thMjowincome students across the nation. nr imhe, I, J J *  with parents who graduated .?r Z? Sh =hool also hive lower - ------...J naiionwidc. . - _ J .t  ** awTT-iiivi  Added to this fact: In the SREB states, from high school . - - - scores than students from similar families Seto mS *e toyf oTgiS?\" 'ent: where student live and  Both male and female students in rural areas and small towns http://www.sreb.org/Prograins/MiddleGrades/We score nklinlrEducation's Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM significantly below students in rural areas nationwide. In fact, eighth-graders in rural areas of the SREB region score about the same as their counterparts in inner cities. Nationally, rural students score higher than those in the central cities. (Figure 3)  Female students  more than half the school-age population in SREB states  perform at a lower level in mathematics and science than other female students across the country and consistently below male SREB students. (Figure 4)  The largest achievement gap among females occurs between girls who live in rural areas of the SREB states and girls elsewhere in the nation who live in rural areas. Figure 3 Percentages of Eighth-Grade Students at Mathematics Performance Levels on the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress by Location Central City SREB Nation Percent of students who scored at performance levels Total Percent of Students 33% 29 Urban FringelLarge Town SREB Nation Rural/Small Town SREB Nation 35 38 32 33 Advanced Proficient and above Basic and above 1 Below Basic 2% 3 17% 16 50% 48 50% 53 21 26 60 64 40 36 w 15 Ml 69 * 3 5 13  Shading  Statistically significant differences between SREB and nation 1 Basic and above includes proficient and advanced percentages * Fourteen of the 15 SREB states participated in the 1996 NAEP\nOklahoma did not participate. Figure 4 Average Mathematics Performance Score by Content Areas on 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress by Gender Gender Number of sense, properties, operations Measurement Geometry Male SREB Nation Female SREB Nation 269 272 269 273 267 269 Data analysis, statistics, probability Algebra 265 269 268 272 272 272 * * Shading  Statistically significant differences between SREB and nation Fourteen of the 15 SREB states participated in the 1996 NAEP\nOklahoma did not participate. http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddIeGrades/Weaklink/weakIlnk.htm Page 4 of 11 Education's Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM 'I' twofold?Hrto determine w^ perform more poorly when compared with similar students nationwide\nand (2) to develop practices that help all students - those in cities and rural areas, girls and boys - raise their academic achievement. i j i i ( I Why do the gaps exist? HiSija for Jem^e students and rural students in SREB stotes? Are expectotions Hum  rhigher grades than females nationwide, they score sigmficantly below other girls in the nation on the National Assessment. yet ^5^ standards different in mral ar^? Eighth-grade girls in rural areas of the wSSSw^SmSe Class they do fewer hands-on tasks involving concepts associated preparation forchallenoino ci-irsnvo rvm.rm, i for challenging science courses in high school.  schools set clear, challenging standards for what eighth-graders should know before they enter high school? Are there also problems with what J taught? Do parents know what the standards and exoectotions are for the WOTkV^ children struggle with more difSt and challenging 1 content is being taught  k. In virtually every PraS'^s point to weaknesses in middle Btades acmevernent. In Kentucky, for example, acommitteeis trying to determine whv middle school egging behind elementary and high school i inX evSSSXjf yf ? these questions._Part of the answer might be found 7.^ nauonwide phenoSj^onlhit^gSo deciaBT fhedata cited here, die explanation for the middle grades achievement to be even more comniev 7  **vvucutgap in the SREB stetes appears to be even more complex - rooted, perhaps, in a history of lower standards and expectotions. Standards and Expectations What should smdents know and be able to do to be successful in high school and hevond'/ Do expec. as much from our siudenls us other states do? luterrmtiouufnS Ste^^S XS '\u0026lt; expectations for ef^th-grade we What do we mean by high standards and expectations? ! We know that American students are comparisons of achievempnt v 7 77 ' I^rforming at the highest levels on international comparisons ot achievement. Yet education leaders in only two of the 15 SRFR have^mnared 7t. h  oJ the 15 SREB stotes report that they mathemaucs and science with international benchmarks for k pertormance. What does that say about mathematics standards and expectations in stotes where students score significantly below the national average? expectations in stotes Algebra IS often described as the gatekeeper for advanced mathematics 11 TiZ  'ic gaicKeeper lor aavanced mathematics and for entrance into college. About 25 percent of students in the SREB states take algebra by the end of the natinnQl __j___r____ OI me c-oiuucuu, lu uic orvnn siaies laxe algebra by the end of the eiehth grade _ the same as the national average. Yet eighth-graders in more than half of the SREB stotes^score below the national average on the algebra part of the NAEP assessment. (Figure 5) i i AnoAer 35 percent of eighth-graders say they will take algebra in ninth grade leaving almost 40 percent who do not plan to begin a higher mathematics sequence - Algebra I, GeometJ and Algebra http://www.sreb.org/Prograins/MiddIeGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.litmEducation's Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM II in high school. All SREB states require three years of mathematics for high school graduation and admission to postsecondary education, but the requirement can be met by a variety of mathematics courses. Currently, Algebra I is the highest level of mathematics required of all students. However, about one-third of SREB states have raised that requirement to include both algebra and geometry for future graduating classes. More entry-level jobs require technical, mathematical knowledge. Yet we still have a third of students in SREB states who reported that, if given the option, they would not take mathematics at all in high school. J Eighth-Graders: A World View  American eighth-graders have improved their performance in aritlunetic, while the rest of the world has moved on to problem-solving, algebra and geometry.  Basic mathematics for American eighth-graders is the same as seventh-grade mathematics for most of the world.  Most American eighth-graders (86 percent) think that they are doing well in mathematics, while more than half of Japanese and Korean students (who are doing well) think they should do better. j Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years: lEAs Third International Mathematics and Science Studv 1996. Splintered Vision: An Investigation of U.S. Science and Mathematics Education. 1997. Figure 5 SREB State* Performance in Eighth-Grade Mathematics on 1996 National Assessment of Education Progress (\"  \" = Below National Average,\"  = Same as National Average,\"  \" = Above National Average) Content Topics Number Sense, properties, operations Measurement Geometry Data Analysis, statistics, probability Algebra AL AR FL GA KY LA MD MS NC SC TN TX VA WV 4* 4* 4* csD 4* ra~i 4* caj 4* 4* r=ri 4* 4* 4^ 4* 4* 4* 4* r=n 4* r=n 4* 4* 4* 4* 4* 4* mi 4* mi 4* mi 4* 4* caa 4* csjj 4* caj 4* r^ 4* 4* 4' 4* 4* 4* ran 4* i~=n 4* cm cm 4* 4* r=n psn 4* 4* rsn r:zn 4/ 4* cm cm 4* 4* If two out of five students fail to see the importance of mathematics to high school and career success, what should we do in the middle grades to motivate students to succeed in mathematics'/ What standards do we expect middle grades students to meet in mathematics and the other core subjectsand do those standards reflect the tougher high school graduation requirements most SREB states have now implemented? Parent support and school practices Deciding what we expect students to know and do is the first step in shrinking the achievement gap in the middle grades. Many states in the nation and the SREB region are developing or refining http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.htm Page 6 of 11.1 Education's Weak Link\nStudent Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM academic stand^ds and expectations for students in all grades. But after standards are developed and PYTVPfahnnc HAfi-nAH mkot F\\/-x ____ _ i _ * expectations defined, what next? Do students, teachers and parents know what the standards ^e and what perfonnance is expected? The next all-important step is to make sure that all parts of the education system are organized to achieve the standards. ! i 1 Wh^ do the National Assessment data tell us about how well schools in the SREB states communicate with students and parents about standards and expectations?  Fewer schools in SREB states, especially in rural areas and small towns, report positive parental support.  Eighth grade students in schools with positive parent support for student achievement in SREB states score the same as eighth graders nationwide.  Fewer schools in SREB states report that parents are involved in classroom activities, parent conlerences and curriculum matters.  Students in schools with parents involved in classroom activities, parent conferences and cumculum matters in SREB states score the same as eighth graders across the nation. i Are schwls m SREB states less welcoming to parents, less trusting, or less open about what is expected of students? The data suggest that schools with middle grades should find ways to involve parents in setting academic standards and building parent support for the standards. A first step is to mTTiTminir'aM ctii/iAnto ______________c ~ ^cggmuni^tejos^nts and parents alike a clear picture of the standards for completing eighth grade and wRaris^Scceptable^rtormance:----------------- i ! What does the Third International Mathematics and Science Study data tell us about how we organize content and develop activities within the curriculum? 10-15 topics each year in mathematics and study them in grater depth until they are mastered. In America, middle grade students cover or review as many as 35-40 topics a year-often the same 35-40 topics they have covered for several }  In fact, while most countries introduce six or seven new topics in algebra and geometry during tnp minnlA oroHdc A -------- k J -------  141 tugvwia aiiu g\u0026amp;uiu\u0026amp;u y uuiixj thTs^riod ^\"^etican students can count on studying only one new topic during 75 percent of eighth graders in SREB states report doing problems from a textbook every da y Thes e studente do not perform as well as students nationwide who report daily textbook use Why the different result? How do teachers decide what to teach f rom the textbook, what to emphasize and how much time to devote to different topics? Is the textbook the only curriculum in too many schools? Without a set of standards and indicators of acceptable performance, curricular results may vary sigmiicantly from classroom to classroom and school to school. use. I I t i ! i 1 Interestingly, eighth grade students in the SREB sutes and across the nation perform better in scientx than in matiiematics on international comparisons. Studies show that the U.S. curriculum is more focused in science than in mathematics, giving students more time and opportunity to master concepts and study a topic in more depth. Whal do we know about classroom practices? Information gathered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress from teachers and students tells us that in comparison to the nation, the typical eighth grader in SREB states:  is assigned less group or partner work in mathematics\n)  is assigned less project work in mathematics\nj  writes less about how to solve problems in mathematics\n/  believes mathematics is mostly about memorizing facts\n '  deigns and carries out fewer scientific investigations\n )  gives fewer oral reports in science\nand  y http://www.sreb.org/Progranis/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.htm P#I\u0026lt;T*\u0026gt; *1 1 1- lu tuc Aviiuuie orades  has fewer discussions about material they have read. 2/28/99 12:41 AM leSS S Wyi\"? what they have scores for eighth graders in SREB states when compared to eighth grata S?n\"  results in lower .X us about luow scboots in SHEB states assess student progress?  Almost two/thirds of students in SREB states their teachers, and these students are tested at least weekly in mathematics by score about 30 points lower on the National Assessment of Kucadonal Progress dian students who are tested once or twice a month'  iSSSr frequent testing does not lead to better It may be at students in classrooms that emphasize testing concentrate on learning bits of information that are not remembered or developed into a logical understandin p nf matt^p k science. Frequent testing coupled with fewer o^rtuniti^ to apply leanung fpS ' ichievement in c assrnnms appears student achievement in classrooms. to produce lower How Do States Evaluate Student Performance? performance. progress on state standards for knowledge and or report statewide data on science achievement at grSe ei^t a^d ^REB states one state looks at science in grade seven. However, comparisons are not always aSble fron^ZT NAFPkwS\"tttllotatl goals. i^chveVT dompamtive data for these data are not linked to individual schools and districts. and assessments. The the SREB region, but Several SR^ states have launched studies to examine standards and exoectations in mathpm.tinc id science. For instance, Georgia has been concerned nivM.f .k., ^^P^^^^tions in mathematics standee Perfoance o[juniors and seniors on and the SAT. To try and understand the causes of lagging SAT the SAT given in seventh through tenth grades were conclusions. scores, results from preliminary versions of analyzed. Georgia reached the following 8ive-hc^rceiofamherwh=n,,wL'SSm*S  Students do not know or understand geometric relationships. These shortcomings can be traced, in significant part to weakneccec in Aa mJHHu carmotbe The evidence of lagging achievement in the middle grades in SREB states is nvprwhAim- pervades the entire educational system. (Figure 6) To chance what^P I? ! overwhe imng and inabiliy in our schools and cl Jrooms, difcgSvXXSbk d achievemenl io examine data and consider what steps need Io be aken toSeme cow Middle Grades: The Weak Link http://www.sreb.org/Progranis/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.htin Page 8 of 11Education's Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM Results from State Testing Programs I Elementary In Kentucky over the last five years, statewide reading scores have risen 31 points and statewide mathematics scores have risen 22 points in the elementary grades. The overall accountability index rose 13 points Middle Grades High School In reading, scores rose only 11 By twelfth grade reading points over the last five years,  - much less than the growth rate rose 34 points, a dramatic scores expected by the state in the middle grades. Mathematics improvement, and mathematics scores improved by 28 points ,,  over the five-year period. The stores improved by 31 points, overall accountability index rose The overall accountability index by 15 points improved by 9 points, the lowest gain of the three grade groups J I f i During the 1994-95 school year, South Carolina's fifth graders scored about the same as a national sample in mathematics. Twenty-five percent were in the lowest quarter of students and 28 percent scored in the upper quarter. kt the end of the third grade, Oklahoma students scored as well as 60 percent of students on a nationally-normed test in reading, 62 percent in mathematics and 69 percent in science. By the end of fifth grade no fewer than 76 percent of students passes all state-developed curriculum tests. When these fifth graders were For students moving from ninth to eleventh grade during the tested as seventh graders in period, the percentage students in the lowest quarter of students scoring in the had grown to 30 percent and thehighest quarter grew and the percentage in the upper quarter   ' slipped to 26 percent. percentage in the lowest quarter decreased. At the end of seventh grad reading, 58 percent in mathematics, and 55 percent in science. By the end of eighth grade, the percent-age of students who passed the state's curriculum tests was lower in every area. The degree in the percentages of grade except for reading where the percentage improved from eighth grade. Comparing a High-Performing and Low-Performing School school with a school in which students wun a scnooi in which students are not performing atantKceotahiehZi nfn'- snapshots of two such schools with a similar student ' majority of students from low-income families. of racial/ethmc groups and a are ! ! High-Performing As you enter the door of l\u0026amp;KrfSJ^hiimirScr^^ : Bright and attractive displays of student work a num ot activity greets your aurdcuve aispiays of student work are posted in the hallwavs'andin ^o^se as you make your way to the office. S^dents gSl ^^ou need help. The principal shares the standards for student leamine in the schnni thatj i j  c immumty and parent advice. She sueeests that vnu inX developed with : community and parent advice. She suggests that you look for the http://www.sreb.Org/Progranis/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/w, ' content standards and samples 'ooVIimV- La  rtWinrtw,wift\u0026lt;iiwSEducation's WeaK EinK: stuaent rertormance in tne Mioaie urades ix:*i Ajvi\nof exemplary work to be achieved by students that are displayed in each and every classroom. She selects a student buddy for you to follow so that you get a flavor of what going to this school is like. Jordan, your eighth grade student buddy, is bouncing in his seat as the combined mathematics and science period begins. There are two teachers and a parent volunteer to work i with 60 students during this 90 minute block of time. The students are sitting at tables that i accommodate six students.\nMs. Jones begins the period with a brief review of the previous days work on distance, : speed and force and then asks, How many of you have seen a water wheel? Very few students\nraise their hands, so she begins to elicit what students know about water wheels from pictures, : movies and stories. Students are directed to work in pairs and to identify the major characteristics of water wheels. After several minutes, students share their ideas with the whole class. i Next, each student is challenged to design an effective and efficient water wheel from the ' materials on the table. Students must sketch their design and estimate its speed and capability of lifting certain materials. After completing their sketch, they s hare their design with a partner and\ndevelop one best design from the two. The exercise is monitored by both teachers who roam the room asking questions, observing discussions and checking designs. As the noise level subsides ' and the pairs begin to complete the activity, Mr. Smith signals for attention and asks for volunteers to share how they began and completed the given task. Approximately 30 minutes\nhave gone by quickly. Ms. Jones sets the boundaries for the next part of the days task. She instructs each table (of : three pairs) to come up with one best design for a water wheel, sketch it, write why they chose it, and estimate its speed and power capability. After completing those tasks, each table must get : a teachers initial on the plan and estimate and then begin constructing and testing their water\nwheel. Ms. Jones and Mr. Smith remind the students to record the results of their water wheel\ntests in their notebooks and write their observations and summary statements after completing the tests. The room begins buzzing with ideas, discoveries and disagreements. The teachers question the groups about their designs as they circulate through the room. The parent volunteer fill s pails of water and provides an empty and a filled bucket for each table. As the period draws to a close, Ms. Jones asks for volunteers to share the results of their : experiment and any summary statements they have developed. Students are eager to share their ' results, and they speculate freely on why some designs worked and others did not. As students dismantle their designs, Mr. Smith assigns the homework for the evening. Each student is to write how they would change the group designed water wheel to make it faster and more powerful if they were to do the task again.\nDuring the teachers planning period, Ms. Jones and Mr. Smith explain that the activities\nobserved were part of the instruction designed to help students achieve the following science standards:  Students will plan and implement investigative procedures.  Students will collect data, organize, analyze, evaluate, infer and predict trends.  Students will recognize how to apply formulas and equations.  Students will identify physical properties of various materials. The observed task required students to learn about circumferences, diameters and radii and their relationship to each other as well as to rate and distance. The teachers wanted students to think about these concepts using the scientific process of hypothesizing, experimenting and  evaluating. The task also supported content and skills being used by other members of the : teaching team in an English and social studies unit on colonial America. The lesson observed was but one of several the team has planned to investigate energy and the environment. The teachers shared a checklist they used to evaluate students work during the class period. This checklist was shared with students in advance so evervone knew what was exnected. Each http://www.sreb.org/Prograins/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weakIink.htm Page 10 of 113 Education s Weak Link: Student Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM student was checked on their imUal design and estimates and upon the groups final design and justification of that design. Each student was required to recordthe resSts o^f the water Xel expenments in a latoratory notebook and to develop a summatwe statemen?bSn die experiment that explained the relationships of circumference, radius, speed and power. Ms. Jones and Nfr. Smith also discussed problems students had with the task and strengths they noted dunng the period. They explain that later, when they have time to reflect more fSly they will examine the students work closely and ask pointed quest! ons of themselves about the quality of their lesson plan and how it could be improved. ncmscives aooui me Mr. Smith will begin the next days period with a review of formulas that help calculate circumference Md energy expended. His objectives are to help students undersold why the formulas work based on thmr pnvripnpA j , uciauuiu wiiy me other applications of the relationships discovered through the water wheel task i A visit to a low performing school reveals believe works for students. an equally dedicated principal and faculty who are trying to do what they t i ! i f i I ( i I ? i j I ! 0 I i ? ^iip-//^ssw.srcb.or^rograms/MiddleGradesrWeakniii./we!ikliBk.btm D.J vuucm rcnurmance in me iviiauie Grades 2/28/99 12:41 A 0 =11 il 1 J  Ip a: Low-P^rf o r m i n g PerforminiMiddie School, a bkmkeTof'quTc  reminded by large signs that you must report to the office or be \u0026gt;khr'y, y?r the principals office, the secretary is busy dealing with students. Student fill the office, and each has a piece of paper that requires attention. After cleanng out some of the crowd the secretary buzzes the principal to let him know you have pnncipal emerges from his office, welcomes you, and suggests that you come into his office for a briefing before you visit classrooms. no The principal provides a gener^ description of the community, staff and students that is clear and knowledg^ble. He explains, because so many of our students have little structure in their lives outside of school, we believe that we must provide structure so that they have an opportunity to learn what they need to know. There is research supporting the effectiveness of structured whole class instructionespecially for low-achieving students. We strongly believe tnatisngnt.  After the briefing the principal walks with you to the science classroom, the first of four , cl^srooms you will visit He introduces you to the teacher and requests that you return to the rnU ralYif before you visit the next classroom. The teacher is completing a roll call of the class. He is about to begin a demonstration of how to construct a pulley one of Dunng the demonstration, some of the students have their heads down h\" *,S^ appears to be mathematics homework. As the questions. No one raises a hand. He then instructs : the students to open their books to chapter 8. He moves to his desk to retrieve the textbook and asks the student sitting at the back of the first row to begin readme aloud from r.hant- 8 KftP^n : minutes have gone by. to begin reading aloud from chapter 8. Fifteen classroom, and there are commercial posters on the walls illustrating the six simple machines. Classroom rules related to clothing, iSavior and wrk are^so j^ted pe students continue to read from the chapter, a paragraph at a time. When a student hesitates on a word, the teacher quickly provides the correct pronunciation. As a student completes a paragraph, the teacher asks, What is that paragraph telling us? If no one wlunteers, he selects a student to Mswer. As the chapter is completed, he tells the students to h!o* quesuons at the end of the chapter. Complete these questions and hand them in at the beginmng of the class period tomorrow. , Smdents begin to search for paper and pencils\nsome do not have either and must admit that , to the tether or find someone to gve them paper and a pencil. The class is finally working on 50 minute class period rings. Students^surge toward the hall, and the noise level nses as they chatter and move toward other classrooms The tocher and princij^ explain later that you have observed a general science class. In this\ncl^s students will ^mplete the textbook and do physical science^fOT the more advanced students) or consumer science, a course that concentrates ci health, nutrition and science project and a research paper by the i every^y s^nce for the less able student The science department examined student data to find Xw / to emphasize both process ^d  content. To that end, they begin most class penods with a teacher demonstration of an : experiment or concept, and students spend one day each week in a laboratory replicating an expenmentand recording it in lab books.  In ^ih of these schools and in the classrooms observed, teachers were planning and working to improve student achievement. One classroom emphasized student work, and the other classroom achievement. ernpr^neu siu^ni worK. and the other classroom was centered on the teacher's work. Their tchoob and teachers go about their business makes a difference in student Some differences between high and low performing schools http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.htin Page 12 of 11 3 r i?  H 1 a I\n? i 1 I aEducation's Weak Link\nStudent Performance in the Middle Grades 2/28/99 12:41 AM as Students in high performing schools are expected to do more, and high-performing schools provide more challenging curriculum. Successful schools emphasize higher level academics and the intellectual development of students in the middle grades... opposed to schools that concentrate most of their energy on social development and are satisfied with achievement on low-level skills. High-performing schools and districts align all the parts of the educational systemcurriculum, instruction, assessment and student supportand all the participantsthe community, school boards, administrators, teachers, students and parentsto achieve challenging standards. Expectations are clearly defined and widely supported. In high-performing schools, most parents and students have a clear vision and understanding of challenging standards for achievement by eighth grade. Schools, districts and states establish clear benchmarks for entrance into ninth grade and provide more time and more help for those students who have not mastered challenging content. Parents work with middle grades educators to define and achieve the standards in a challenging middle grades curriculum. Teachers in high-performing schools are prepared to teach challenging content In mathematics, science and reading and to teach young adolescents. Administrators oversee a system designed to emphasize plarming, collaboration and development of quality learning experiences by staff and faculty. Teachers and administrators believe that they can support the unique developmental needs of adolescents and offer a challenging learning experience. School boards and school and community leaders are ready to develop new policies to create a different system that ensures high performance for all students. These differences are conditions that legislators, state educational leaders, local educational leaders and middle grades educators, parents and community leaders need to consider as they work to help all schools and students become successful. Looking Ahead Three more reports will examine the current condition of middle grades education in the 15 states that comprise the region served by the Southern Regional Education Board. Observations in i schools and classrooms across the region will provide examples of current practice in the middle grades. The reports will incorporate data from the school visits to examine standards and expectations, teacher preparation and professional development and the best practices of schools whose students are achieving at high levels. I ! I i I i t- http://www.sreb.org/Progranis/MiddIeGrades/Weaklink/weaklink.htm Page 13 of 11 I i3 L. I I i i LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 i March 2, 1999 I 1 i j i t I TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Middle School Principals Dr. Bonnie Lesley. Associate Superintendent for Instruction SREB: Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades The attached second article from SREB is very important. Exit Standards for Middle School See the bottom of page 1 through the top of page 3 for a list of indicators that grade 8 students are ready academically for high school. These are exit outcomes for middle schools - for all students, not just the ones at the Pre-AP level. The percent of your grade 8 students who achieve these standards is a good measure of your schools quality. Then youll see at the top of page 4 a list of some of the structural changes recommended in our own middle school plan. Now we know the reasons for teams, advisors, and block schedules. They are of no importance out of the context of improved academic achievement. There are some profound and, yes, sometimes upsetting, information in this article, but we have to know what works and what doesnt. The discussion on page 12 about classroom practices is excellent and should guide us all as we plan for improved instruction. Your faculty should spend a lot of time answering the questions on pp. 12-13 and then reflecting on the consequences of their answers. We are lucky in LRSD. We are reinventing alLour middle schools. The trick will be, however, in preparing \"every student for rigorous work in high schools.\" Attachments BAL/rcm f rxaiaiug vuiv Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades: , Readiness for Success In the first of a series of reports on middle grades education, the middle grades were characterized as the \"weak link\" in the educational system. Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress were used to support the conclusion that SREB states should raise standards and expectations for student performance in the middle grades. This report will suggest ways that schools and classrooms in SREB states can use standards to improve achievement. Recent international, national and regional reports paint a picture of an American educational system in which students get a jump-start through early childhood programs, begin lagging behind in the middle grades and finish high school near the back of the pack. Almost 50 percent of eighth- graders in SREB states are below the basic (partial mastery) level in math, as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Students in rural, small-town locations score significantly below students in rural areas nationwide. How can we raise our studentsachievement ahd close this gap? States and districts have set content standards and goals for learning at specific grades in an effort to define what must be achieved to be ready for success. But the standards and goals often are not clear and concise and are not easily understood by parents and students. Schools and teachers have not taken the next step: converting middle grades standards into clear examples of quality work that indicate students' readiness for challenging work in high school. The examples in Figure 1, gathered by the SREB from teachers, administrators, parents and students, illustrate what students might be expected to know and to do when they complete eighth grade. In simple, straightforward language, they describe achievement goals that too few students can meet today. Have your school districts, high schools and middle schools discussed and identified what readiness for challenging work in high school means for students completing eighth grade? Are middle grades students in your community ready for challenging work in high school? How do you know? On Expectations \"There is something very important we are not sharing with our students: Not everything is going to be pizza\nsome things will be spinach. Students need to know how to determine what is important and get through it.\" A Tennessee educator \u0026gt;Teachers, parents and students often do not have clear examples of what quality work is or how to reach high standards. Without clear expectations for performance, they cannot judge the quality of assignments or real academic progress. And the expectations must be set at a level high enough to ensure that any student meeting them is ready to do challenging work in high school and then be prepared to learn after high school, either in postsecondary education or on the job. Once standards are in place and accompanied by examples of quality work, schools must be asked, \"What are you doing to help all students perform at the highest achievement levels and be ready for success in high school?\" HI Figure 1 Readiness for High School Reading Indicators  completed pre-algebra or Algebra I with proficiency score Current Performance  In SREB states 25 percent of eighth-grade students complete an Questions to Ask  Have changes been made in mathematics instruction to ensure http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinl Page 1 of 12Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades\nReadiness for Success 2/28/99 12:42 AM on an end-ol-course test  apply appropriate mathematic^ strategies to solve multistep problems algebra course and 34 percent complete pre-algebra. that all tilth-grade students will complete Algebra I orpre-^gebra by eighth grade? Are teachers asking all students to solve a variety of real-world and complex mathematical problems?  read-widely - a standard of 30 books over the course of a year - on an eighth-grade level.  Thirty-five percent of SREB eighth-grades report that they read five or fewer pages daily, compared with 25 percent of eighth-graders nationally.  At least 70 percent of students nationally are below the Nation^ Assessment proficient level in reading - a level indicating masteiy of challenging work and readiness for the next level of schooling.  Do all teachers know how to engage students in reading complex material? for example, do science teachers help students learn how to read scientific texts and materials?  find, organize and present information in writing as a response to a problem or question\u0026gt;  Forty-six percent of SREB eighth-graders report that they never have done a written report in science and 30 percent of math and science teachers say that they never ask students to write a report.  Are students asked to produce frequent, short-term writing responses in all classes? Are all students expected to do intensive, in-depth research and writing?  design, conduct, analyze and report on a science investigation  Forty percent of teachers in SREB states report that they never ask students to do an extended report on a science project, and two-thirds of students say they never have design^ and carried out their own science investigation  Are students expected to learn and use laboratory and research procedure,s in science? Are students required to develop and complete at least three science investigations each year? I f I  present an oral report that is interesting and logically developed with scientific accuracy  Sixty-one percent of SREB eighth-graders never have given an oral report in science, and 56 percent of teachers report they never ask students to give oral reports in science.  Are students required to present and defend ideas through oral presentations developed for different audiences? http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddIeGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.html Pape 2 of 12 Raising the Bar in the Middle uraaes: Keaainess lor success M.1V1  demonstrate writing competence  Nationally, NAEP trend data show that in 1996 fewer 13 year-olds (66 percent) could write clear, focused responses to different writing task than in 1984 (72 percent).  Are students asked to create, critique and summarize literary works? Are they required to use various writing strategies, such as comparison and cause-and-effect? What are the consequences of not \"being ready\"? Data from about 20,000 High Schools That Work students underscore the importance of being ready to do challenging work in high school. Ninth-graders in English/language arts courses described as basic or remedial have a 20 percent chance of attaining the HSTW proficiency goal for reading by their senior year. To attain the goal, students must meet a predetermined performance score on a test similar to the National Assessment of Educational Progress. The reading proficiency goal requires students to know how to analyze situations\norganize and synthesize written information\nand make written and oral reports. Only 42 percent of HSTW students who enroll in ninth-grade-level English courses achieve the reading proficiency goal, while 72 percent of students in accelerated or college preparatory ninth-grade English reach the HSTW proficiency goal. (Figure 2) A similar pattern is evident in mathematics. Of high school students who do not complete an algebra course equivalent to college preparatory algebra, fewer than 25 percent meet the mathematics performance goal set by High Schools That Work. Students who meet the goal are able to use concepts from algebra, statistics and geometry to reason and solve problems. Half of the students who complete a college preparatory course in algebra or its equivalent meet the HSTW performance goal by graduation. About 86 percent of those who complete Algebra II or geometry in high school meet the mathematics performance goal. (Figure 3) When High Schools That Work followed 6,000 students a year after graduation, it found that taking challenging academic courses and meeting proficiency goals gave students an edge in further education and employment For example:  Students who met HSTW performance goals and were working full time or part time earned more per hour than students who did not meet the goals.  Only 15 percent of graduates who met HSTW performance goals had to take remedial courses in college, compared with 31 percent of those who did not meet performance goals.  Only 17 percent of graduates who met HSTW performance goals were unemployed at some time dunng the year after graduation, compared with 25 percent of those who did not meet the goals.  Students who met the HSTW performance goals were much more likely (83 percent) to enroll in further study after high school than those who did not meet the performance goals (56 percent). i Getting students ready to take a high-level Enghsh course and a solid algebra course taught to college preparatory standards is the best way to ensure that they will be ready for the challenges of high school and further learning. I Why aren't students ready to do challenging work? How did we get into a pattern of lagging performance in the middle grades? There is no simple answer. There is, however, a pattern of practices in schools with lagging performance. That pattern can be altered by getting Ure right focus for middle grades education. When districts began establishing middle schools in the 70s and '80s, the focus was on a list of recommended practices and policies that would http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddIeGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinl Page 3 of 12I Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades: Readiness for Success 2/28/99 12:42 AM provide students appropriate experiences for their ages and grade levels. The recommendations became a checklist of characteristics that \"defined\" a middle school\namong them were teams, advisory' homerooms and longer blocks of time to do hands-on activities. -------- Accotnmodating versus expecting Every middle school visited by the SREB staff sorted students. For one group of students, the focus was on academic achievement and accelerated learning. For the rest, the focus was on textisook coverage, special short-term instructional programs and self-esteem improvement. In class after class, students were relearning content covered in earlier grades. High standards for all students became n reading a novel on the same theme,\" but honors students were expected to demonstrate deeper comprehension by doing more literary' research and writing. Figure 2 Percent of Students Meeting HSTW English Performance Goal Ninth-Grade Course Assignment 80% ... 72%. 60% j j5 (. I i 40% 20% 0% 19% Basic 42% Regular HighL 5 i I 1 ti Figure 3 Percent of Students Meeting HSTW Mathematics Performance Goal Courses Completed in High School 100% 86^ 80% 60% 40% 20% 24% 0% Basic yathemstics Algebra I Algebra Gegro http://www.sreb.org/Progranis/MiddleGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinl Page 4 of 12 Raising the bar in tne iviiaaie oraues\nKeauiness lui jullho -- Data from both the National Assessment of Educational Progress and the Third International Mathematics and Science Study report that sorting students leads to different expecUtions and lower achievement\nwhat is taught (curriculum) and what is expected (standards) make a difference in student achievement. i Data from the National Assessment of Education Progress show that more eighth-grade students (50 percent) in SREB states are assigned to English courses according to their ability than are students across the country (33 percent). J) , Schools that accommodate students by sorting them into different levels limit their j access to further opportunities\nstudents who are accommodated through lower license to \"hide\" from more challenging work. expectations are given a Social development versus academic performance What was missing from the checklist was the ultimate purpose of the middle school: academic achievement that would prepare students for challenging, rigorous work in high school. When parents and educators are asked about their vision for the middle grades, they frequently say that students should \"feel good about themselves,\" \"reach their full potential\" or \"enjoy coming to school.\" All of these are important, but where is the focus on learning? It is no accident that schools that focus on academic improvement have students who periorm at a higher level. No common expectations for performance Observations and conversations with students, teachers, administrators and parents in the SREB states confirm that too few students are ready for the challenges of high school. Eighth-grade students in schools visited b\\SREB staff reported that they \"read one or two books on their own during the year.' Teachers of pre-algebra and general math estimate that at least half of their students are not ready for algebra. Eighth-grade promotion policies in some states require that students must pass only two or three of the four core subjects\nparents believe that passing grades are sufficient evidence that a student is ready for high school work. N In most school systems, there are no common expectations for the content knowledge and skills needed by all students to be ready for high school work. States may have set grade-by-grade standards, but the accompanying examples of quality student work have not been set by local districts and schools. As a result, far too many students trip and fall in ninth grade as they begin the last lap of secondary education. Doing the right things with the wrong focus One of the key recommendations for having effective middle schools is to create small, personalized communities for learning. Many middle grades sites organize teachers and students into teams to obtain smaller learning units within the school. These sites also may set aside advisory periods so that students and teachers can develop closer and more supportive relationships. Vision and Purpose We want all our students to have choices when they leave this middle school. If they want to take accelerated courses, we want them to be prepared by knowing the content that they need.\" A Memphis, Tennessee lead teacher Unfortunately, having key practices becomes more important in some schools than usInglEhe key practices to improve teaching and learning. littp://www.sreb.org/Prograins/MiddleGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinI Page 5 of 12I Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades: Readiness for Success f I i If i Tecun teaching across subject areas 211^199 12:42 AM f In a 1993 study by the National Middle School Association, 45 percent of schools reported organizing tochers into teams in core academic areas. About 75 percent of schools with such teams provided two planning penods for teachers to work together. However, according to logs of team meetings the fnr.115 nf the fpam ic liV-Ak trv Ra manoninn Ptii/4A7kAkotMz^,^r,iKz. 2..* J___ ---:----::--- focus of e team is likely to be managing student behavior, filling out pai^nvnrlc and nbnn^ Cltpn uc fia1 H triro onrl  r.....___- JT__ i.'---------- - xo xmvijL yy\naiuuciu uciiAv lUK lining mil papenvork and planning events such as held tnps and assemblies. In rare cases, teams focus on examining student achievement data aniTctlirlAnt xtzr\\rV rnmnlon. a.* .^1 zs. __i_______: ---------------------------- .------- J-T ---------------------------J--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^^^*****AA***jg, jkUMvin. avmcYcxxicui u and student work .samples\non planmng and reviewing lesson strategies\nand on analvang stiiHenr responses. Yet ifisthat locus on student learning and performance that acceleraleT^ademir' achievement  ! pi f ! Guiding and advising students Likewise, the National Middle School Association study reported that in 1993 nearly half (47 percent) of all middle schools had teacher-based guidance programs, compared with 39 percent in 1988. Two-thirds of these advisory programs meet daily for 15 to 30 minutes. Adyis^ periods are supposed to provide early adolescents with social and emotional aL,4.  -----------------------------IT----------------- I _________t____________________s* ---------------Tw auviai aiiu ClllUtlUllU sufipo^jece^gry^for acadiinic. success jn school. H^iTeVer, they are more likely tn consist of roll call, school announcements and unstructured social'time for stucfents. i 5 f { If a school believes that teacher guidance is important, it will develop or adapt a guidance curriculum trv'llCAC nn lonHomiri z^ :_____r_______ , / C--------- I ----------- that focuses on academic counseling in addition to issues of concern to adolesomts \"Uniiy i 20-minute periods are not long enough to implement an effective guidance curriculum Forthat scht^ls should schedule longer periods once a week or twice a month\nteachers should work together to plan a senes of topics with well-developed lesson plans. For instance, one topic for an eighth-grade advisory curriculum might be \"What is high school really like?\" Former students might come back to tai If Ahnnt fhAir pvrvmorioflf' iirkn* +l.-zxz^ z,z.l.:-.z.  ______1 _   talk about eir experiences and what it takes to achieve in academic courses. 1 Dr. James Stigler I t I i \u0026amp; I \"I once asked a group of American teachers to create a lesson plan. They took 15 minutes to do It. ... 'Hie AfiKrican plans always say what the teacher is going to do. the Japanese plans ask wtMt the students are going to think if the teacher does this. ... Then 1 asked on of the American teachers to teach the lesson... It was a complete disaster\neverything went wrong. ... American teachers don't have any experience jointly talking about instruction. When they get together, they don't talk about lessons. They talk about all manner of other professional and personal issues but almost never discuss how they actually teach their 1 I \"Lessons in Perspective\nHow Culture Shapes Math Instruction in Japan, Germany, and the United SUtes\" The California State University Institute for School Reform Block scheduling A quote from a recent Third International Mathematics and Science Study summarizes the dilemma over time in schools\n\"It's not just how long you make it but how you make it long.\" The study found that longer classes meant more repetition and boredom if the extra time was not used effectively with specific goals in mindi ---------------------------------- Many middle schools have lengthened their classes. In education lingo, they have adopted \"block scheduling.\" There is much debate over how long the blocks should be, which courses should be taught every day and what happens to students who miss these longer classes. Teachers often say that their preparation for the change to block scheduling included one or two workshops but that they learned mostly from experience. What did they leam? Teachers say they do more projects but the .protects are_gften add-ons or time fillers and not an integral part of instnictio^ I 'he kiHs fep them\" is a one or two workshops but that they common comment. And block schedules are often just rigid as the traditional 45- to 50-minute http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddIeGrades/RaisinaBar/raisebar.html Dperiod-just longer. rxiTx 5 scheduling to improve student performance have changed 1 sgn\u0026gt;f\u0026gt;cant ways. Teachers work with students to studv fewer topics in greater depth and to demonstrate greater understanding of content through comparing. analvSng, summ^zing and rej^rting Lesson plans foci^ on what students will do rather than what the teacher will do. Students are challenged with problems and issues that have more than one solution or perspective- solutions, decide which is best and defend their choice both oraUy have changed or perspective\nTeachers and administrators who see longer blocks of time as essential to learning also emphasize the  \"g b^ed on academic purpose. For instance, EnghsM^guage sav tn tniv Tnakf rnnnArtmnc _______i- ai lo icacuci b often say to truly make connections among readin\nQ wri ting, speaking, research and grammar requires *.u  1 VI  Jr .  i^sarcn ano grammar r more time than is avmlable even in 90-nunute blocks. Schools that are focused on students and academics are more likely to allow teams to schedule learning time based on purpose rather than organizational need. man md Louisville, Ky., teams are free to create their own schedules based on their ac^emic needs. For example, math classes may be shorter (but more frequent) than social studies classes. Science classes may be longer on \"lab days.\" This level of flexibility is too rare in scnoois loaay. A Kentucky Educator i The most dranMic change due to state testing has been that classroom practice has been more content-dnven, nwre focused on what students need to know, because we reauired students to do son^thing with what they learned - make a graph, summarize what they read in their own words, organized results into a table.\" H A Tennessee Eighth-Grader . *nniV.^w\u0026lt;-^'av^\u0026lt;ir\u0026lt;'/avinw\u0026gt;v.'.v science teacher teaches real science, things that you can do, and it\ns a lot more interesting. She really n-igs to teach us. Some teachers haven't really tried to teach us  they teach the book. Good teachers want you to learn and find any way they can to help you.\" Getting itb^kward: Finding the standards that fit rather than fitting instruction to standards States and distncts have set content and student achievement standards at specific grades. But settine standards is only the first step. AlLschools need to convert standards into descrintion.sofwnrV ,SXEgc^ of all students prepmng for college and employment. When teachers have examples of the quality.ot_work ej^ted to meet the stand^ds, they will use standards iFa'annine in.stnictinn nnd ^sessing acluevement. Without ei(amples ot quality work, teachers will conPnue to plan and tSch they-^ways have and, when asked, will find a standard that fits the lesson. One teacher said \"In a middle school classroom, I can find a standard that will fit anything I plan to teach\"  use stydards in planning instruction a^ as States have developed smdards based on higher-level thinking and skills, but they may continue to use tests that measure lower-level skills, such as the ability to recall isolated facts. And in classrooms in every district and every state, teachers drill students on sample test items of isolated facts\nIn a school visited by an SREB staff member, one English teacher designed a lesson on the state standards relating to vocabulary development, writing and poetry in a way that was creative eneaeed students and resulted in an onginal poem. In the other Engl ish classrooms, teachers assigned U/rrVch^*tC' /itk vrv'oKill'an/ lictc 'inri ri Till ^\u0026gt;-5 _________i _ worksheets with vocabulary lists and drilled students on sample items from the state uA,-i . V f j' 1.  .-J ------------------1'------assessment test. While one teacher focused on havmg students actually use new words to create a poem, the others http://www.sreb.org/Progranis/MiddleGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinl Page 7 of 12Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades: Readiness for Success emphasized isolated bits of information that may be forgotten quickly. 2/28/99 12:42 AM Effecuve teaching balances the need to know and remember with the ability to apply know-ledge 1 real-world problems. When students who are achieving at high levels talk about what is different about their classes, they often say they are doing \"real science\" or using numbers that \"mean something.\" In other words, they are thinking for themselves and finding new- w'avs to use the knowledge they are acquiring. to HSgad\u0026amp;gre grg no concrete indicators or examples of quality student work, the textbook or the latest .prpgrqm^omes the curriculum and the instruction, hducators talk about the impnrtanrp nf curriculum, instruction and assessment. They say that they want to determine content topics plan experiences necessary to leam the content and check to see whether students know the content and how to use It. Eight very different middle schools in five states visited by SREB staff all have the same commercial reading program - a \"quick fix\" to low reading scores. None of the schools visited could sh^e models of exemplary student work that educators used to judge acceptable student performance If there are no specific learning goals and no examples of work that meets the goals, how can schools determine what content students need to leam and whether they have learned it? A Texas Middle School Principal 5 I M 'We have a whole quick-fix culture that says, 'Get your test scores us if you buy this program.' when other principals ask me how I turned my school around, they really expect me to say 1 bought this or that, they are really disappointed when I say to them 'We did it with a lot of hard work!' \" I n I  I i i i I f System structures that slow higher standards Schools do not exist in a vacuum. They are subject to outside forces and inside pressures. Good schools are part of a larger system that allows them to focus on what is important for students In far too many systems, the organization and policies that are designed to support successful learning often have the opposite effect. For instance, teachers know that students do not learn at the same rate. Some need more time, and some may need different teaching. Yet students are moved through the system at the same rate and in the same way. Common sense tells us that students learn better in smaller settings, but as many as 3,000 students are housed in the same building in the name of efficiency. Students who have difficulty learning need expert teachers, yet experienced teachers use their seniority to choose schools and classes with the easiest-to-teach students. In other countries, students learn more by studying fewer topics, yet in the United States students are asked to learn a wider range of topics, making it difficult for them to achieve a deeper understanding of essential concepts. Leadership Developing a sense of academic purpose and a commitment to high-quality learning for all students arises out of effective leadership. Yet very few districts have administrative support programs or match new principals with formal mentors. While principals are expected to be instructional leaders, most do little or no teaching after leaving the classroom for an administrative position. Others spend little time on curricular and instructional matters. Principals admit that they need training in how to build understanding among students, parents and teachers about what students should know and be able to do. I I 1 Leaders focus attention on what needs to be done to improve student achievement, and they make sure Jthappens. If teachers need help planning curriculum and instruction tied to example.s of high-quaEty\" performance in the classroom, good leaders find ways to provide that help. If students need more time to accomplish achievement goals, leaders find ways to add extra time. I http://www.sreb.org/ProgramsZMiddIeGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinl Page 8 of 12i\n*1 naisiug me oar lu me iviiuuie uraaes: Keaainess lor success Time 12:42 AM Controlling the use of time is a critical factor in focusing on academics and student achievement Most lu UI ling uic uoc UI ulub lo a UI luuiu laciui 111 luuuaiiig uii uuauciiues ana sluaeni acmevement y districts use the same length of school day and year for all students. But schools can control how time ,.Lr^ icncpH Tnnnftpn crbnnl c licp vtalnoKlo l/aominn timia t/^ rl/-\\ *-or.b-r. ^-u___ is used. Too often, schools use valuable learning time to do administrative tasks or for the school's convenience rather than to meet the real needs of students. Principals who are instructional leaders make sure there is uninterrupted learning time. If schools are to focus on students and academic achievement, then students who are having difficulty in the middle i^rades must be eiven extra time and every opportundv to succeed. Extra time may mean ~before-school and after-school tutoring, Saturday school and summer school: it may require different schedules for teachers and students alike. Extra opportunity may mean constant checking on student understanding and a rethinking of how content is being taught. If students cannot reach performance expectations on the first try, teachers must have time and support to find another way to help students learn. Sorting and labeling All teachers say they want their students to be creative, to be critical thinkers, to be active participants and to be problem-solvers. But how they define those terms and what they think their students will achieve are often alarmingly different. Students' opportunities are limited through sorting that begins in kindergarten and continues through high school. Students labeled as \"at-risk\" or \"disadvantaged\" often carry a more subtle label of \"can't be expected to do the work\" or \"needs to be in a lower-level class.\" Sorting ^d ladling in SREB states have the greatest negative effect on students in classes lower than \"honors\" level. Students assigned to average-ability maematics classes in SREB states scnred  significantly lower than similar eighth-graders across the United States. We should challeng^aiO. students to meet performance expectetions sinular to what is expected of students in college preparatory co^ufses. One set ot expectations and one set of criteria for quality work should be applied to all students. If we are going to group students, the groups should focus on providing extra opportunity' and extra time to accomplish challenging work, not on lower standards and expectations. A similar sorting process happens to teachers through teaching assignments. The system of seniority most often matches the newest and least experienced teachers to schools and classrooms that have students with the greatest needs. Interrupt Class? America, Yes\nJapan, No \"We measured how many times the lesson was interrupted by someone coming into the classroom or an announcement coming over the public address system. This ^ppened during 31 percent of the American lessons, 13 percent of the German lessons and none of the Japanese lessons.... They couldn't believe that someone would interrupt a moth lesson or disturb students like this.\" II ,n 'Lessons in Perspective: How Culture Shapes Math Instruction in Japan, Germany, and the United States A South Carolina High School Principal \"1 got my better teachers to teach 'other' [not honors] students, and amazingly these 'other' students passed Algebra and Algebra II. They could do it. If teachers believe they are good and students know they have good teachers, the changes are remarkable. I would change middle schools and mix students and teachers.\" I ! 1 ny http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htinI Page 9 of 12Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades\nReadiness for Success 2/28/99 12:42 AM One Texas middle school principal reassigned teachers and students as one of his first acts as principal.' Teachers who had taught the \"best\" students were assigned to \"other\" students, and test scores began to rise. The best teachers had higher expectations and a broader range of teaching strategies, and students began to meet the higher expectations. When students began to experience success attendance went up and the climate for learning improved throughout the school.  / Likewise, the teachers in that Texas middle school who began to teach \"honors\" students for the first time began to believe they were \"good\" teachers. Faculty morale went up, and teacher expectations were raised. I Changing the focus to student achievement Recently, a representative from a large urban district spoke out in frustration: \"Too many teachers and administrators just don't get it! They think that when they open the doors to the school, the kids will come whether they are doing a wonderful job or not. With choice and charter schools, that may not be the case. I ask them, 'Do you want the kids to say \"I love coming to this school,\" or do you want to hear \"I hate this school\"?' Many teachers don't understand that we could be like the dinosaurs.\" What they don't get is the importance of putting student academic performance at the center of education. ( i I Discussions about poor performance often provoke discomfort, blame, finger-pointing and fear. By providing time and help in coming to agreements on the quality and quantity of student work that is acceptable, leaders can allay fear and confusion and develop cooperation and focus. Developing, refining and updating curriculum and changing the focus to student achievement require time, expertise and resources, information and financial support National, state and local standards can guide schools, but teachers, school leaders and parents can come together to examine student performance. What all students are expected to know and do should be described by performance criteria and supported with examples of quality student work that provide evidence that students are ready to tackle challenging work in high school. An Eighth-Grade Language Arts Teacher n '/ teach eighth-grade reading improvement. 1 had 40 students on the first day of school\nsome had passed the state test, and some had not. I can tell you right now that passing the test does not mean the student can read on an eighth-grade level.\" Every middle grades teacher should know what is to be done at every grade level to ensure that all students who complete eighth grade have attained eighth-grade standards and show readiness for a challenging ninth-grade program. Meeting high expectations and challenging standards requires continuous, coherent effort and progress through the middle grades. Passing a test does not guarantee that students can do challenging work. By agreeing on examples of work expected at every grade level that correspond to expectations in \"honors\" courses, teachers can align instruction and assessment with the standards. Research Paper Assignment http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddIeGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htniI Paee 10 of 12Raising the Bar in the Middle Urades: Readiness for Success 2/28/99 12:42 AM All students will express a strong opinion or assertion and support it through research to be presented in oral and written forms. Performance Criteria $ 3 1 ! Students will:  use at least three research sources and one mteiv'iew\n complete a narrative using all standard English conventions of grammar punctuation, spelling, and word usage, as well as logical organization and coherent writing\n use a variety of thinking and writing strategies - for example, comparison and facts and details\nor opinions\n include a summary' of their research that explains how it supports or rejects the study questions or opinions  explain how the researched information is connected to the reader and author through explicit examples of the relationship - usefulness, interest, relevance. 1 I Sample Scoring Guide Advanced: The student has located exceptional informatior from a wide range of resources. The method of organizing and summarizing is ef. xtive and comprehensive. There are no English usage errors in the final product. Proficient: The student has used at least four sources for information, including an interview, that are clearly relevant to the chosen topic. The information is organized so that it is retrieved easily and can be connected to main ideas or questions under study. References are noted properly, and English usage errors are minimal. I Performance criteria not met: The student has relied upon one or two resources. The information is not well organized, and the paper lacks focusing questions or main ideas. References are not noted properly, and the report contains numerous English usage errors. No attempt or off-task: The student did not do the assignment or did not use the performance criteria guidelines. Changing old patterns What happens in classrooms in which students are challenged to do high-level work? What happens to students who are judged to \"need lower-level classes\"? There are practices that distinguish challenging high-level classrooms from classrooms in which students struggle to achieve. Some of those practices are outlined in Figure 4. There is a hidden curriculum in low-expectation classrooms for students who are thought to be less able. The hidden curriculum is built on a b^e of repetition and monotony, and it sends a message to students thatthey can't do challenging work. We can change this message to one that says \"This is what is acceptable eighth-grade work, and this is what you need to do to achieve it.\" What will it take to change all classrooms into high-expectation classrooms? i I cj http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddIeGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htniI Page 11 of 12I i Raising the Bar in the Middle Grades: Readiness for Success Fi gure -4 Classroom Practices 2/28/99 12:42 AM High-Expectation Classrooms  spend more time on learning !E I  clearly state goals and performance criteria for all students  aim for clarity and understanding of content and factual knowledge appropriate for the grade level  believe all students can do tasks and solve problems successfully  require students to think and reflect, analyze, synthesize and evaluate  use a variety of methods and materials and communicate a joy for learning and doing  provide time for students to cooperate and try out various learning strategies t! i  support and encourage a sense of teamwork and challenge all students to participate  connect learning to student lives I I Low-Expectation Classrooms  allocate more time to discipline and classroom management  go from chapter to chapter or activity to actinty without goals tied to standards  emphasize working quietly, following directions and using only teacher-demonstrat^ strategies  have fewer opportunities for students to try different learning strategies  ask students only to recall facts and follow one- or two-step procedures  substitute low'-level tasks such as fill-in-the-blanks for written analyses, discussion and in-depth study  lack enthusiasm and optimism about learning and doing among both teachers and students  focus on those students who are easiest to engage  focus on isolated skills disconnected from any meaning to students E Successful schools focus on students and learning rather than on sorting and labeling. Learning is based on challenging standards for all students, and quality is upheld consistently through descriptions of acceptable performance. Teachers know their subject and how to teach it in many ways so that all students can leam. There are successful schools and classrooms in each of the SREB states. The challenge is to make sure that every school in every state is successful with every student. E J F. 1 Asking the right questions Many educators believe that the most important part of teaching and learning is helping students know what questions to ask to get the information they need. Ensuring readiness for high school means asking schools the right questions about the middle grades. 1 i  What evidence of readiness for high school is required of every student by the end of eighth grade?  Do performance criteria describe the skills and qualities needed to do challenging work in high school?  How has the school changed what is taught, how teachers teach and how student performance is measured to better prepare all students for high school?  Are there samples of student work to show parents and students what is expected for every standard?  Is student work evaluated consistently according to known criteria across classrooms and subjects? Do all teachers expect essentially the same quality of work?  How do the standards at this school compare with those in the rest of the state? Nation? World?  How does the school make sure that all parents and community members know what the standards are?  How does the school help students who are having difficulty achieving the standards?  Does the school publish information on how many students achieve performance standards? For example, how many students complete Algebra I by the end of eighth grade or enroll in Algebra I in the ninth grade?  Does the. .school re.nort information on how different uroiins of .students nerform in different http://www.sreb.org/Progranis/MiddleGradesZRaisingBar/raisebar.htinl Page 12 of 12 auca, ncttuiucss lui OQVUCbS 2/28/99 12:42 AM subjects? For example, how many male students complete the reading and wiitin'o ......... requirements? How many female students design, conduct, analyze and report on^science expenments?  How is the school helping teachers learn to use standards and performance criteria in planning their instruction? h *6 I I Looking ahead If we want students to be focused on academic achievement, we also need teachers who believe in academe achievement and are prepared to teach content and to guide students toward high-qualitv work. Without adequate preparation and continued learning for teachers, agreement on standards is a hollow exercise. A recent Public Agenda sun-ey identified some stumbling blocks to raising expectations and improving student achievement\n Teachers generally support the call for higher standards, but they do not view low standards a.s a widespread or urgent problem\n Teachers seem more concerned about students' social skills and values than about hieh-level academe skills.  It I I a li ! Despite these discouraging findings, sgmgjniddle schools are \"reinventing\" themselves and making the changes nec^sary' to prepare every student foTn^orous work inTugE school. WrffronrPvreFinFinb tethers in these schools are involved in professional development programs that encourage them to delve deeply into their teaching and to accept responsibility tor student ----------------------------- success. Dr. J^es Stigler, who 1 ed the videotape studies of American, Gennan and Japanese classrooms for the Tmrd International Mathematics and Science Study, says the key to improving teaching in the United States is for t^hers \"to ask the question over and over: Can you think of a way to make agents learn more. \"The SREB's next report on middle grades'education will examine what teachers should know and be able to do to help students get ready for challenging studies in high school http://www.sreb.org/Programs/MiddleGrades/RaisingBar/raisebar.htniI Page 13 of 124 13/ Y7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 March 2, 1999 L. TO: Middle School Principals FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley .Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: SREB: Improving Teaching in the Middle Grades: Higher Standards for Students Aren't Enough' This article is about improving the quality of middle school teachers, and we can do a great deal in this area. 1. 2. Note the emphasis on content-specific teaching strategies on page 7. Note on page 10 that teachers may need as many as 50 hours of instruction, practice, and feedback to become comfortable using new teaching strategies.\" 3. j? f  S 4. 5. 6. Note also on p. 10 the importance of content knowledge in improving student performance. See the top of page 11 for advice to low-performing schools. See also on page 11 the discussion about teachers reading professional literature and other informal learning opportunities. Remember that I discussed with you the importance of teachers being a part of a professional learning community? See p. 12 for ideas on how to support that. H I $ 45 E 7. 8. We have to know the barriers to change. Note the bottom of p. 12 and top of p. 13 for a list. The next to last sentence is the message: Academic standards will not make a difference if policies and practices do not also change. Attachments BAL/rcm 2/28/99 12:43 AM Improving Teaching in the Middle Grades: Higher Standards for Students Arent Enough j 4 i i Recommendations ,9 How are middle grades teaHieis selected and educated, introduced into schools, assigned c!as,sroc\u0026gt;ms and_subjc5cts, and encouraged to grow profes.sionally? In two previous repf.)ris, the SREB focused on the importance Oi raising standard,s and expectations for student performance in the middle rades. But e.^f^cted to (X'rlorm at the highest levels, .shouldnt we expect ihe .same from hiacher Shouldn t we set high standards tor those who seek to become teacher\n, ' \\ v teacheix to bt' prepaixxl to teach ligorous academic oMlent and to apply research on the best teaching practices in cla,ssiwm3?  9 And shouldnt we expect I 9 Teaching in the middle grades today never Bec^e of praciices in teacher preptirdlion, licensure and assignment m elassTTOms, too many jgacher^mth^iddle^^^^^^^^^ have too little knowledge of the rubjects they ^ch n^v - have uiken ad^'anced English courses, physic.s, chemistry or college filgebra can teach seventh- and eighth-grade pre-algebra, algebra, physical science and English in most SREB states. In SREB states those who teach eighth-grade mathematics and science are less likelv than their peers nationwide to  have had co lege courses m their content area during the last two years. The results are predictable: lagging student achievement in the middle grades in mathematics, science and language arts. Do teachers have the jmntent knowledge needed to teach their assigned classe.^? ticm one SREB state were available to study teaching assignments by class. The SREB believes that if data were available throughout the region, the findings would be similar. In the state for which data were available:  Almost two-thirds of sixth-grade mathematics classes are taught by teachers with elementary education majors.  More than two-thirds of eighth-grade mathematics classes are taught by teachers who majored in mathematics or mathematics education. About half of seventh-grade mathematics classes and only one out of five sixth-grade classes have teachers who majored in mathematics or mathematics education.  In eighth-grade science, two out of five classes are taught by teachers without a science major, and only 11 percent of science classes are taught by teachers who majored in a science content area such as biology, chemistry or physics^  In grade eight, 70 percent of the English classes are taught by teachers with a major in either elementary education or home economics education. Researchers in lexci.s and Tennessee have found that studenls yvho have less effeclive teachers for even one year perform at losver levels over time., even if the quality of teaching improves in subsequent years. Teacher qualitymaitefs /or studem achievemenl.. Education Week. Feb. 18, 1998 While compiehensive legional data are not available at all grade levels, we can sav wi th some confidenix that at least a third of the middle grades teachers in the SREB states texlay hold elementary teaching licenses. A study in Kentucky also concluded that at least a third of middle grades math bttp\n//yfTirw.sreb.or^rogramsfM.iddleGrades/higher_st\u0026amp;ndards/report.htm} Page 1 of 125r Middle Grades teachers ha ve elementary cerliilcation. 2/28/99 12:43 AM Table 1* Middle Grades Classes and Teacher Qualifications Percentages of Classes Taught by Teachers with Different College Majors Subject Area, Grade Level Math, 6th Math, 7th Math, Sth Algebra, 7th Algebra, Sth English, 6th English. 7th English, Sth Science, 6th Science, 7th Science, Sth Heraentary Education 64% 31 16 22 2 82 57 36 33 24 15 Secaidaiy Education 9% 75 37 25 4 5195 4 English Education Major 6 15 Math Educaticn Major 6% 40 53 41 56 Science Education Major 43 46 48 Artsand Sciences English, Mathematics or Science Major 14% 11 18 12 56 47 11 Other** Education Major 7% 11 8 5 14 27 42 11 18 18 * Data was gathered in one SREB state ** Most of the other education majors in eighth-grade English are home economics majors\nin eighth-grade science, they are mostly health and physied education majors.  In rural areas of the SREB states, eighth- graders trail the nation in student achievement by a laiger margin than do students in urban and suburban areas of the region. In these rural areas, a greater percentage of eighth-grade mathematics teachers (29 percent) have elementary education majors than do eighth-grade teachers in the rest of the nation (16 percent). - bational Assessment of Educational Progress. 1996 In the traditional teacher-preparation program, those who wish to teach in tlie elementary grades enter a general course of study to complete institutional retjuirements for graduation. Ty'pically, this course of study takes two year,s to complete. \u0026lt;Dnce students are admitted to the teacher education program, they begin learning to teach tlie numerous subjects taught by elementary teachers. 'I'heir tdectives fire concentrated in courses on teaching methods for various academic areas, and they graduate with a major in elementary education. A Traditional Teacher-Preparation Program Bachelor of Science in Education (Elementary Education Major) By contrast, secondary et\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_380","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Planning for Program Evaluation''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Planning for Program Evaluation''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/380"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nPLANNING FOR PROGRAM EVALUATIONozo\u0026gt;o mm on 0) z Planning for Program Evaluation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 8. 9. Memorandum to designated principals from Mona Briggs, Aug. 23, 1999, providing information on standards for accreditation from ADE Memorandum to elementary staff, Jan. 20, 1999, relating to an ADE evaluation of Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) /-yy Memorandum to Kathy Lease and Ed Williams, June 29, 1999, on program evaluation with attached articles on qualitative research and an example of a research report from Austin ISD by Glynn Ligon Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, with agenda relating to program implementation E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Debbie Milam, Feb. 4, 2000, suggesting a model for the evaluation of ViPS programs /V/ Memorandum in March 15, 2000, Learning Link relating to progress made by schools implementing the ALT assessment program Document from Kathy Leasecalendar of meetings with Dr. Steve Ross since March 15, 2000\nattached planning document on program evaluation E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 24, 2000, providing information about a meeting with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss the middle school evaluation / E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23, 2000, providing feedback on proposed middle school student survey 10. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Marian Lacey, and Sadie Mitchell, June 12, 2000, from Les Gamine requesting information about the middle school evaluation 11. E-mail from Steve Ross to Kathy Lease, June 27,2000, with attached design notes for Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation 12. E-mail from Kathy Lease to her staff, Aug. 6, 2000, requesting them to place the memorandum and program evaluations on the Board agenda 13. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Gamine, Aug. 10, 2000, providing copies of drafts of the ESL and middle school evaluations\nthen his questions and her answers. 14. Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, from Kathy Lease presenting the program evaluations: Title EElementary Literacy, LRCPMSA (mathematics and science), English as a Second Language, and Middle School Transition and Program Implementation. Attached is her PowerPoint presentation: Program Evaluation.15. E-mail from Steve Ross to Les Camine, Sept. 7, 2000, giving his feedback to the program evaluation reports. i7 16. E-mail from Debbie Milam to Cabinet members, Sept. 20, 2000, requesting permission to conduct interviews of parents on the subject of parental involvement. 17. E-mail from Kathy Lease to staff, Oct. 11, 2000, advising them of an upcoming meeting with Dr. Steve Ross related to program evaluation /s-y 18. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley and Vanessa Cleaver, Oct. 20, 2000, relating to our required participation in an evaluation study conducted by the National Science Foundation 19. Memorandum to Gene Jones, ODM, from Kathy Lease, Oct. 27, 2000, inviting him to an intensive work session with Dr. Steve Ross on program evaluation /q/ 20. Document prepared by PRE in November 2000 that lists Additional Programs and Strategies Requesting Evaluation / 21. E-mail to Cabinet members from Kathy Lease, Nov. 28, 2000, attaching Dr. Steve Ross planned presentation to the Board of Education on Using Evaluation for Program Improvement: Lessons Learned 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 2, 2001, setting up a meeting to finalize CPMSA program evaluation plan 23. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 3, 2001, attaching her tentative plan 24. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine and Junious Babbs, Jan. 5, 2001, providing information relating to outsourcing program evaluations to Dr. John Nunnery 25. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 5-20, 2000, relating to submission of Core Data Elements to the National Science Foundation 26. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Apr. 14-16, 2000, relating to CPMSA program evaluation issues J 27. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine, Jan. 22, 2001, attaching a draft of the work from Dr. John Nunnery 28. Memorandum (one of several) from Kathy Lease, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting participants to the first meeting of the Research Committee /TO29. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to John Walker, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting him to participate in first meeting of Research Committee 30. Agenda for Feb. 5, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 31. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Eddie McCoy, Ed Williams, and Karen Broadnax, Feb. 16, 2001, to set up a meeting to discuss ESL program evaluation /73 32. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee setting up Feb. 26, 2001, meeting 33. Agenda for Feb. 26,2001, Research Committee meeting and sign-in sheet 34. Invoice from Dr. John Nunnery to LRSD for services rendered, February-March 2001 35. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff, Feb. 21, 2001, setting up a meeting to discuss the CPMSA program evaluation /v7 36. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, March 14,2001, providing updates 37. E-mail to middle school staff from Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 15, 2001, summarizing a meeting to plan for a Middle School Team Leaders Institute, including recognition of need to train team leaders on assessment and using data /7? 38. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff. Mar. 19, 2001, setting up follow-up meeting to discuss CPMSA program evaluation /?O 39. Memorandum to Carnegie Management Team, March 20, 2001, from Bonnie Lesley with information about counseling program and need for a program evaluation /^/ 40. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, Apr. 16, 2001, setting up next meeting on summer school evaluation and program evaluation for the National Science Foundation grant 41. Sign-in sheet for Apr. 23, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee 42. E-mail from Bormie Lesley to Dennis Glasgow, Suzi Davis, and Laura Beth Arnold, April 17, 2001, to discuss program evaluation for Element 5 of the Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project 43. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 18, 2001, relating to next steps in providing information about SAT9 item analyses for teachers 1^5 44. E-mail from Mona Briggs to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 25, 2001, relating to survey needs for national evaluation of Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project45. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary and middle school staff, Apr. 26, 2001, summarizing a large scale study that links classroom practices to student achievement in mathematics 1^7 46. E-mail among team working on CPMSA program evaluation, Apr. 18-May 2, 2001, relating to model for program evaluation and data analysis I'S'^ 47. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, May 2, 2001, with attached latest version of the Guidelines for Program Evaluations 1^^ 48. Agenda for May 7, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet no 49. E-mail from Don Crary to Bonnie Lesley, May 24, 2001, announcing that a program evaluator had been hired by New Futures to conduct the program evaluation for Safe Schools/ Healthy Students 50. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee with attached memorandum relating to next meeting on June 11, 2001 51. Agenda for June 11, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 52. E-mail from Junious Babbs to Bonnie Lesley, June 12, 2001, relating to information on program evaluation /'iV 53. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Compliance Team, June 14, 2001, with an outline of a plan for the completion of the Middle School Evaluation I 54. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, June 14, 2001, attaching a copy of final draft of Dr. Nunnerys evaluation of the mathematics/science programs 55. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to Ed Williams, July 3, 2001, requesting additional ALT reports n7 56. E-mail from Vanessa Cleaver to others working on CPMSA program evaluation, July 10,2001, requesting help in publishing a three-year progress report on the CPMSA1 ssc .1 Planning, Research, and Evaluation Instructional Resource Center 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, Arkansas, 72206 August 23, 1999 To: Principals Designated for Standards Review 1999-2000 LL- (Carver, Cloverdale E., Geyer Springs, Gibbs, Hall, King, Mabelvale E., Meadowcliff, and Pulaski Heights Middle) t 51 J1 J From: Through: RE: Mona Briggs, Technical Assistance Team Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent for PRE Standards Compliance Checklist As you know, I have invited Bettye G. Davis, the specialist at the Department of Education for Standards Assurance, to meet with us on September 29,1999, at 3:30 p.m. (IRC, room 12). In order to further your understanding of the standards for accreditation, I am providing you with a copy of the compliance checklist that was furnished to us last year. While there may be some minor changes in this years checklist, this will give you a sense of the documentation you will be collecting for the states visit. If you will take a moment and review this document, it may help clarify what is involved and may also serve as a catalyst for formulating questions that you may want Ms. Davis to address during our meeting. If you have any questions, you may e-mail me at mrbrigg@.irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us or call me at 324-2120. (If you are not able to attend the September meeting, please notify my office and give me the name of the person who will be your designee at the meeting.) I ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS STANDARDS FOR ACCREDITATION COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST LEA. DISTRICT SCHOOL  I I I 5 Grade Levels Enrollment Field Services Specialist Date Rev. 6/98 ,'' Standard Yes No EVIDENCE/COMMENTS I. GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROCEDURES 5 S A. Policies and actions are non- discriminatory and in compliance with state and federal laws.  Equity Compliance Report  Equity Assistance Center Verification B. State and National Goals I. II.A fl C. School District Goals ILB 1, The district's five-year educational plan (all schools' COE plans) has been developed, with staff and community participation. It is reviewed annually, and public meetings (district and school) are held to discuss progress. This information is published annually.  Newspaper article(s)  Date and attendees for meeting II.B f D. School District Administration II.C It s 1. School board policies  Copy of school board policies 2. Reports and records  Test results on file with ADE II.C.l II.C.2 i I 1 I5 I 3 1 J t t I if 1 I 3 standard Yes No li. The school board held a public meeting to review progress toward accomplishing district goals and accreditation.  Minutes F. School Goals 1. 2. n.c.3 LD evidence/comments The school has an appropriately developed and reviewed school improvement plan. (Reviewed under I-C)  COE plan The school has an in-depth five year curriculum review. (Reviewed under II-A-1) G. The community is actively engaged in the educational program. * Appropriate documentation H. The discipline policies are written and filed according to established 1 I. J. r.D.i I.D.2 III. V.D 4 i guidelines.  Discipline policies  Signed written statements There is a written policy that governs participation in extracurricular activities. * Extracurricular activities policy There is a written homework policy. Homework policy K. The enrollment and attendance policy is consistent with applicable laws and regulations.  Policy L. Grades assigned to students reflect only educational objectives and are consistent with laws and regulations.  Grading policy V.E-F V.G VI. VILB A 2I  I i * ______ \\ Standard Yes No EVIDENCE/COMMENTS f sI I a I I 4II ! ! 2. 3\nTime is scheduled for instruction in the core curriculum (language arts, math, social studies, science).  Schedule/ Observation Time is scheduled for instruction in the other curriculum areas as specified in the Standards.  Schedule/ Observation C. Grades 5-8 1. Instruction is developmentally appropriate.  Observation 2. Time is scheduled for instruction in the core curriculum (language arts, math, social studies, science).  Scheduie/Observation 3. At least one semester of Arkansas history is taught in grade seven or eight (or in grades 9-12).  Scheduie/Observation 4. Time is scheduled for instruction in the other curriculum areas as specified in the Standards.  Scheduie/Observation D. Grades 9-12 *(may be taught every other year) 1. Language Arts-6 units 4 units English 1 unit oral communications or Vz unit oral communications and V2 unit drama * 1 unit journalism IV. IV. 13 I 1i ' IV, IV. IV. IV. IV. 4 I3 Standard Yes No EVIDENCE/COMMENTS 1 j 5  I f s I J 'i 1 I 'll j I 8. 9. Health and Safely Education and Physical Education-} 'A units I unit Physical Education 'A unit Health and Safety Education TecA Prep and Applied Technology-9 units (EIGHT UNITS MUST BE TAUGHT EVERY YEAR.) III. GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS A. All graduates have completed a minimum of 21 units of credit._____ B. A unit of credit is awarded for a minimum of 120 clock hours of instruction.____________ C. All graduates have completed the following 15 units of credit: English-4 units Oral CommunicationsA unit Social Studies-3 units or 2 units of social studies and lunit of Vocational/Technical studies Mathematics3 units Science-3 units, at least 1 science unit in a life science and 1 in physical science physical Education-A unit Health and Safety Education-'A unit Fine Arts-'A unit . Transcripts IV. IV. I ( IX.A IX.B IX.C 6Standard Yes No evidence/comments a '^1 I 1 D. All graduates completing the college preparatory path of study have completed the following units: Science-1 unit of biology (or equivalent), 1 unit of chemistry, or lunit of physics (or equivalent) Mathematics1 unit of Algebra I (or equivalent), 1 unit of Algebra II, and 1 unit of geometry Social Studies1 unit of World History or Cultures, 1 unit of American History, 'A unit of Civics/American Government, and A unit elective Foreign Language-2 units of 1 foreign language Transcripts _________ IX. 11 i I I E. All graduates completing the technical preparatory path of study have completed the following units: Science-at least 2 units include content which is equivalent to science courses in the college preparatory track Mathematics-2 units must include content which is equivalent to mathematics courses in the college preparatory track Social Studies-1 unit of American History, 1 unit of World History or Global Studies, and at least A unit of Civics/American Government Vocational credits-4 credits in a vocational sequence are required. . Transcripts IX. I- 1 I 7I* ^5: Standard Yes No EVIDENCE/COMMENTS F. Honor graduates are selected according to the guidelines established by the Rules and Regulations as related to Act 980 of 1991. IX.  Transcripts IV. TEACHERS s Si A. Student-teacher interaction time is a minimum of 178 days. V.A.l A B. Teacher contracts are a minimum of 185 days, including 5 days staff development and in-service training. VA.2 i!  C. The planned instructional time in each school day does not average less than six hours per day or thirty hours per week. . School calendar  Daily schedule D. Student/teacher ratio: 1. Kindergarten 20/1 or 22/1 with half-time instructional aide  Annual reports/Observation 2. Grades 1-3-23/1 with no more than 25 in a classroom  Annual reports/Observation 3. Grades 4-6-25/1 with no more than 28 in a classroom  Annual reports/Observation V.A.4 V.B.2 V.B.3. V.B.4 o at s ri 4. Grades 7-12-Each class has 30 students or less\nno more than 150 students per day  Annual reports/Observation V.B.5 I 1I. 8 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 January 20, 1999 TO: Gene Parker Judy Milam Judy Teeter Sadie Mitchell Kris Huffman Pat Price Ann Freeman Kathy Lease Ed Williams Frances Cawthon FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley,, AAssss(ociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Evaluation of ELLA Please see the attached letter. You may receive questions from some of our schools. BAL/rcm ) DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL  LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 RA\u0026gt; MOND SIMON, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: January 5, 1999 ^4/V TO: Superintendents FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Kevin Penix, Assistant Dire School Improvement and Instructional Support Initiation of Impact Study for Districts Participating in the Second Year of Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) The Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) is conducting a study to determine the effectiveness of the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) training and its impact on student achievement. Teachers who. are currently enrolled into the second year of ELLA will provide data on three to five selected students in their classroom. The data collected will be cunent information from the Observation Survey and the Developmental Reading Assessment. These assessments are administered as part of the requirement for participating in ELLA and should not utilize any additional class time. Enclosed is a sample of the form that will be used to record the data on each student. Data information compiled on students who are in the classroom of the targeted ELLA teachers will be assigned an identification number to maintain anonymity and provide future follow-up studies. The assessment listed will be administered as a pretest during the first twelve weeks of school and a posttest during the first of May or prior to school year completion. A control group will also be used in reviewing the impact of the ELLA training. Again, data have already been compiled on these students as part of a random sample study in coordination with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Reading Recovery/Early Literacy Training Center. The study for ELLA is in response to the Smart Start Initiative and the accountability of the staff development being offered by the ADE to meet the needs of participating teachers. The ADE is working with the University of Arkansas Research Center in the compilation and analysis of this study. This is part of an ongoing process to assess this staff development impact on student achievement. If you need additional information or have questions regarding this study please contact either the Early Childhood Curriculum Specialist at the Education Service Cooperative in your area or contact the Early Childhood / Reading Unit at 501-682-5615. STATE BOARD OF EDI ( ATION\nChairman - BETTY PICKETT. C onwa)  Vice Chairman - JoNELL CALDWELL. Bmanl Members: ED\\M\\ B. ALDERSON. JR.. El Dorado  CARL E. BAGGETT. Rogers  MARTHA DIXON. Arkadelphia  WILLIAM B. FISHER. Paragould  LI KE GOKin. \\an Buren  ROBERT HACKLER. Mountain Home  JAMES McLARTT 111. Newport  RICHARD C. SMITH. JR.. McGehee  LEWIS THOMPSON. JR.. Tesarkaoa  ANITA Y ATES. Bentonville An Equal Opportunin Employer ! Cooperative Teacher___ Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas Impact Study 1998-99 ____________________ ^District___________________ School_________ ____ ______ LEA# Phone Students Identification # Birthdate Age Grade Check one: Gender. , Male  Female Ethnicity... Black  White  Hispanic  Asian  NativeAm  Other This is the  first year  second year student has been under the instruction of an ELLA trained teacher. Date of pretest Date of post-test Observation Survey Subtests Beavers DRA Pre Post Letter ID Word Test CAP Writing Vocabulary Dictation Text Reading Level Students Identification # Birthdate .Age, Grade Check one: Gender. . Male  Female 1 Date of pretest Pre Post I Ethnicity...O Black  White  Hispanic  Asian  NativeAm  Other This is the  first year  second year student has been under the instruction of an ELLA trained teacher. Date of post-test Observation Survey Subtests Beavers DRA Letter ID Word Test CAP Writing Vocabulary Dictation Text Reading Level Students Identification # Check one: Gender. , Male  Female Birthdate .Age. Grade Ethnicity...n Black  White  Hispanic  Asian  NativeAm  Other This is the  first year  second year student has been under the instruction of an ELLA trained teacher. Date of pretest Date of post-test Observation Survey Subtests Beavers DRA Pre Post Letter ED Word Test CAP Writing Vocabulary Dictation Text Reading Level 3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 June 29, 1999 TO: Kathy Lease Ed. Williams FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley,, zA\\Ossociate Superintendent, Instruction SUBJECT: Program Evaluation I found in my files the attached documents which may be helpful: 1. A couple of articles on qualitative research. 2. A copy of the executive summary of a research report from Austin ISD by Glynn Ligon. Please note both the content and the format. Attachment BAL/rcm 06 USING WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT TEACHING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ANOTHER WAY OF KNOWIN 107 Spindler, G. and Spindler, L. \"Roger Harker and Schonhausen: From Familiar to Strange and Back Again.\" In Doing the Ethnography of Schooling. Edited by G. Spindler. New York: Holl, Rinehart, and Winston, 1982. Stevenson, C. \"A Phenomenological Study of Perceptions about Open Education Among Graduates of the Fayrweather Street School.\" Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut, Storrs, 1979. Updike, John. Rabbit is Rich. New York: Knopf, 1981. Varenne, H. \"Jocks and Freaks: The Symbolic Structure of the Expression of Social Inlerac- A Response to Rogers lion Among American Senior High School Students.\" In Doing the Ethnography of School- Edited by G. Spindler. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1982. E.\nCampbell, DjSchuarlz, R.\nand Sechresl, L. t/ziotfrwsfwMcflSHres. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1966, p. 9. Wilcox, K. \"Ethnography As a Methodology and Ils Implications to the Study of Schooling.\" In Doing the Ethnography of Schooling. Edited by G. Spindler. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1982. Wilcox, K. Schooling and Socialization for Work Roles: A Structural Inquiry into Cultural Transmission in an Urban Community. Doctoral dissertation. Harvard University, Cambridge, 1978. Wigginton, E. Eoxfire. New York: Anchor Books/Doubleday, 1972. Wolcott, H. The Man in the Principal's Office. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1973. I I I I WILLIAM D. CORBETT If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there. The Talmud The direction of education should be based on the proven successes of the past and present. Identification of proven success, however, is not as clear cut as it would appear to be because of the complexify of the educational process and the diversity of the constituencies we serve. It is from the multitude of components that contribute to good education and the variety of efforts made by innovators that we expect researchers to assist us in mapping our course. Since educational research affects the lives of practitioners as well as the students served, it is valuable to have lucid description of the two major types of research by a person who is a recognized leader in the field. Vincent Rogers has depicted the strengths and weaknesses of both quantitative and qualitative research and offered cogent examples of each technique. The chapter should be excerpted from ASCD's Yearbook and placed on the required reading list of those who are preparing for teaching and administrative careers. Current practitioners should also read the chapter with care. Those of us who are public or private school practitioners have been both beneficiaries of sound research and victims of poor research. The very word \"research\" tends to lend authority to headlines, however outrageous, to meet the public's appetite for news: Class Size a Factor in Reading Success Class Size Not Important in Educational Achievement Open Education Proves Successful in Affective Education Research Shows Traditional Approaches Best for Basics Reading Scores Improving Study Shows High School Graduates Are Illiterate Headlines like these confuse the public and frustrate educators. They indeed embarrass serious researchers. Much of the questionable research that gains wide attention is \"so called\" hard data research. It is often dependent upon the results and analysis of multiple choice, fill-in, machine-scored tests. Deductions drawn from this type of research are statistical with seldom a careful look at the instruments used, not to mention the effects these instruments William D. Corbett is Principal, James Russell Lowell School, Watertown Public Schools, Walerlowii. Massnchusells. 108 USING WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT TEACHING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH  ANOTHER WAY OF KNOWING 109 have on the educational process. The more the multiple choice, fill-in instruments are used to draw educational conclusions, the more the emphasis is placed on them at all levels. Education, at least in the United States, is correspondingly diminished to serve these evaluation procedures. Qualitative research is much more expensive and requires unusual sensitivity and experience in both process and analysis. Let it be said that meaningful educational research of all kinds is costly and needs talented and perceptive directorship. Let it also be said that a great disservice to both education in general and to conscientious researchers in particular is done by the several who engage in shallow research. Perhaps it is time for serious researches like Vincent Rogers, John Goodlad, and others to call for a permanent blue-ribbon research monitoring committee to rank educational research according to its integrity. The committee would be ready to analyze and answer authoritatively the shoddy pieces of research that appear periodically in the news media. In this manner the word \"research\" would reacquire the respect it deserves and those affected by research would give it the attention necessary to chart the direction of education. The Price of Everything, the Value of Nothing ANNE RONEY In his essay, Vincent Rogers defends qualitative research. Perhaps his need to do so points more to certain predilections in ourselves than to deficiencies in qualitative methods. We are as entranced by numbers as crows are by shiny objects. How do we explain this attraction? Our delight with numbers probably goes back to the very moment when, as young children, we first counted six cookies on a plate or 23 cows alongside the highway or 15 days until Christmas. What precision and economy of expression! What power it was to realize that an unknown that pile of cookiescould be counted and thus controlled, manipulated to divide the pile or to win the game or to sequence time itself. So we began to attack unknowns with numbers, using ever more sophisticated calculations. In a society with competing traditions, populated by people from many nations, and striving to move forward, we encountered many unknowns or, at least, questions for which previous answers no longer sufficed. This faith in the quantitative was reinforced on every hand as our penchant for problem-solving bloomed into technology. For some of us the faith occasionally dimmed. As a new teacher, 1 was dismayed when the librarian stopped at my door, form in hand, and inquired as to my circulation total for the month. I had not kept any circulation figures, I told her, searching about in my mind for a way to construct a number. I stammered something about having 32 students and having been to the library two or three times. She said, \"Oh, that's all right. I'll just put down '150' for you. That's close enough.\" She went on her way? With her went my incorrect number, wafting its way through the bureaucratic channels, making wrong every other number it touched. Realizing how often such estimates are entered on forms, I became skeptical about numbers. They are very nearly all bail-park figures, used more for their economy of expression than for their precision. Of course researchers are not as naive about the precision of numbers as 1 was. They have devised all sorts of safeguards and hedges\nthe standard error of measurement, Type I and Type II errors, levels of significance, degrees of freedom, random selection, and so on. Each safeguard fulfills a necessary function and in so doing, makes the resultant numbers more authoritative than ever. But, transformed in analysis, the original bit of data has been so far removed from its origin as to be unrecognizable even to its mother. I Aitne Roney is Elementary Supervisor, Department of Public Instruction, Knox County, Knoxville, Tennessee. 110 4 -ft JUK  USING WHAT Wfe KNOW ABOUT TEACHING I )UALITATIVE research-ANOTHER WAY OF KNOWIN,. 111 In addition to the seduction of numbers, we must contend with both a predilection for method and the unwise application of quantitative designs. Apparently, pioneer educational researchers came from agriculture and psychology and were constantly glancing with envy at the laboratory experiments of chemists and physicists. Using these models in education, we have applied spelling treatments to classroom groups as if we were applying fertilizers to plots of corn\nand we have counted the responses of students in class discussions as if they were rats in a maze. We have thus removed the variables under study from their settingthe school or the social group, such removal being a condition of the quantitative design. Researchers have not set out to isolate their problems from context. Ideally, each problem worthy of inquiry is derived from both a situation and a review of related research and literature. But in doctoral dissertations, Chapter Twos are often deadly\nand the lines of thought connecting them to problem, methodology, and findings are likely to be less than clear and direct. In other research reports, the space devoted to the review of the literature and the rationale for the study is usually much less than , the space given to metholodogy. Preoccupied with design rather than utility, the researcher is compelled to explicate his/her mathematics for the benefit of other researchers\nthat is, to share the recipe whether or not the pudding is worth eating. Quantitative designs are often precise and elegant. We get caqght up in their tight beauty in the same way that wc admire an architect's elevation drawings, whose delineated grace may obscure the clumsiness of the resulting structure. It is lack of attention Io context and overemphasis on the means instead of emphasis on the ends that make the use of research discouraging to the practitioner. Even if early educational researchers had derived their methods from , sociology, anthropology, and history. we probably could not have escaped the American romance with quantitative methods. And would we want to? Oh, no. As Rogers pointed out, quantitative methods are effective and useful. The power of numbers is particularly persuasive, as I found on a winter morning when the heater in a portable classroom had been turned off the night before. The teacher had complained to rne (her principal) about the cold, but it was only when she sent a note saying \"It is 42 in here\" that 1 jumped up and arranged for her class to occupy the cafeteria. Numbers give substance and specificity to description\nthey support or fail to support our judgments and our hunches\nthey enable its to evaluate reported information. Indeed, a school leader would be lost without his/her quantitative litany: How soon? How many? How often? Out of how many chances? At what cost? Quantitative approaches stem from our logical and analytical ways of knowing. What they do not give us is the context, the setting, the framework of meaning that surrounds each problem and that would abTes w (frialitative methods permit the scrutiny and analysis of individual vari- ^n^jTTTijiir^reserving the setting under study. The reports of guiililntive mwirrii are written as narratives, which h^ the advantage of accessibil-itv of meaning to the reader, being full of concrete references and idenlifj-able characters. If we deal only with quantitative data, like Oscar WiIde's T^THc, weTcnow \"the price of everything and the value of nothing.\" Numbers cannot tell the whole story. It is qualitative information that irises from and addresses th'eTioIi^ic and intuitive ways of knowing that ^ic truF scientist does not fear. References Me.id. Margaret. Coining 0/ Age in Sanioo. Laurel Edition. New York: Dell Publishing Com-pany. 1961. Wilde, Oscar. Complete Works of Oscar Wilde. London: Collins, 1981, p. 418. 91.29 ' Vustin Independent School District ^ Department of Management Information Office of Research and Evaluation Drug-Free Schools 1991-92 Evaluation Report Executive Summary Author: Kristen Blis^. Program Description: The Drug-Free Schools and Communities (DFSC) Act of 1986 provides funding to school districts to combat drug and alcohol abuse on their campuses. In 1991- 92, its fifth year of funding, the Austin Independent School District (AISD) received $464,924 from the DFSC grant. An additional $165,745 was carried over from 1990-91 for a total of $630,669. These grant monies fund a wide assortment of District programs aimed at drug abuse prevention and education. Progrrim components funded during the 1991-92 school year included:  Student Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Program,  Peer Assistance and Leadership,  Conflict Resolution Project,  Student Assistance Program,  Drug Abuse Resistance Education,  Elementary Curriculum,  MegaSkills,  Office of Student Intervention Services,  Private Schools,  Education for SelfResponsibility II,  Medicine Education and Safety Program,  Parent Involvement,  AU Well Health Services Program,  AISD Campus Police, and  Read Pilot. The grant also provided for both a full-time evaluation associate and program fecilitator. Major Findings: 1. Students whose parents participated in the MegaSkills workshops had higher test scores than the national average, as well as higher attendance, lower discipline, and lower retention rates than other elementary students districtwide (pp. 26-30), 2. Both staff and PAL students agreed that the PAL program is an effective way for older students to help younger students avoid problems with drugs and alcohol. Dropout rates for secondary students served by the program both semesters were lower than predicted, and GPAs for these students were higher than their GPAs for the previous school year (pp. 10-15). 3. DARE is perceived as an effective way to communicate important information to students about the effects of drugs and alcohol by both teachers and the DARE officers, rhe officers are satisfied with the fifth-grade curriculum but believe the seventh-grade curriculum is not age appropriate and does not convey the no-use message as effectively as the fifthgrade curriculum (pp.20-23). 4. Dropout rates for all secondary students participating in the Student Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Program were below prediction, and the retention rate of elementary program participants was lower than that of other elementary students districtwide. Two thirds of the students reported that they learned about the dangers of drugs and alcohol, felt more confident, were better able to make decisions, and saw themselves as leaders after participation in the workshops (pp. 6-9). 5. High school students rank the use of drugs and drinking/ alcoholism in the top five of the biggest problems with which their school must deal while teachers at all grade levels, campus professionals, and campus administrators do not consistently rank them in the top 10 (p. 4). 6. There are considerable differences between high school students' perceptions of the prevalence of illegal drugs and alcohol on their campuses and their teachers' perceptions. Districtwide surveys found that the majority of high school teachers, administrators, and campus professionals believe the presence of drugs is staying the same, while most high school students believe it is either increasing or decreasing. More high school students believe the presence of alcohol on their campus is increasing than do their teachers, campus professionals, and administrators (pp. 3-4). 7. A number of program components were not implemented as planned, including the Student Assistance Program, Office of Student Intervention Services, and Education for Self-Responsibility II (pp. 18, 31-32,37). Budget Implications: Mandate: External frmding agency- Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1986 (Public Laws 99-570,100-297,101- 226, and 101-647). Funding Amount: 1991-92 Allocation: $464,924 Funding Source: Federal Implications: Funding of this program has contributed to increasing achievement scores and lowering dropout rates and retention rates of students in the program. Continued funding will assure that more students participate and benefit from its positive effects, Contin-ued funding and evaluation of results are imperative if AISD is to achieve Goal 6 of the AMERICA 2000 action plan that by the year 2000, every school in America will be free of drugs, as well as AISD's first strategic objective that every student will function at his/her optimal level of achievement and will progress successfully through the system. According to PL 99-570, no local education agency shaU be eligible to receive funds or any other form of financial assistance under any federal program unless it certifies to its state agency that it has adopted and implemented a program to prevent the use of illicit drugs and alcohol by students and employees. MegaSkills 1991-92 Allocation\n$40,650 Students whose parents participated in the MegaSkills workshops had higher test scores than the national averages, as well as higher attendance and lower discipline and retention rates than other elementary students districtwide. These students also showed improvement in these areas since the 1990-91 school year. Nearly all the parents reported that they would recommend the workshops others, and nearly all the principals believe it is important to continue providing the workshops. to The MegaSkills program, created by Dr. Dorothy Rich, founder and president of the Home and School Institute, offered parenting skiUs workshops to parents at 52 District schools. The series of five to eight workshops focuses on such skills as confidence, motivation, effort, responsibility, initiative, perseverance, caring, common sense, teamwork, and problem solving. Each workshop consists of information-sharing,  large and small group discussions, and demonstrations of hands-on activities (called \"recipes\") which cm be repeated at home with children. Two MegaSkills facilitators were hired: one from AISD who was paid from the DFSC grant, and one from the A-t- Coalition, paid for by IBM. Additional workshops were offered at five businesses and three neighboring school districts, but the results of this report only include students from AISD schools. Eight area businesses contributed more than $13,000 in cash, services, or facilities to the MegaSkills project: Advanced Micro Devices, DuRite Duplication, HEB Grocery, IBM, Markborough Texas/Harris Branch, Southwestern Bell Telephone, 3M, and Southwest Area Council of the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce. Additional funding in the amount of $21,980 was also provided by the Chapter 1 grant. The AISD MegaSkills facilitator sent letters to all elementary campuses describing the program and requesting signed letters of intent and leadership nominations from those campuses interested in providing the workshops. Upon completion of 10 hours of training, leaders received certification from the Home and School Institute to become workshop leaders. In 1991-92, a total of 214 District staff, campus staff, and parents received training as workshop leaders. An additional 46 leaders from 1990-91 continued to lead workshops. The schools advertised the workshops to parents through fliers, PT A or school newsletters, AISD cable channel announcements, and advertisements in the city paper. What information about drug use prevention did the program provide? The MegaSkills facilitator and the Drug-Free Schools project facilitator collaborated on an effort to expand the scope of the workshops to include more information about drug and alcohol use, prevention, and detection. During the course of the year the project facilitator left his position, but the curriculum  plan is expected to be in place for the 1992-93 school year. Evaluation A number of methods were used to evaluate the McgaSkills programs, including surveys of parents and school staff, and student success measures such as achievement, attendance, discipline, and retention rates At each workshop, parents were asked to fill in the names of their children on the sign-in form so that ORE could create a database to assess the aforementioned measures of success for the students whose parents were involved in the program. Unfortunately, because all leaders were not firm in insisting that parents fill out the fonn, many parents neglected to provide their childrens names. Therefore, the database did not contain a complete record of students potentially served by this program. The following results are based on those students included in the database. 2691.29 MegaSkills Student Characteristics Of the 1,196 elementary students included in the analysis:  5% were in pre-K, 25% were in kindergarten, 15% were in grade 1, 14% were in grade 2, 12% were in grade 3, 12% were in grade 4, 11% were in grade 5, and 4% were in grade 6 (see Figure 18)\n 15% were African American, 35% were Hispanic, and 50% were Other\n 11 % were limited English proficient (LEP)\n 46% were low income\n 30% of the students were identified as at risk\n 13 % of the students were identified as gifted/talented\nand  10% were overage for their grade. FIGURE 18 GRADE LEVEL OF MEGASKILLS STUDENTS 1991-92 2iid grade The GENESYS program examined achievement, attendance, discipline, and retention rates for the group of students in the ORE database. Figure 19 compares MegaSkills students 1991-92 attendance, discipline, and retention rates with their 1990-91 rates, and the 1991-92 rates of elementary students districtwide. Achievement MegaSkills students achievement was analyzed in three ways. Program students scores on two standardized tests were compared to national averages, to predicted scores, and to District averages. In a comparison of 1992 ITBS/NAPT achievement scores to 1991 national norms, the MegaSkills students scores were above the national average in reading in five of six comparisons, and above the national average in mathematics in all six comparisons. The 1992 ITBS/NAPT scores for these students were also examined using OREs Report on Program Effectiveness (ROPE). ROPE predicts achievement scores for the group of students who have both 1991 ITBS/TAP scores and 1992 ITTBS/NAPT scores. These predictions are then compared to the students actual scores. The difference between these two scores is called the ROPE residual score, which is based on a grade equivalent score scale. If students ROPE residual scores are far enough above or below zero to achieve statistical significance, they are said to have either \"exceeded predicted gain\" or to be \"below predicted gain.\" Nonsignificant residual scores are classified as \"achieved predicted gain.\" j MegaSkills students scores exceeded predicted levels in two comparisons, achieved predicted levels in 11, and were below predicted levels in no comparisons. The Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) scores of program students in grades 3 and 5 were also compared to District averages. The 27 I 1 (TAAS) scores of program students in grades 3 and 5 were also compared to District averages. The percentage of MegaSkills students who mastered the TAAS was higher in eight comparisons, and  the same in seven, and below in none. Anendance Compared with the attendance rates for elementary students districtwide, the rate for the MegaSkills students was higher in both the fall 1991 and the spring 1992 semesters. When the attendance rates are compared to these same students during the 1990-91 school year, attendance rates increased from the spring of 1991 to the fall of 1991, and then dropped slightly in the spring of 1992. A decline in attendance between the fall and spring semesters is common districtwide at all grade levels. Discipline The rate of discipline incidents for MegaSkills students was lower than that of elementary students districtwide in 1991-92, as well as for these same students during the 1990-91 school year. Retention Compared with the percentage of all AISD elementary students recommended for retention for the 1992- 93 school year, the percentage of MegaSkills students recommended for retention was lower. FIGURE 19 PROGRESS INDICATORS FOR MEGASKILLS STUDENTS AND OTHER ELEMENTARY STUDENTS IN AISD, 1991-92 Indicator Semester MegaSkills Students: 1991-92 MegaSkills Students 1990-91 AISD Elementary 1991-92 Attendance Rate Fall 1991 97,0%\n97.3% 96.5% Spring 1992 96.6% 96.3% 96.0% Discipline Rate Fall 1991 0.0% 0.3% 0.1% Spring 1992 0.0% 0.3% 0.2% Retention Rate Spring 1992 0.3% NA 0.4% Parent Opinion At each workshop parents were asked to complete a sign-in sheet and a session feedback form. The sign- in sheet functioned as both an attendance record and a student roster. Because the leaders did not insist that *e forms be filled out, the attendance record was not accurate. A total of 1,666 parents from more than 30 different schools completed feedback sheets evaluating the workshops.  Nearly all (90%) said they gained new information during the workshop (N = 1,646)\n Nearly all (96%) would recommend MegaSkills workshops to others (N = 1,651)\n The vast majority (80%) said the workshops helped them increase their understanding of their role in their childrens education (N = 1,372)\n2891.29  Almost half (49%) reported that since attending the workshops, they have increased their involvement at their childrens school (N = 1,339). Parents views were split in-these areas:  A third (33%) agreed that the lessons helped em teach their children about the dangers of drugs and alcohol: about one fourth (26%) selected a neutral response, and over one third (37%) selected \"not applicable\" (N = 1,315)\n Nearly a third (31%) said their childrens grades have improved since using these recipes: another third (35%) selected a neutral response, and another third (33%) selected \"not applicable (N = 1,324)\nand  A third (34%) repotted that the recipes had a positive impact on eir childrens attendance in school: less than one third (31%) selected a neutral response, another third (33%) selected \"not applicable,\" one percent disagreed, and one percent selected more than one response (N = 1,325). Parents reported at they received new infonnation and would recommend the workshops to others. In the 1992-93 school year, MegaSkills funding will be provided by both Drug-Free Schools and Chapter 2. Since the DFSC grant will continue to fund a large portion of the program, more emphasis should be placed on helping parents teach their children about the dangers of drugs and alcohol, as well as helping them identify behaviors that indicate possible drug and alcohol use. Principal Opinion A total of 37 principals\nreturned a questionnaire at the end of the year assessing the program at their school. The results indicate that of the children whose parents participated in the woikshops, most principals reported:  Improved or much improved academic work (69%\nN = 36),  Better or much better attitudes (74%\nN = 34), and  Fewer or much fewer behavioral problems (74%\nN = 35). See Figures 20, 21, and 22 for a breakdown of all responses to these questions. FIGURE 20 PRINCIPALS ASSESSMENT OF MEGASKILLS STUDENTS ACADEMIC WORK FIGURE 21 PRINCIPALS ASSESSMENT OF MEGASKILLS STUDENTS ATTITUDE ssx Neutral Much Improved 11% Better 53% 29 1 ) i Most principals also agreed agreed that\nor strongly FIGURE 22 It is important to continue offering MegaSkills at their school (9'1%- N = 37)\nThe training increased panicipating parents involvement in their childrens education (86%\nN = 36)\nMost of the panicipating parents improved or increased their communication with their childrens teachers (67%\nN = 36)\nParticipating parents seemed . -------more relaxed in discussing their children, education, and the school (76 % N = 34)\nand ^ey had seen a noticeable difference in the behaviors and attitudes of the student whose parents participated in the training (71%\nN = 34), The DFSC cost per student was $33.99 (40.650/1.196). 30 STUDENTS behavioral Fewer . 60 / Q megaskills problems About the Same \\ 26% Much fewer 1456 J4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 February 1, 2000 TO\nDivision of Instructioj FROM\njction Dr. Bonnie Leslejyy,. AAssssoocciiate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nDivision Meeting\nWednesday, February 2 Let's use our meeting this month to take stock\" of where we are on our Work Plan for 1999-2000. Please bring your copy. People giving reports need to be brief and talk fast. A 1.2000-2001 Curriculum Catalog 2. 2000-2001 Proposed Calendar 3. ESL Update 4. Middle School Publication and Plans 5. NSF Update 6. Personalized Education Plans 7. Talent Development Plan 8. Instructional Standards - Update 9. Cultural Diversity and Prejudice Reduction Training 10. Elementary Literacy Update 11. Curriculum Mapping Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Karen Broadnax Linda Austin Vanessa Cleaver and Dennis Glasgow Gary Smith Bonnie Lesley Mable Donaldson Marion Woods 12. Assessment Plan 13. Collaborative Action Team 14. Parent-School Compacts Pat Price Mona Briggs and Eddie McCoy Kathy Lease Debbie Milam and Marion Baldwin Pat Price and Leon Adams WHEW!! Some planning we need to do\n1. Schedule of summer training and notification to teachers. 2. What to do about thematic instruction? BAUadg 5 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, February 04, 2000 4:05 PM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA\nMILAM, DEBBIE LEASE, KATHY R. RE\npartnership evaluation Thanks for following up, Debbie. I think you are going to be impressed with the work that Virginia has done. I am. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Friday, February 04, 2000 10:22 AM MILAM, DEBBIE LESLEY, BONNIE, LEASE, KATHY R. RE: partnership evaluation How about Wednesday 2/9 in the morning or Friday 2/11 in the afternoon? Original Message From: MILAM, DEBBIE Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 3:59 PM To: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject\nRE: partnership evaluation okay. Let me know what is good for you. Debbie Miiam Volunteers in Public Schools Original Message From: Sent: To: MILAM, DEBBIE JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Thursday, February 03, 2000 2:56 PM Subject: RE: partnership evaluation I am finalizing it now, in between our orientation sessions on the upcoming NWEA level testing. Lets get together some time next week and you can give me some input on the final draft. There are two sections, per Julios request: Community Engagement, and Resources. Original Message From\nMILAM, DEBBIE Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 1:36 PM To:JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject\npartnership evaluation Virginia, Dr. Lesley said that you put together a great evaluation piece for the NSF partners. She thought it might be useful for our community programs and suggested I get with you sometime. Let me know when you have time to show it to me. Debbie MUam Volunteers in Public Schools 1 6 LL ^h's/oo II 1- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 4 March 14. 2000  TO: Everyone FROM\ne^)r.. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nThe Value of Assessments and Data Analysis Please read carefully the attached article about the results of a school that uses the NWEA Achievement Level Tests that you have just administered. You may also wish to share this information with your staff. 4  '^1- -ft : -J* The new assessments created tons of extra work for everyone involved, but if they help us improve and align teaching and learning, they are well worth the effort! Carrie Martin Elementarys story may help you ensure improved results at your school! Attachment BAL/rcm  # I 8ft: 3 a#\n-,\nData-Driven Success 4 when fourth-graders at Carrie Martin Elementary School made the second highest gains on the 1998 Colorado State Assessment in reading and writing, state officials wondered how we could have achieved so much so quickly. A few privately joked that we must have cheated, but one look at the data showed our changes were serious and real. Eighty percent of Carrie Martin students passed the state reading test, and 65 percent passed the writing test. This compared to 65 percent passing the reading test and 33 percent passing the writing test the year before. And it compares to statewide averages of 60 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Our success is all the more remarkable because more than 25 percent of our students qualify for the free and reduced- price lunch program, and 22 percent have special education individualized education plans. (In Colorado, special education students are required to attempt the state tests. If the tests are too difficult for a student, a zero is averaged into the schools score for that student.) How did we raise our scores so dra-matjcally? We used our assessment program to measure everything that affected student performanceTThen we changed or cut anything that didnt im-prove achievement. 1 Data-driven instruction Carrie Martin is one of 18 elementary schools in the Thompson School District, a primarily rural district of 14,325 students in northern Colorado. Frustrated with the limited information that standardized tests gave us, district officials began using Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) achievement-level tests 10 years ago, but we didnt get serious about data-driven instrucrion How one elementary school mined assessment data to improve instruction By Keith Liddle until four years ago. Thats when we started relying on pre-assessment and state content standards to identify student needs and learning styles, then using that information to plan and implement teaching strategies appropriate for each child. Pivotal to our assessment program are the NWEA achievement-level tests, which have been custom-designed to align with our curriculum and to predict how students will do on the state tests. We used the data from the NWEA tests to measure student progress and the effects of changes in die curriculum. The data also allowed us to predict performance on the state tests, to encourage students to do better, and to point out specific areas where they need to work harder. Even before we began using NWEA tests, we realized we had been focusing too much on middle or average students. If we were going to challenge all of our students appropriately, we needed to raise our benchmarks and stop teaching to the middle. We now try to teach each child at his or her own achievement level. To measure how were doing, we test children at their achievement level^which isnt necessarily their grade level. An advanced fourth-grader might take achievement tests at the sixth-grade level, while a classmate might be tested at the third-grade level. NWEA helped us set up this system by sending representatives to meet with a group of teachers from our district. Together, they drew from NWE^ bank of 15,000 field-tested items to develop math and reading tests that aligned with our curriculum. NWEA helped us develop short assessments, called locator tests or placement tests, to determine at what level each student should be tested. Charting individual students growth on achievement-level tests allows us to focus on each students needs and progress. Most students take pencil-and^ per tests in the fall and spring. At-risk studentsincluding those who score below the benchmark in the fall also take a computerized version of the tests as a mid-year assessment. Most students show progress after the fell test, and they cant wait to tell their parents and teachers about their success. The mid-year test provides the positive feedback these kids need, and most are never at risk again. TTie achievement-level tests also help us challenge our more advanced students. For example, when last years fifth-grade students broke the previous school record on NWEA math scores in 10 years, we told them, We think you can do better. We raised the bar as high as we could, challenging some students to take tests at the highest level. Our students rose to the challenge: Twenty scored above the eighth-grade benchmarks, 17 scored above the seventh- grade benchmarks, and the majority of our special education students J 30 www.electronic-school.com March 2000 t rscored at or above the fifth- and sixthgrade benchmarks. Crunching the numbers I NWEA provides ongoing help with test ' administration, scoring, and data interpretation, which helps us use the test data appropriately to improve learning. Data are collected and analyzed for the ivhgedistrict, for specific schools, for 5 'Hiferent grade levels, and for each stu- TemT Detailed test data for each student showing the students test scores and how they compare to whats expected ~are used dunng parent-teacher confer-prices. For every single student, we set gSalTthat include what the parents will HoTwhat the student will do, and what the teacher will do. If a student is below -yhrbenchmarlc, the student, the parent, and the teacher develop a personal edu-cation plan. Together, they review state -assessment scores, achievement-level test scores, classroom activities, and a variety of other factors. Then they decide on a plan that might include tutoring, summer school^ or other actions to help the student succeed. tests also enable us to provide accountability information~to our broader \u0026amp;5l!ata from the achievement-level school community. Every year, we compile a school profile and an annual report for the district, the state, and our accountability committee. This report includes an action plan, an oudine of our goals, and a report on our measured growth. Among other things, it also includes graphs of our test scores, along with breakouts of the data, such as how girls scored versus boys. Members of the accountability committee which includes staff, parents, Ttiident council members, aniad (commu- nity representative!___-u_s_e_ t_h_e_s_e _r_e_sults to evaluate whats working and to recommend changes. The committee also uses the mtormation to develop surveys that are sent to parents and teachers for more input. We analyze the information gathered from these surveys to make changes at the classroom level. Based on our survey results, teachers detemuned what fifthgraders needed to exit our elementary school. We worked backward, so each grade level was a stepping stone to the exit requirements. For example, we changed our spelling practices to improve daily writing. Each grade level was given about 20 words that are considered no-excuse words. The weekly spelling test was no longer the only criterion for the spelling grade\nif a no-excuse word was misspelled in a writing assignment, the students spelling grade could slip from an A to a C or lower. The no-excase words are cumulative, so students nnust be able to spell words required in previous grades, as well as their own. Once students understood the importance of the no-excuse words, most learned them well. Making time for tests VNo change_________ ___________ Initially, some teachers thought the comes without problems^ achievement-level tests were just another assessmentand a big waste of time. Many said, Were not going to have time to teach if we have to administer all these assessments.' To address these concerns, the districts assessment director and NWEA representatives explaiped how achievement- level tests are differenthow they would show students progress over time. We would be able to see whether our students progressed as much in grade five, for instance, as they did in grades three or tour Hearing this caused some additional anxiety among teachers, who feared they would receive poor evaluations if their students didnt progress. However, as teachers implemented the tests and COMPUTERIZED TESTING By Allan Olson I Assessment experts are just beginning to tap the potential for achievementlevel testing. The next step is to leave paper and pencil behind and move on to computerized adaptive tests that measure each individual students achievement in less time and with more reliability than anything weve seen so far. The Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), a nonprofit assessment organization that serves more than 300 member school districts around the country, is in the final stages of developing an Internet-enabled assessment system that adapts questions to the performance of each student When a student answers questions correctly, the questions become more and more difficult\nincorrect answers lead to easier questions. The idea is to help students avoid the frustration caused by too-difficult questions or the boredom resulting from questions that are too easy. These tests can be shorterand take less class timewhile still providing a highly reliable estimate of each students achievement level. Research shows that scores from an adaptive test are as valid as those from a traditional test of twice the length. As with NWEAs paper-and-pencil achievement-level tests, the computerized tests can be customized according to a school districts curriculum and state standards. Each test draws from a large, calibrated pool of questions that vary according to each students answers. No test items will be repeated for a student who takes the test more than once. These adaptive tests can be designed for both PC-based and Mac-based networks, which enables schools to give tests to whole classes of students and transmit results for scoring and analysis. Typically, these computerized adaptive tests cost less to administer than conventional standardized tests and eliminate the cost of test booklets and materials handling. Because test administrators can connect to a testing service and download appropriate testing infonnation for each student as needed, tests can be kept secure. The new computerized system, now being tested in five school districts, will soon be available nationwide. For more information, check out NWEAs web site at 6t^://mino.mi)ea.i\u0026gt;rg. Allan Olson {allon@nwea.orgj is executive director of the Northwest Evaluation Association, a nonprofit assessment organization in Portland, Ore., that serves more than 300 school districts nationwide. March 2000 www.electronic-school.com 31 II FMO PRESS STwo important new titles from Dr. Jamie McKenzie, a pathbreaking former superintendent and an inventor of leading edge school programs making powerful use of networks and information technologies. Beyont/ Tcchnofo^y Shows how to create information literate schools emphasizing questioning and research. $20.00 -180 pages 2000 ISBN: 0967407826 iJ Is HowTeacfiers Learn Technology Be?* Outlines effective professional development strategies to recruit and win support of all teachers. $20.00-180 pages 1999 ISBN:0967407818 it- r Jamie McKezie Editor From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal saw for themselves how information from the tests could be used to improve student learning, the teachers became less fearful. Still, theres no denying the fact that the achievement-level teststwo one-hour sessions in the fall and another two in the springdo take some time away from ofoer activities. To make time for the tests (and academics), we have made some sacrifices. For example, we rarely schedule schoolwide assemblies or activities that pull students out of the regular classroom and away from core curriculum. Instead, we focus on what we need to teach to meet our goals. It turns out that this has not been much of a hardship. Our surveyshow that students, parents, and teachers all want to stay focused on aca- ~demics. We decided to give up something else last yearthe Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Initially, the school board thought we needed the Iowa test to measure how schools were doing. But as board members saw how rich the achievement-level test data could be, they realized that we didnt need the Iowa test and that the rime would be better spent working on areas identified by the NWEA tests. Teachers werent the only ones who were nervous about the tests. Some parents and students also worried, esjpe-ciaUy when they realized that the district tied these test results to high school graduation requirements. We addressed this concern by educating parents about the tests and the data when their children enter third grade. Most parents are amazed to see that we can predict as early as third grade whether their child is on track for high school graduation. While this idea scares some parents at first, it also prompts them to help their child grow academically. We try to limit anxiety during testing rimes. We reassure the students that theres no rime limit\nwe just want to see this to the six days of state testing that leave students mentally and emotionally drained. http://fno.org how much theyve grown since the last test. Stu Jents who have had experience To order books call toll free 1-888-453-4046 Purchase securely online http ://f no. org/books. html with these achievement-level tests typi-cally look torward to each testing time. They vvarit to be able to prove what theyve learned and what they know. Overall, the test administration is not as grueling for a child as other tests can be. A student can usually complete a test in 45 to 60 minutes. Because reading and math tests are given on separate days, testing takes two days. Contrast Beyond testing Of course, no single test can guarantee success. But weve used the achieve-ment- level test results to work with our entire school communitystudents, parents, classroom teachers, district administrators, and othersto measure the effects of different strategies. By measuring before-and-after test results, for instance, we found that a strict discipline program, coupled with incentives, led to higher student achievement. Students who come to class ill-prepared, for example, or who talk without raising their hands or dont stay on task, get a check. Students who have fewer than three checks each quarter are rewarded through recognition, additional recess time, and other bonuses. Test scores also improved after we increased homework for all students even for kindergartners. Every night, our students are expected to write a paragraph and read for 30 minutes. Homework also includes activities such as going to the grocery store to estimate how much selected items will cost and to compare that estimate to the total. As these activities increased parent involvement, parents have requested guidance in monitoring their childrens efforts, So we developed a system in which teachers send home a weekly sheet that tells what each child is doing, gives a status on assignments, and notes any problems, discipline or otherwise. Parents dont have to wait until the end of the quarter to know how their child is doing. Achievement-level testing allows us to measure the success of every initiative. These tests keep us on track and allow us to create higher standards for otjr students. And, weve found, when you have higher standards, students rise to meet them. Keith Uddle (Iiddlek@ttiomp5on.k12.co.us) is principal of the Carrie Martin Elementary School in Loveland, Colo. Editors Note: For a discussion of the technology of data mining, see Smart Data: Mining the School District Data Warehouse,  Electronic School, September 1999. I i I I I I I I ( I I I I I I I I ( I j f I K'    I I I j I 5 ! 1 32 www.electronic-school.com March 2000 I i I L Compliance Report Information Section 2.1.1 We have met with Steve Ross on the following dates since March 15, 2000: May 5, 2000 Leon Adams and PRE Staff to discuss Title I student achievement issues June 23, 2000 Ed, Virginia, and SteveInformation on schools August 4, 2000 Phone Conference with Steve Ross re: Program Evaluation August 25, 2000 Steve RossProgram Evaluation August 31, 2000 Steve Ross^Title I/Program Evaluation September 1, 2000 Conference call with Steve Ross and Dr. Camine re: $20 million ADE loan October 18, 2000 Steve RossProgram Evaluation October 20, 2000 Conference Call with Steve Ross re: Program Evaluation November 2, 2000 Steve RossProgram Evaluation November 17, 2000 Steve Ross, Kathy Lease, and Compliance Committee November 30, 2000 Steve Ross-Program Evaluation December 1, 2000 Steve RossProgram Evaluation December 15, 2000 Steve Ross and Compliance CommitteeConference call with Kathy Lease because of ice storm Program Evaluation Agenda Data Collected Data In Process Future Data Collection PreK-3 Literacy Plan 1. Fall 99 and Spring 00 Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment (OS/DRA) 1. Spring 01 Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 1. Longitudinal study of impact of PreK-3 Literacy Plan using 4th Grade Benchmark Scores. 2. Fall 00 Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment (OS/DRA) 2. Reviewing impact of PreK-3 literacy plan using growth data from Achievement Level Test (ALT) 2. Longitudinal study of impact of PreK programs on student achievement using OS/DRA, Benchmark, and ALT data 3. 99-00 Climate Survey of parents and teachers 3. Impact of summer school on achievement using a comparison of Spring 99 and Fall 00 ALT scores. 3. Impact of Extended Year schools on achievement using ALT, OS/DRA, and Benchmark scores 4. Promotion Rate 5. Attendance 6. Percent of students eligible for Free and Reduced-Cost meals 7. Demographic data: race, gender 8. Special Populations: Special Needs Students, Limited English Proficient National Science Foundation Project Components (K-12) 1. Attendance 2. Percent of students eligible for Free and Reduced-Cost meals 3. Demographic data: race, gender 4. Special Populations\nSpecial Needs Students, limited English proficient 1. Annual updates for SY 2001-2002 (attendance, demographics, special populations, promotion, free and reduced meals, teacher professional development and certification) 2. Identifying trends in math achievement utilizing SAT-9, ALT, Benchmark, CRT, Explore, Plan, ACT, and Advanced Placement Test scores 3. Identifying trends in science achievement utilizing SAT-9, ALT, CRT, Explore, Plan, ACT, and Advanced Placement Test scores. 4. Identifying outcomes of SMART using fall and spring ALT scores 1. Longitudinal study of trends in math achievement by race and gender utilizing SAT-9, ALT, CRT, Benchmark, Explore, Plan, ACT, and Advanced Placement scores 5. Promotion Rate 6. Teacher professional development 7. Teacher certification 5. Identifying outcomes of After School Science Club utilizing attendance rosters and student survey 6. Identifying outcomes of professional development utilizing ALT and end-of-unit math and science CRT scores. 7. Identifying outcomes of professional development utilizing teacher survey data from end-of-unit math and science CRTs 8. Climate survey (teacher, parent, student, administrator) 9. Middle School Survey: Math and Science items (teacher and student perceptions) 8. Identifying teacher/student perceptions of newly implemented science curriculum using middle school survey data. 9 10. Seventh Grade SEPUP Survey (Fall 00) 11. Teacher survey, grades 2-8, at end of each math and science module 12. SAT-9 (math and science reasoning), grades 5, 7, 10 13. Math Benchmark Exams (Grades 4 and 8) 14. End-of-Math-Module CRT (Grades 3-8) 15. End-of-Science Unit CRT (Grades 3-8)______________________________ 14. Math ALT (Grades 2-8)__________ 15. Science ALT (Grades 3-8)_______ 16. Algebra I ALT (Grades 7-11) 17. Algebra II ALT (Grades 9-11) 18. Geometry ALT (Grades 9-11)_____ 19. Biology ALT (Grades 9-11)_______ 20. Physics ALT (Grades 10-11)______ 21. Chemistry ALT (Grades 9-11) 22. Advanced Placement Tests 23. Explore (Grade 8)_______________ 24. Plan (Grade 10)_________________ 25. ACT (Grade 11)________________ 26. Math course completition and final grades (Algebra I and II, Geometry, Concept Geometry, Trigonometry, Calculus, Statistics) 27. Science course completition and final grades (Biology, Physics, Chemistry) 28. Impact of SMART summer program using pre and post test scores 29. Impact of After School Science Clubs using 8 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, March 24, 2000 1:16 PM LEASE, KATHY R. RE: Steve Ross I would love to join you, but I am in another meeting in a few minutes on a grant proposal. I wish I had known. Original Message From\nSent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Friday, March 24, 2000 11:14 AM LESLEY, BONNIE Steve Ross Bonnie, Steve Ross is in town for a meeting that his wife is attending. He is coming by about 1:00 to visit with me about Middle School evaluation. Could you join us? If so. I'll let you know when he gets here. Thanks, Kathy Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 9 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, May 23, 2000 4\n55 PM LEASE, KATHY R. Middle School Survey I do not feel that the questions on the survey forms give us much information about the middle school transition issues-which, I thought, was the reason for the survey-to use in the middle school evaluation. I suggest some of the following be added or used instead of those on the general sheet. 1. I want to know if kids like the way that math (and English and science) are taught this year, as compared to last year. 2. I want to know if kids felt adequately challenged by the instruction they received. Was it too difficult? too easy? interesting and engaging? 3. I want to now if they prefer hands-on, group activities or for the teacher to direct the class through lecture and recitation. 4. I want to know if they had adequate amounts of meaningful homework. Was it challenging and interesting? 5. I want to know if they feel that their teachers care about them. 6. Do they like working with a team of teachers? 7. Have they had opportunities to participate in intramural activities or sports? 8. Have they had opportunities to participate in clubs? 9. Are the number of periods in the day about right? 10. Do they feel they are being well prepared for the next grade level? for high school? 11. Do they like their elective classes? 12. If they need extra help, do they get it? 13. Is time used wisely? too many free periods? field trips? videos? 14. Are kids well behaved in the school? 15. Is the principal or assistant principals visible to the students in the halls? cafeteria? In other words, is the middle school restructuring working as planned? The questions should be about curriculum, but also about the other components of the middle school plan. Did anyone consult with Linda Austin about these surveys? She's the expert and has sample forms for surveys. I am very worried now that at this late date these surveys cannot be done before the students depart for the summer. I thought they had already been done and the forms had been collected. I only got these drafts to review today. Please keep me informed about where we are. 1 10 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Monday, June 12, 2000 3:30 PM CARNINE, LESLIE V.\nLACEY. MARIAN G.\nMITCHELL, SADIE AUSTIN, LINDA RE: Middle School Evaluation Implementation and Evaluation? Kathy Lease is supposed to present the program evaluation in July. I tried to schedule a meeting with her and Ed last week to see where they are on this, but Kathy left town, and we didn't have it. I'll catch her later this week when she returns. Original Message- From\nSent: To: Cc: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Monday, June 12, 2000 3:22 PM LESLEY, BONNIE\nLACEY, MARIAN G.\nMITCHELL, SADIE AUSTIN, LINDA Middle School Evaluation Implementation and Evaluation? I know you heard the request for the plan and / or information on what we believe is working and what plans we have for an evaluation. I think we are still in good shape on this issue and Baker is not pressing. I also think we should keep this issue in \"front of us\". 1 11 LESLEY, BONNIE From\nSent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Monday, July 31,2000 9:03 PM ADAMS, LEON\nMcCOY, EDDIE FW: Design Notes FYI-Here are the notes from Steve Ross. He wants to meet on August 25 (is that Friday?) at 1:00, if thats OK with us. Unless I hear from you. Ill tell him OK. KL Original Message From: Steve Ross-f\u0026amp;MTI^mwhbi Sent: TuesdayvJui To: LEASE, KATlXR. T7000 4\n5^M iemphis.edu] \u0026lt;mailto:[SIVITP:smross(g).metnphis.edu1\u0026gt; Subject: Design Noles' Hi Kathy, Good to see you last week. Attached are my notes. Please distribute to Ed and Virginia. Turns out that I wont be able to meet on 8/4. However, perhaps you could identify a time for a speaker phone call the following week, and we can determine status of the project. Let me know if there are any Unknown Document questions about the notes. Thanks! 1 Kathy, here are my notes on the research plan. Basic Design is Program-Matched Control School with 9 SFA School/9 Controls Leon Adams will provide qualitative confirmation of the initial matchings and history of implementation in grades within schools. Ed Williams will examine 1996 SAT data to ensure that matched pairs were equivalent at baseline. Units of Analysis: Students nested in schools nested in programs Dependent measures: All subscales of all available test data Pretest (Covariate) 1996 SAT, Grades 2-5, Reading/Language Posttests 1997 SAT (Grades 2,3*) 1998 SAT (Grade 3) 1999 SAT (Grade 5*) 2000 Tests Observation (K, 1, 2) ALT (2,3,4,5*) Benchmark (4) Pretest score from 1996 Analyses 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Covariance/longitudinal: Treatment x Year (1997, 1999) on SAT for 1999 fifth graders with pretest Covariance/By Year: 1997 3'* graders with pretest\n1999 fifth graders with pretest No covariate/Grade by Year: Treatment by Grade (2,3) in 1997\nTreatment (Grade 3) in 1998\nTreatment (Grade 5) in 1999. Observation x Grade (K, 1, and 2) in 2000 ALT by Grade (2, 3, 4, 5) in 2000 (Also, separate covariate analysis in Grade 5) Benchmark by Grade (4) in 2000. Special Analyses Repeat above disaggregating for ethnicity, LEP, and no Mobility (1 grade enrollment at school) Factor in implementation scores provided by Memphis. 12 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:04 PM TRUETT, IRMA\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA\nWILLIAMS, ED Memo for Board Agenda Meeting Importance: High Dear Folks, Attached is the memo I drafted for the Board agenda. Virginia, would you and Irma look it over and make any necessary changes? Irma, will you take it down to Bonnie, get her initials, then deliver it to Bev before noon on Tuesday? If you all have questions, let me know. I can make revisions tomorrow night or you all can make the revisions, just let me know what your suggestions are. We can wait to turn it in until Tuesday, as long as we get it there by noon. Ed and Virginia, what Dr. Gamine said he wanted for the agenda and board meetings is just the executive summaries, the conclusions, and the recommendations. We need to keep the recommendations very general, such as request that the curriculum division make additional recommendations on ....or study the possibilities of... I feel sure that Bonnie wont have enough time to react to all the reports to make specific curriculum and instruction recommendations. She will need to see the reports, but I want to see all final versions fkst. I can check my email every night. This will really be a tight schedule and may require some midnight oil, but we have to meet this deadline. The only extra time we might buy is to give them the reports in the Friday package, but I would really like to have them ready for Thursday night. Keep me posted!!! Hang in there everybody!! Kathy Bd Rpt Aug 2000 prog evat.doc 1 13 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE. KATHY R. Thursday, August 10. 2000 11:06 AM CARNINE. LESLIE V. RE: program evaluations We don't have any national comparison data for ESL. Our consultant from Austin was supposed to send Ed some studies, but he hasn't done so. We'll do some web searches and see what we come up with. We'll also see if we can come up with some national sources on Middle School to add. Ed, Eddie and Virginia stayed late last night. I told them they had to bring their pj's and couldn't go home until these reports were finished. We are still getting corrections. I just found out that Dodd's DRA scores were incomplete. That means all of that data has to be recalculated-never ending story. That omission impacts the Title l/Pre-k-3 evaluation and the ESL evaluation. We'll keep you updated on the latest versions. The time of day is printed on the bottom of the reports so you can discard accordingly. We've gotten no feedback from Bonnie, but we are routing the reports for final review to as many of the curriculum folks as are in the building (workshops going on today!). Karen Broadnax has already been in to add her changes. Later, KL Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Thursday, August 10, 2000 10:09 AM LEASE, KATHY R. RE: program evaluations As you would guess I had only a very brief look at the report and my only reaction at this time is the language assumes we may be different. What I'm suggesting is that the Middle School report suggests the change from Juniors Highs was because of.... If you look at national data the concern about middle level education and middle level youngsters is very consistent. People feel much better about early childhood, elementary and high school than they do about middle or junior high. Most researchers suggest this is because of the age and maturity issues plaguing these young people. Age of raging hormones...! Obviously your lead statements should be neutral rather than conclusive. I had a similar thought when you wrote about ESL, etc. Are those youngsters really different from their counterparts nationally or are we seeing lower achievement than the national data???? Based on what you indicated the district program may be better than or worse than. Any idea which??? Obviously if I'm correct you may want to color the recommendations differently??? Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Thursday, August 10, 2000 9:02 AM CARNINE, LESLIE V. program evaluations Dr. Carnine, Here are the first two program evaluation reports. Bonnie is not in so I wanted you to be able to glance at them to see if they pass muster. The other two are on their way after a few other corrections are made. Each report will have a cover page for Board. Kathy  File: Executive Summary ESL 99-OO.doc   File: Executive Summary Middle Level 99-OO.doc  Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 14 Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 August 24, 2000 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent, PRE THROUGH: Dr. Leslie Gamine, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent, Curriculum and Instruction SUBJECT: Program Evaluation In accordance with the research agfenda adopted by the Board of Education and recommended by the Superintendent and Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction, the Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department is presenting its findings from the first year of program evaluation of the four areas designated for the research agenda: Title l/Elementary Literacy, Little Rock Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRPMSANSF Grant), English as a Second Language Program (ESL), and Middle School Transition and Program Implementation. In order to carry out the program evaluation plan, data had to be gathered in three categories: participation, perception, and performance. In order to collect data on the performance aspect of the evaluation, it was necessary for the district to implement a new, comprehensive assessment plan. This plan is ready for full implementation with the 2000- 2001 school year. Benchmark data is now available and growth comparisons can begin for the 2000-2001 school year. Also, data was collected in the areas of participation and perception for several of the programs scheduled to be evaluated. Recognizing that program evaluation is an on-going process with continuous refinements, the Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department is presenting an executive summary of each of the four program evaluations, along with conclusions and recommendations. Program Evaluation Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District July 2000 When gathering data for program evaluation, three areas are assessed:  Participation  Performance  PerceptionParticipation consists of...  Who was involved?  What is their gender?  What is their race?  What school do they go to?  What choices did they make regarding curricular, co-curricular, or extra-curricular activities?Performance consists of. . .  Test Scores iwBenchmark Exams ^SAT-9 ^ALTs i*-Explore  Grades  Enrollment  RatingsPerception consists of. . .  Expectation  Application  Acquisition  AttitudeProgram Evaluation Agenda 1999-2000  Middle School Transition  NSF Grant  ESL Program  K-2 Literacy PlanLESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Tuesday, April 04, 2000 4:13 PM LEASE, KATHY R. Projects Dear Folks: I know that we have a lot on our plates right now. Here is a list of the current projects that I know about and projected due dates. If you have others, please email me. Mona- Lit Review on Middle Schools-April 24 Work with Ed on Draft of Middle School Evaluation Draft-Due May 1 Final Pieces of CM, the plan for June 5, and Implementation Plan for Procedures for Credit by Examination-To Bonnie and me by April Eddie- Title I /PreK-3 Evaluation Plan-Draft Due May 1 Lit Review on Successful Programs in Low-Performing Schools or Program evaluation of Title I schools Yvette-Benchmark and End of Course Training- Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent next year-April 28 14 for review something similar. Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc,lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 LRSD Assessment Plan Using Assessment to Enhance Student AchievementEssential Purposes of Assessment  Improvement of Student Learning  Improvement of Instructional Programs  Public Accountability, Confidence, and SupportThe design of our assessment plan is guided by the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan...  2.6 No barriers to participation by qualified African-Americans in extracurricular activities 9 AP courses, honors and enriched courses and the gifted and talented program  2.7 Improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students  2.7.1 Assess academic programs for effectiveness in improving African-American achievementif not effective, modify or eliminateRDEP, continued.  2.8 Promote and encourage parental and community involvement and support in the operation of LRSD and the education of LRSD students  5.2. La. By completion of the third grade, all students will be reading independently and show understanding of words on a pageRDEP, continued...  5.2.1 Primary Grades  5.2.l.d. Identify clear objectives for student mastery of all three reading cueing systems and of knowing-how-to-leam skills\n 5.2.l.g. Monitor student performance using appropriate assessment devices\n 5.2.1.h. Provide parents/guardians with better information about their childs academic achievement in order to help facilitate the academic development of students\nRDEP, continued...  5.2.2 Intermediate Grades  5.2.2.a. By completion of the sixth grade all students will master and use daily higher level reading comprehension skills for learning in all subject areas, for making meaning in real life experiences and for personal growth and enjoyment\n 5.2.2.e. Monitor student performance using appropriate assessment devices\n 5.2.2.f. Provide parents/guardians with better information about their childs academic achievement...RDEP, continued...  ra  5.2.3. Secondary Schools  5.2.3.a. Adopt as a goal that upon graduation all students will read independently with comprehension in all subject areas and be proficient in language arts, as necessary to be successful workers, citizens, and life-long learners\n 5.2.3.f. Monitor student progress and achievement using appropriate assessment devices.RDEP, continued...  5.3 Mathematics  5.3.2. Develop appropriate assessment devices for measuring individual student achievement and the success of the revised curriculum.Other guiding documents that impact assessment decisions...  Strategic Plan  Title I/K-3 Literacy Plan  NSF Grant  ACTAAP (State Accountability Plan) - Benchmark exams - End-of-Course exams - SAT-9Proposed Modifications to the LRSD Assessment Plan:  Individual pre- and post-assessments for Kindergarten and 1 st grade  Individual pre- and post-assessments for 2nd grade with G/T sereening second semester (CRT and Raven)  Pre- and post-criterion referenced tests to measure individual student growth from year to year (grades 3-11)LRSD Assessment Plan, cont cl... State Required Assessments^  SAT-9 norm-referenced test for grades 5, 7, and 10  Primary benchmark exam (grade 4)  Intermediate benchmark exam (grade 6not yet developed)  Middle Level benchmark (grade 8)  End-of-Course testsAlgebra I, Geometry, and LiteracyLRSD Assessment Plan, contd... District Coordinated Classroom Assessments  Performance assessments aligned with Benchmark assessments and End-of-Course exams  District developed CRTs measuring attainment of state standardsLittle Rock School District is committed to monitoring the individual academic growth of every student, and our assessment program must meet that need.Students use tests to ansyver these questions : a  Am I learning what Im supposed to learn?  Can I do what Im supposed to do?  Am I trying as hard as I can?  Should I try harder?Teachers use tests to ansyver these questions:  Is each child growing in what he or she knows and can do?  Is my teaching/instruction helping this group of students to be successful?  Do any of my students need assistance from a special program?  What changes do I need to make in my instruction?Parents use tests to ansyver these questions: sW ' '  How is my child doing?  How is my child doing compared with others?  Has my child mastered his/her grade level skills?The Board uses tests to ansyver these questions:  Is the program of instruction working?  Are our students meeting or exceeding the standards?Administrators use tests to ansy\\^er these questions:  What staff development is needed?  How and where should we alloeate resourees?State and community use tests to ansyver these questions ?  How well is the district doing its job?  How do our schools and district compare with others?What skills does our community expect our students to have?  Literacy skills  Problem solving skills  Ability to work togetherSchool Report Cards.... High Stakes Accountability  Accountability for individual schools  Who is not achieving? - Identify by name all students who are below proficient level  Why not? - Curriculum - Instruction - Assessment  What are we going to do about it?Paradigm Shifts  Bell Curve - Normal distribution continues to fall into predictable patterns unless interventions are made.  The New Paradigm - Standards-driven system - Smart Start belief systemWhat is a standard?  What we want students to know and be able to do  Common assessment of students 5 performance: create tests worth teaching to  Externally set criteria for passing (a rubric/scoring guide)Standards-Driven Belief System  Effort-based achievement  Clear expectations to students  Clear content standards  Alignment of assessment with curriculum and instruction  Adequate amount of time  Honest feedback about progress  Multiple opportunities to demonstrate what students have learned.Teaching Toward Tests Worth Taking...  Academic Content Skills - Charts, graphs, number line, value of money, fractions, addition, subtraction, estimation, measurement - Editing skills, specific content from reading material (3 types of texts), vocabulary, main idea, plot, character, setting, elements of style, using resource material (dictionary) Process skills - Drawing a conclusionbest answer/most reasonable - Probabilitymost likely what is missing/wh^i^ needed - Reading strategiescontext clues, drawing conclusions (main idea), inferring information: predicting, understanding why the author wrote the material, and sequencing events Problem solving skills: organizing infonnation from one or more sources/eliminating unnecessary information/defending a position (specific to material provided)/ comparing or contrasting Writing process skills: prewriting/editing/revisionChildren's self-esteem gets better yvhen they see themselves getting better, Heidi Hayes JaeobsWhat are the essential questions about assessment?  What do we want to accomplish with our assessment plan?  What is the purpose of the assessment system?  What do we want to do with the information?  How do we value the Benchmark exams?Essential Questions... continued  What difference will the assessment system make in the educational experience of the students?  What difference will the assessment system make to the classroom teacher?  Does the assessment system prepare students for high stakes exams?  What skills are required for teacher and student success?7 Steps to Increase Student Achievement... 1. Acknowledge where you are. 2. Analyze where you are. 3. Align teaching with assessment. 4. Assess in a manner that is the same as on high stakes testing. 5. Attitude is everything all the time. 6. Accentuate your focus on testing strategies. 7. Activate a plan that will meet the needs of your learners. Charity Smith, ADE15 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Friday, September 08, 2000 3:37 PM 'Steve Ross' RE: Program Effects Thanks for you emails. Both of them were well stated! KL Original Message From\nSent: To: Cc: Subject: Stevi ThflfJ 'Tsmrossi iphis.edu] __ [y? September 07, 2000_^26 PM l/carnine@lrsdadm.LRSD, 'ar.us Program Effects rK12,AR.US I have read three of the recent program evaluation reports completed by your research department. They appear to be of very good quality--well-written, clear, and comprehensive. There is substantial rationale, both logical and empirical, for giving programs time to impact student achievement. The first stage of impact is program implementation, the next is changing instruction and/or conditions for learning, and after these effects occur, achievement may be impacted. In our Memphis study, it took at least tvzo years for school reform programs to show/ positive results. In fact, after the first year, achievement scores went down! This same pattern was replicated with three different cohorts of schools. I will be sending you a copy of that report, which should be completed by 10/1/00. 1 16 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday. September 27.2000 6:33 PM MILAM. DEBBIE RE: parent involvement surveys Oh, and 1 love the idea! Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: MILAM, DEBBIE Wednesday, September 20, 2000 4:11 PM LESLEY, BONNIE CARNINE, LESLIE V. FW: parent involvement surveys Bonnie, I think you're aware of this already. Do you see a problem with it? If not. I'll send the survey to you when we finish the draft tomorrow. Frances says it's okay with her. In fact, she offered to help interview parents. Debbie Miiam Volunteers in Public Schools Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: MH HE fednesday, September 20, 2000 1J,\n! MITCHELL SAnir PAWW P9r6ht involvement surveys AM ^TRANCES H.\nLACEY, MARIAN G. Dear Sadie, Frances and Marian, Our Collaborative Action Team (CAT) would like to conduct oral interviews of parents on the subject of parental involvement. We'd like to have volunteers in a few schools on Wednesday, October 4 as parents come in for conferences. We will not have enough volunteers to cover all schools so we'll want to select at least one elementary, middle and high school, with some geographic diversity. Would this be alright with you? can run the survey by you tomorrow if you don't see a problem with this. We want to start collecting information on parental involvement since it is our major focus. Thanks, Debbie Mi lam Volunteers in Public Schools 1 17 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Wednesday. October 11,2000 5:41 PM WILLIAMS, ED\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA\nMcCOY, EDDIE CARNINE, LESLIE V.\nLESLEY, BONNIE Regular meetings with Steve Ross Importance: High We now have our meeting scheduled with Steve Ross. Please plan to work from 9:00 until he decides to leave on October 18th. We will review with him all revisions of the program evaluations and go over any new data (just in case any is available by then). We will meet in room 12. Thanks, KL Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Monday, October 23, 2000 5:01 PM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA RE: Washington meeting Thanks, Virginia. Original Message ______ From: WOOlCVtRGlNIA Sent: To: ' Subject: Friday, October 20, 2000 11:46 LESLEY, BONNIE- Cl EAJ FW! WSShington meeting ^vANESSA\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nCARNINE, LESLIE V. I have continued my email conversations with Dr. Jason Kim of Systemic Research and made arrangements to have all the materials sent directly to me from the December Sth CPMSA Kev Indicator and Evaluative Study Workshop for Data Managers and Evaluators. In addition, Jason says I will have access to Linda Crasco for any questions I may have. This is great because she has worked with me when I first came on board last year and we have a history of good communication. Her input will give me acess to group discussions where evaluators share \"experiences and issues in core data collection, analysis, utilization, and local evaluation.\" (I took that right off the workshop outline.) In addition, Jason may also be able to send me whatever is collected from the other members of my cohort that includes Beaumont, Dayton, and Montgomery, all of which initiated their programs in 1998. I have conveyed these details to Julio and assured him that (1) he can depend on me to benefit from this workshop, as NSF intends, even though I will not be able to attend in person, and (2) I will make sure that valuable strategies related to core data and local evaluation are implemented here in Little Rock. He has responded that this \"indeed reflects your full understanding of the role of the evaluator in the CPMSA undertaking.\" So. I think its covered from all aspects. Now if you want to send Mona Briggs to take notes it's your call, but it may not be necessary. However, you may want to talk to Vanessa as she also talked to Jason about alternatives related to her needs from the SR workshop. Original Message From: Sent\nTo\nSubject\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA Thursday, October 19, 2000 7:51 AM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: Washington meeting You see, this is why I said to Vanessa that you would have a plan! This is a good idea and I support it. Original Message- From: Sent: To: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, October 18, 2000 12:56 PM CLEAVER, VANESSA\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject: Washington meeting What if we send Mona Briggs and Ken Savage to the Washington meeting to represent us? Both understand at some level the kind of data that NSF likes to collect, etc., and Mona is great at taking notes. What do you think? Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501/324-2131 501/324-0567 (fax) 1 19 Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 To\nGene Jones, ODM From: Kathy Lease, Asst. Supt., PRE Date: October 27, 2000 Re: Program Evaluation i We are meeting as a department with Dr. Steve Ross on November 2 at about 9:00, depending on his arrival time from Memphis. We are doing intensive work on each program evaluation to begin the revisions based on the new data that has come in. We will be meeting in Room 12 at the IRC. We would love to have you join us for the day. We will be meeting with Dr. Ross every two weeks through December. I will give you a complete schedule so that you can join us whenever possible. Most meetings are on Thursdays, except for November 19**^. i Call and leave me a message, if you can come. I will be at a meeting in North Carolina until Wednesday. I understand you really left town! We are anxious to hear about your trip. We look forward to seeing you. C: Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent Ms. Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent Mr. Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent Mr. Brady Gadberry, Associate Superintendent Dr. Don Stewart, Associate Superintendent 20 Additional Programs and Strategies Requesting Evaluation Planning, Research, and Evaluation November 2000 SMART After School Science SECME Vital Link Benchmark Open Response Study for math Elementary Summer School Middle School Summer School High School Summer School Learning to Cope with Differences Alternative Learning Environments Lyceum Scholars High School Academic progress of ALC and ACC Charter School Hippy (as needed for Federal reporting) CAT Scottish Rite Reading Program Voyager Accelerated Reader Campus Leadership Team Survey Climate Survey 21 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Tuesday, November 28, 2000 4:31 PM BABBS, JUNIOUS\nFRANCES CAWTHON\nGadberry, Brady L.\nHurley, Richard\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nLeslie Carnine\nLINDA WATSON\nMARIAN LACEY\nMilhollen, Mark\nSadie Mitchell\nSTEWART, DONALD M.\nVann, Suellen Steve Ross-Program Evaluation.ppt Steve Ross-Program Evaluation.... KL FYI-Here is a copy of Steve's presentation to the Board. 1 Using Evaluation for Program Improvement: Lessons Learned Steven M. Ross Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of MemphisI. -It\nI li I 1 Types of Evaluation Formative: Improving developing programs 3 I a 55 How are we doing? I J  Summative: Judging completed programs How did we do?The Evaluation Process t t  stakeholder Buy-in I  Evaluation Questions - Instruments - Data Collection - Analysis - Report IReporting I  Executive Summary  Introduction/Purposes  Evaluation Questions  Instruments  Procedures  Data Analysis  Results  ConclusionsConsiderations/Suggestions ( 1 I  Evaluation is not sufficient in many districts/ schools.  Evaluation needs to be ongoing.  Programs alone do not increase achievement.  It generally takes more than two years for programs and strategies to increase achievement. IWhat does increase achievement?  Improved teaching  Teacher buy-in  Improved school climate  Principal leadershipr Additional Suggestions: Form a research committee One or more Board members Assistant Superintendent For PRE and designated staff I Selected administrators, parents, students (should have research interests/expertise)Responsibility of Research Committee b i  Committee meets monthly  Reviews reports Initiates and plans new studies Focuses on applying research results to decision making  Board Member(s) serve as liaison to full board IReporting to the Board I  Spread out the presentation of research reports at Board meetings - One per meeting limit (unless there are special circumstances) IResearch Briefs  Research Briefs should be prepared by PRE for Board members who need information in a short amount of time I  Briefs will be highly readable and focus on major findings and implications I22 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, January 02, 2001 3:39 PM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA CLEAVER, VANESSA\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nGILLIAM, ANITA NSF Program Evaluation Virginia, I know that Julio is going to want us to produce our program evaluation plan very soon. Please plan to meet with me and Vanessa and Dennis very soon to get this plan developed. Send me what you gave him previously, please, so that I can see what is lacking. Anita, please schedule a meeting for all of us asap. Thanks. Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501/324-2131 501/324-0567 (fax) 1 23 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Wednesday, January 03, 2001 2:55 PM LESLEY. BONNIE RE: NSF Program Evaluation prof dev. evaluation plan.doc Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, January 02, 2001 3:39 PM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA CLEAVER, VANESSA\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nGILLIAM, ANITA NSF Program Evaluation Virginia, I know that Julio is going to want us to produce our program evaluation plan very soon. Please plan to meet with me and Vanessa and Dennis very soon to get this plan developed. Send me what you gave him previously, please, so that I can see what is lacking. Anita, please schedule a meeting for all of us asap. Thanks. Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501/324-2131 501/324-0567 (fax) 1 The following plan was submitted January, 2000 upon request by Julio. Julios site visit statements indicate he feels we have achieved these goals. While that is a testimonial to our presentations during the site visit, it is not entirely true that we have maxed out on this plan. You may want to ascertain that records developed in preparation for the 2000 site visit and housed in a Math Dept, computer file will be integrated with the district professional development data base at some time in the future. This integration would permit analysis by grade level, by school, by individual teacher etc, in relation to certification and to total hours of professional development as well as to various program implementation initiatives. You may want to consider how to assess the relationship between outcomes from various program implementation initiatives and professional development using the current data filing system. As you re-write this plan, it might help you to know that other funded programs have the capacities identified in the following plan and that is why they were included in ours. If our NSF professional development data was stored in the Districts professional development database we could access it as part of the identification of outcomes for any program initiative by teacher, by grade, by class, by school, etc. At the present time we are not able to do that. We can only offer a global participation report such as we gave during the site visit. While I am not minimizing the importance of doing this for our site visit, it does not permit any analysis in relation to specific outcomes of various initiatives. Julio saw that. What he did not see and we did not offer was the electronic inability to go beyond the fact that 238 3\"* grade teachers received 3 hours of Investigations training on August 10, 1999. I am painfully aware that folks are real tired of hearing me fuss over this so I am glad to have your energy and guidance. Evaluation Component: Professional Development and Certification of Teachers of Math \u0026amp; Science Procedures have been established to collect relevant quantitative data from (1) the database maintained by the Professional Development Division of the LRSD, and (2) records maintained by Instructional Resource Center personnel responsible for providing professional development related to CPMSA activities. These sources provide incomplete archival data for NSF reporting. Therefore, a rudimentary record keeping procedure has been implemented to document activities until procedures can be developed to collect the comprehensive data necessary for Core Data Elements reporting and other NSF reporting parameters. The initial process of collecting district-wide demographics has begun to identify data for the baseline school year of 1997-98, the first year of 1998-99, and the second year of 1999-20 to date. This activity will continue across each succeeding year of the grant. Data has been and will continue to be, disaggregated by elementary, middle, and high school levels. The total number of instructors teaching math and science will be identified as well as the total number of those certified in math and science areas. Across elementary, middle, and high school categories, total number and percentages will be computed to identify the total number and percent (1) teaching math and science, (2) certified to teach in math and/or science areas, (3) completed less that 60 hours of professional development, (4) completed more than 60 but less than 120 hours of professional development, (5) completed more than 120 but less than 200 hours, and (5) completed more than 200 hours of professional development. This information will be displayed in table and figure form (graph with accompanying table) for the baseline year and each succeeding year of the project. In addition, custom-designed figures will identify demographic trends by displaying the percent of change from the baseline year to year five (2003) of the project. Formats for the tables and graphs used to clearly and concisely display data in this category can be viewed in the Program Evaluation Record. The process of collecting district-wide demographics has begun to identify data for the baseline school year of 1997-98, the first year of 1998-99, and the second year of 1999-20 to date. This activity will continue across each succeeding year of the grant. Data has been and will continue to be, disaggregated by elementary, middle, and high school levels. The total number of instructors teaching math and science will be identified as well as the total number of those certified in math and science areas. Across elementary, middle, and high school categories, total number and percentages will be computed to identify the total number and percent (1) teaching math and science, (2) certified to teach in math and/or science areas, (3) completed less that 60 hours of professional development, (4) completed more than 60 but less than 120 hours of professional development, (5) completed more than 120 but less than 200 hours, and (5) completed more than 200 hours of professional development. This information will be displayed in table and figure form (graph with accompanying table) for the baseline year and each succeeding year of the project. In addition, custom-designed figures will identify demographic trends by displaying the percent of change from the baseline year to year five (2003) of the project. Formats for the tables and graphs used to clearly and concisely display data in this category can be viewed in the Program Evaluation Record. 24 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Friday, January 05, 2001 2:15 PM CARNINE, LESLIE V.\nBABBS, JUNIOUS John Nunnery We are on board with Dr. Nunnery. He sounds like he will really be great. Having a public school background, he is very familiar with the time constraints, stakeholder issues, and politics. I am FedExing him a box of background materials to get started on. He will only be in Missouri for 2 or 3 weeks, then he will join his wife in Virginia. He is doing some consulting work for Johns Hopkins and the Memphis City Schools, but it sounds like he works hard and fast. Let me know any questions you have. Kathy Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501-324-2122 (VM) 501-324-2126 (Fax) krlease@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 25 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject\nLESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, January 20, 2000 8:05 AM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA RE: CORE DATA ELEMENTS good, Virginia. Thanks. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Wednesday, January 19, 2000 4:46 PM CLEAVER, VANESSA LEASE, KATHY R.\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nGLASGOW, DENNIS\nWILLIAMS, ED RE: CORE DATA ELEMENTS I have been in contact with Michael Flynn at QRC about the changes He and Kevin Greenberg were identified at the NSFconference as contact personnel for evaluators. However, you should forward me whatever you get from NSF just to be sure. At this time, I am using a hard copy of the main menu and each page of the computer spreadsheet to organize required data. I have much of the data now and will have the remainder ready to submit using the electronic format in plenty of time to meet the deadline which is three months away. The core data elements (CDE) are just that - the core. They constitute a small subset of information currently contained in our existing Program Evaluation Record. Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2000 8:02 AM To:CLEAVER, VANESSA\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA Cc: LEASE, KATHY R.\nGLASGOW, DENNIS Subject: RE: CORE DATA ELEMENTS Let's put on our agenda what we are going to do now that Dr. Johnson is leaving. We have a major problem to get the work done to ensure a good report. Original Message From: Sent: CLEAVER, VANESSA Wednesday, January 05, 2000 4:31 PM To: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Cc: LESLEY, BONNIE\nLEASE, KATHY R.\nGLASGOW, DENNIS Subject: CORE DATA ELEMENTS I received, today, updated information on the scope and content of the CDE activity for the 1998-1999 school year. The memo states that several of the items contained in the draft version (which we received in October) have been revised. You may have also received this information. Let me know if you did not and I'll forward a copy to you. 1 26 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Sunday, April 16, 2000 12:55 PM JOHNSON, VIRGINIA RE: This Week-end Electronic dissemination is great! Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Friday, April 14, 2000 6:36 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: This Week-end Well, for #2 its back to basic summative/formative - Participation, Performance, Perceptions. I have a few ideas on #3 related to disseminating A\u0026amp;l electronically in a systematic manner as well as prepatory to planning activities. Bytes of A\u0026amp;l data as they emerge rather than in huge lumps. These bytes might be more effective if they contained an implications for practice attachment directly following A\u0026amp;l, ideally prepared by you so application in the field could occur swiftly and with the appropriate endorsement from administrative personnel. An electronic approach is very likely to read if it takes this format while print materials are easy for all to set aside. Both would be good. Given what you have sent, I will not write, just think and send helpful (hopefully) thoughts. Going home to Bob and Sophie now. See you at 2 on Sunday. Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 5:21 PM To:JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject: RE: This Week-end I just looked at my notes. He wants: 1. List of the program components-not just what we are funding from NSF, but what he called the LRSD Agenda for Mathematics and Science. 2. Description of the design to collect data on these for program evaluation. 3. Description of the procedures to feed the leadership with analysis and interpretation of data necessary for decision-making. Original Message From: Sent: To: LESLEY, BONNIE JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Friday, April 14, 2000 6:06 PM Subject: RE: This Week-end Great! Of course we need something for now and always in this type of environment you need to evolve as you go. I have in my mental computer sketched out a brief overview of the components addressed in CPMSA program evaluation and the rationale for their inclusion (basically the 8 components (see Status Report table of contents) were identified by NSF as necessary but not sufficient). 1 I noted last night that you had a list in the Compliance Report on page 55 under formative evaluations that might be a good place to work on that on beyond necessary into sufficient territory. We do have an established record, congruent with NSF requirements, but it does not move on beyond into the area of strategic plan implementation etc. Given that this is sometimes designated turf, it can be clearly defined who and how this on beyond Component 8 evaluation is accomplished. It may be that the first segment of this would focus on summative evaluation, the necessary 8 components, (I can draft that) while the second and major focus, would be on formative evaluation (you could draft this). Is this a reasonable starting point? If it doesnt come together in a way that will influence Julio positively, we can go back to the drawing board. Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 4:42 PM To: JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject: RE: This Week-end I can help you write that last piece. I'll just make up something for now. We can refine it in real life. How will that be? From\nSent: To: Subject: Original Message JOHNSON, VIRGINIA Friday, April 14, 2000 4:38 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: This Week-end I plan to work at a down town office were I have privileges and access to all equipment. Also have proof reader lined up who has worked for me for over ten years. Access to this building is just impossible. My home phone is 221- 9750 and my cell is 590-8217. If you do indeed come to the IRC to work that would be much more facilitative for me. Let me know. Probably will work both days. Want to have the Interpretation of Test Results report Julioized to reduce froth at the mouth syndrome. Sorry, this mechanism really does work to reduce the stress but it is so politically incorrect. Now my notes on the 3''*^ segment you asked me to do read major components of data, dissemination of findings to others Do you want to give me any other thoughts you had to guide me in producing what you need and had envisioned. I plan to work till 6ish. -----Original Message From: LESLEY, BONNIE Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 3:09 PM To:GLASGOW, DENNIS\nCLEAVER, VANESSA\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA Subject: This Week-end I am taking stuff home to work this week-end. If any of you are going to be here, call me, and I'll come here. I have my lap top at home and will periodically check e-mail from there. Or you can call me if you 2 need me. 868-4289 I have Cabinet Monday morning and a meeting all afternoon Monday with Sadie on the CLT Institute. If there is stuff that I need to review before we mail it, you HAVE to get it to me now or over the week-end. Otherwise, we have the same situation that we need to avoid-sending stuff as is because 3 27 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LEASE, KATHY R. Monday, January 22, 2001 11:23 AM CARNINE, LESLIE V. WILLIAMS, ED\nJOHNSON, VIRGINIA FW: achievement gap charts Importance: High sample_charts.doc Kathy Thought you'd want a preview of what we are getting from Dr. Nunnery, our program evaluator. Original Message From: John Nunnery [mailto:john_nunnery@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 4:05 PM To: KRLEASE@IRC.LRSD.K12.AR.US Subject: achievement gap charts Attached is a Word file with some example achievement gap analyses based upon the Stanford 9. \"Standardized Achievement Gap\" is the effect size of the black/white difference in scale score means, disaggregated by FAR and Pay. (White Mean minus Black Mean divided by Population Standard Deviation from the norm manual. The resulting numeral can be roughly interpreted as the difference in \"years in achievement\" between black and white students. For example, a value of+1.0 means that white students, on average, perform nearly one full grade level above black students. A negative value indicates that black students outperform white students. As the example charts show, LR school district had a very large achievement gap in 1997, but by 2001 the gap was completely eliminated in math and reading for FAR students!! Modest improvement was evident for Pay students. As we discussed,the analysis for Pay students is problematic because of the wide range of incomes in the Pay category and the likelihood that White Pay students' families have higher incomes than Black Pay. These charts are very encouraging and compelling. I look forward to receiving the 7th and 10th grade data. Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 1 28 January 24,2001 Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Larry Buck, Principal Henderson Middle School 401 Barrow Road Little Rock, AR 72205 Dear Mr. Buck: The first meeting of the Little Rock School District's Research Committee will be held on February 5, 2001 at 4:30 in Room ?? at the Instructional Resource Center. This committee will function to review and discuss the districts research agenda. Your participation and input are vital to the success of this committee. I look forward to seeing you at the meeting. A tentative agenda has been planned for the meeting that will allow us to establish some organizational guidelines and set up our future meeting dates. If you cannot attend, please call me at 324-2121. Sincerely, Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent 29 January 24, 2001 Planning, Research, and Evaluation Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 Ct kxxz)  1 i Uta Q.cy-'v-tC' II Mr. John Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear Mr. Walker: The first meeting of the Research Committee for the Little Rock School District will be held on Monday, February 5, 2001 at 4:30 in the Conference Room at the Administration Building. This committee will function to review and discuss the districts research agenda. We would be happy to have you or your representative observe the work of this committee. Our district is committed to improving student achievement, and this committee will work toward that goal. I look forward to seeing you at the meeting. A tentative agenda has been planned for the meeting that will allow us to establish some organizational guidelines and set up our future meeting dates. If you cannot attend, please call me at 324-2121. Sincerely, CllvtUi Kathy Lease, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent 30 Little Rock School District Research Committee Agenda February 5, 2001 Establish Mission/Purpose Review reports and research briefs Initiate and plan new studies Focus on applying research results to decision making Board member serves as liaison to full Board Review Implementation of Section 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Discuss Committee Decision-Making Process Review and discussion of reports Acceptance of report by vote of committees voting members (excluding ex officio members) Confirm Committee Organization Standing agenda Review of prior meeting and unfinished business Review of new research reports Suggestions for new district research Impact of reports on the Revised Desegregation and Education plan Preparation for Board meeting Additional ideas/suggestions Assistant Superintendent for PRE organizes and facilitates meetinffs' / ) c 7^ 03 i^, 1,/^SD Ul c.^^ Jo\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_367","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Student Academic Improvement Plans (SAIPs) Using Data to Improve Individual Student Performance''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Student Academic Improvement Plans (SAIPs) Using Data to Improve Individual Student Performance''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/367"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nSTUDENT ACADEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS (SAIPs) -USING DATA TO IMPROVE INDIVIDUAL STUDENT PERFORMANCE0-1 ozo5o mm z o in Student Academic Improvement Plans (SAIPs)Using Data to Improve Individual Student Performance 1. 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to Division of Instruction staff and others, Nov. 15,1999, providing information on new requirements from the state on a personalized education plan, appointing a committee to develop a plan, and stating the committee charge Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, requesting approval of the attached administrative regulations (IHBDA-R2) and review of other information E-mail to Dennis Glasgow, Patricia Price, and Suzi Davis, Sept. 15, 2000, requesting that they develop sample SAIPs for the teachers to use ''7 Memorandum in Sept. 20, 2000, Learning Links to all principals from Bonnie Lesley stating a philosophy relating to the SAIPs Memorandum in Sept. 20, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals from Patricia Price clarifying the use of data in SAIPs and attaching sample SAIPs Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to all middle school principals from Suzi Davis providing information on SAIPs and attaching sample SAIPs Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to all middle school principals from Suzi Davis on how to use the SAIP form for parent conferencing Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to middle school principals on how to use the SAIP form for middle school mathematics, how to use the ALT data to interpret need, and including a sample SAIP E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 21, 2000, from Lillie Carter expressing appreciation for the copy of the SAIP philosophy and the sample SAIPs 10. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 27, 2000, from Eleanor Cox expressing appreciation for the SAIP philosophy and for the sample SAIPs 11. E-mail to middle school principals, Sept. 29, 2000, from Suzi Davis providing more assistance with SAIPs 12. Memorandum to Pat Price, Pat Busbea, and Ed Williams, Apr. 3, 2001, with attached document from Connecticut on interpretation of the DRA and use of that data with SAIPs1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 November 15,1999 TO: Gary Smith (or designee) Mable Donaldson Patricia Price Leon Adams Karen Broadnax Eddie McCoy Vanessa Cleaver Linda Austin Sadie Mitchell (or designee) Everett Hawks Marion Baldwin Suzi Davis I FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Personalized Education Plan The states ACTAAP plan states the following: An academic improvement plan means a plan that details supplemental and/or intervention and remedial instruction in deficient academic areas. One shall be developed for each student no performing at the proficient level in every portion of the criterion - referenced examinations. Our 1999-200 Work Plan includes the following priority: 9. Develop Personalized Education Plan design for K-12 students for fall 2000 implementation. Dr. Carnine has stated more than once that'he envisions a personalized Education Plan for every student - not just those who are not performing at the proficient level. I think we can learn a lot about how to think about such plans from our colleagues in special education, so Dr. Smith may wish to add one or more to the committee. We should also add Clementine Kelly and other teacher representatives, and you need to be sure to include an ODM representative, plus some parents since the students plan development must certainly include parents. Personalized Education Plan Memo November 15, 1999 Page Two I request that Gary Smith call the first meeting, and then you all decide who should chair the greater committee. Your charge includes the following: 1. Determine the full committees membership. 2. Conduct research to determine what the critical attributes will be of the LRSD Personalized Education Plan. What are other Districts doing? 3. 4. 5. 6, 7. 8. 9. Will ADE publish a model? Review Mable Donaldsons directory of Personalized Education programs to consider available options/interventions. Consider how planning of electives at the middle school level fits into the plan. Consider how planning for graduation fits into the plan. What should the Boards policy say? The regulations? Design the process/procedures/forms. Design the training/professional development. Propose the necessary budget for implementation. 10. Lay out the plan to secure the support of teachers, students, and parents. 11 .Write a handbook for teachers and a brochure for parents. All this work must be completed by the end of June, but there's lots to do - especially communication to and from teachers - so we should get started now. I request that you provide me with frequent updates on how you are doing. Also, please let me know how you want me to help. Thanks to all of you in advance for the work youll do on this challenging project. We want to create processes that ensure the effectiveness of the PEP's not just create another paperwork exercise. BAL/rcm Cc: Les Carnine Kathy Lease Junious Babbs Suellen Vann Brady Gadberry Victor Anderson Linda Watson I2 TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 August 24, 2000 Board of Education ^r. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction THROUGH: Dr. Les Gamine, Superintendent, Little Rock School District SUBJECT: Student Academic Improvement Plan Act 999 of 1999 requires that schools develop student Academic Improvement Plans for all students not performing at grade level (K-4), those not proficient\" on any part of Benchmark examinations at primary (grade 4), intermediate (grade 6), and middle (grade 8) levels, and those not scoring at the \"proficient\" level on End-of-Course examinations in literacy, Algebra I, and Geometry. One of the priorities in the 1999-2000 work plan for the Division of Instruction was the development of a plan and process to comply with the mandate. Dr. Gary Smith chaired the committee (see names attached), and they involved a broader group of staff and parents in their design work. The administrative regulations (IHBDA-R2)to implement this plan are attached for the Board's review. Attachments BAL/rcm STUDENT ACADEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN (SAIP)- DRAFT COMMITTEE - Gary Smith, Janice Wyatt-Ross, Susan Colford, Eddie McCoy, Kathy Tatum, Everett Hawks, Mable Donaldson, Pat Price, Karen Broadnax, Leon Adams, Marion Baldwin, Jim Fullerton, Jim Fullerton, Ada Keown, Gail Bradford, Vanessa Cleaver, Linda Austin, Suzi Davis, Dennis Glascow, Gloria Billingsly, Joevelyn Elston, Cassandra Norman, Mona Briggs REGULATION - Act 999 of 1999 requiring Student Academic Improvement Plan for students not performing on grade level (K-4), not proficient on any part of Benchmark (primary, intermediate, middle), students not scoring proficient on End-of-Course exams in Literacy, Geometry, Algebra OUR CHARGE - To develop a plan and procedure to meet the requirements of Act 999. Specifically\nCONSIDERATIONS___________________ 1. Determine critical attributes of a P.E.P. COMMENTS________________________ Must be skill specific. Use a pre-assessment/post-assessment process. Must be user friendly and not overburdening to teachers. Must identify deficits and develop goals with suggested strategies. 2. How do electives at middle school and graduation planning fit? Should augment strategies recommended in SAIP. 3. What should the regulations say? 4. Design a process, procedure, and forms 5. Design training and professional development 6. Determine budget See attached draft. See attached draft. See attached plan. See attached budget considerations.I TRAINING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRAINING NEED FOR TEACHERS Process and procedures of SAIP Interpretation of assessment Development of strategies RESOURCES AVAILABLE SAIP committee to train trainers to train school site teachers. _________________ Planning Research, and Evaluation staff to train trainers to train school site teachers. Curriculum specialists, Special Education teachers, GT specialists. Embed in all curriculum trainings. Include The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual (and other text resources) in schools professional libraries. Secure The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual computer version for access by teachers. Computer access to The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual and interactive WEB site for the posting and reading of strategies. Develop interactive WEB site for the posting and reading of strategies.________ Computer services to train trainers to train school site teachers in the use of software. BUDGET - APPROXIMATE ITEM SAIP forms in triplicate_ The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual - computer version COST PER ITEM .10 $36.00 $190.00 QUANTITY 20,000 One per school (52 schools) One per school (52 schools) TOTAL COST $2,000.00 $1,872.00 $9,880.00 Additional costs to be identified: Development of interactive WEB site Materials for staff development Refreshments for staff development Stipends for teachers to attend ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS Parents can be informed of the process for SAIP via District wide publications, WEB site, television station, PTA meetings, etc. Parent/Teachers conferences would need to be scheduled to assure time for teachers to have assessment results available to use in SAIP. Develop processes to produce individual student printouts of assessment results on a SAIP template and/or available on disk, allowing teachers to utilize computers to create computer documents of the SAIP. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IHBDA-R2 STUDENT ACADEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN (SAIP) In compliance with Act 999 of 1999, elementary classroom teachers and both middle and high school teachers of English language arts and mathematics will develop a Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) for each student who  is not performing on grade level (K-4)\n is not proficient on any part of the states Benchmark examinationsprimary (grade 4), intermediate (grade 6), middle (grade 8)\nand  is not scoring proficient on End-of-Course examinations in literacy, geometry, and/or algebra. Grade-level performance in grades K-2 shall be defined as performing at or above the readiness level on the Developmental Reading Assessment. Grade-level performance in grades 3-4 shall be defined as performing at or above the national median on the Achievement Level Tests (ALTs) in reading, language, and mathematics. Schools and individual teachers are encouraged to develop plans for additional students who, in their judgment, require remediation or intervention. The Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) will document a students achievement through District-adopted assessment tools, consideration of personalized education services (special education, English-as-a-Second Language, Title I, gifted programs, etc.) identification of areas of need, specific skills to improve, strategies that will be implemented (see IHBDA-R), and progress. The Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) and the students progress toward grade-level or proficient performance must be shared with parents/guardians at the parent-teacher conferences that are regularly scheduled. If parents do not attend the scheduled parent-teacher conferences, alternate conference times may be scheduled or the form may be mailed. The principal must review and sign all SAIPs. The SAIP will be used to document parent-teacher conferences. Student Academic Improvement Plans are to be filed in the students permanent record folders at the end of each school year or when the student withdraws from the school. Current services -__IDEA 504 ESL T TITLEI OTHER-Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - Student: ID#: Grade: Teacher: School: Principal: Date developed: ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS __ Developmental Reading Assessment _ ALT Benchmark Exam End-of-Course-______________ AREA OF NEEDS SKILLS TO IMPROVE DATES REVIEWED Date Reviewed by: Results - (AREA) AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER STRATEGIES TO BE USED PROGRESS SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITFCnPY -TFACHFRS WORKING COPY VFI I nW COPY - PARENT r9\u0026gt; mNFFRFNrFt PINK COPY -PAR PNT ir r-riNPPR cNrcr 1 3 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, September 15, 2000 12:17 PM GLASGOW, DENNIS\nPRICE, PATRICIA\nDAVIS, SUZI SAIP I promised the principals that we would do some sample SAIPs for them. We need to get them to them right away. Please work with your staff to generate a sample for K-2. another for 3-5, then 6-8, and 9-12 in both language arts and mathematics, please. You may need to get access to the book/CD that Gary Smith disseminated so that you will be working with the same resources we asked the schools to use. Each kid does not need a unique SAIP. Teachers can identify kids with similar needs and then duplicate the form for all that set of kids. SAIPs are mandated for kids in grades k-4 who are not performing at grade level, in grade 5 (after grade 4 benchmark), grade 7 (after grade 6 benchmark), grade 9 (after grade 8 benchmark), and high school after the end-of-course tests (whichever grade level is appropriate for individual kids). SAIPs should continue for students who do not reach proficient performance in one year. Please get these samples to me asap. We need toget them out to the schools! Those parent-teacher conferences are already occurring. 1 4 TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 September 15, 2000 All Principals Jt)r. Bonnie Lesley. Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: SAIPsSome Philosophy I Ive been thinking about our discussion about the SAIPs at the Cluster Meeting last week, and I worry that we talked too much about compliance with the law and not enough about the potential benefits to our kids. One of the things, of course, that outrages really fine educators is for legislators and other lay people to micromanage our processes. For SAIPs to be mandated is very similar to the mandate I received last week from my insurance company to take another medication rather than the one prescribed by my doctor. Both actions ARE outrageous! We also resent unfunded and time intensive demands'on usas this new requirement certainly is. So our reactions to this new law should have been totally anticipated. Now the other side: Parents, legislators, and business people also become outraged when we educators fail, in their view, to take the leadership to initiate processes that seem to them to be commonsensical, to be reasonable if we truly want to improve learning. And, indeed, SAIPs are totally reasonable and even reflective of good practice. Think for a moment about the four principles of quality management that we have embraced: customer service, data-driven decisions, continuous learning, and continuous improvement. A good faculty meeting activity might be to reflect together on the ways that SAIPs fit into those four principles. So I invite you to put aside your outrage relating to this new mandate and to think about the ways that you can exploit the mandate and use it as an opportunity to do something good. The SAIP process has the potential to: prevent student failure improve academic performance of individual students improve students self-concept and their perceptions of school and education reduce the dropout rate educate and involve parents provide a focus for professional development I SAIPsSome Philosophy - Memo September 15, 2000 Page Two  improve instructional practices  start a dialogue among teachers on effective interventions  provide a focus for budget prioritization  inform the design of the Title I and School Improvement Plan  create a commitment to develop a SAIP for all students  etc., etc., etc. Now none of these good things will happen if we see the SAIP only as an exercise in paperwork, if we see it as an event that we have to get through and then file the documentation, if we only comply with the letter of the law. I hope you will all use the SAIPs in ways that serve children well, as additional sets of data to guide decision-making in the school, and as opportunities for reflective dialogue with parents and students about improved academic performance. Use them, in other words, as a quality management tool. Please let us know if we can assist you. BAL/adg 5 LL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EARLY CHILDHOOD/ELEMENTARY LITERACY DEPARTMENT 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 Sqjtember 18, 2000 To: Elementary Principals From: Pat Price, Director of Early Childhood/Elementary Literacy Subject: Information regarding SAIP (Student Academic Improvement Plan) for Reading K-5 Please be sure to use the following data when filling out the Assessment Results on the SAIP: Developmental Reading Assessment  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out only for Kindergarten children who are retained. If a student is retained in Kindergarten their score on the Spring DRA should be below a 2.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any First Grade student who scored below a 2 on the Spring Kindergarten DRA.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Second Grade student who scored below a 16 on the Spring First Grade DRA.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Third Grade student who scored below a 24 on the Spring Second Grade DRA. Achievement Level Test  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Fourth Grade student who scored below a 198 RTT score in Reading on the 3\"* Grade Spring ALT.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Fifth Grade student who scored below a 205 RTF score in Reading on the 4*** Grade Spring ALT. In addition, any student who scored Basic or Below Basic on the 4* Grade Benchmark Exam in Reading, must have a Student Academic Improvement Plan. Current services -IDEA 504 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan Grade: Kindergarten ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Developmentil Reading Assessment _ ALT __ Benchmark Exam End-of-Course________________ AREA OF NEEDS Letter/sound association (AREA) Results\nKindergarten Spring results DRA Level A Recognition of upper and lower case letters Recognizing rhyming words Constructing and writing words Concepts about print STRATEGIES TO BE USED The teacher will model and instruct the student in how to: Hear and record sounds in words through interactive writing Develop concepts about print, letter and Word recognition, and rhyming patterns through shared reading Develop the use of meaning structure and visual cues through shared reading The parent will: Listen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT f WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed\n10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Phonemic awareness Letter recognition Using letter sound knowledge in writing Directionality One - to - one matching Date 10/4/00 10/4/00 DATES REVIEWED Reviewed by\nMs, Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2\" CONFERENqE) T PRINCIPAL PINK COPY - PARENT (l\" CONFERENCE) Current services - IDEA 50 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#\n100100 Grade: 1st School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Developmental Reading Assessment . ALT __ Benchmark Exam End-of-Course________________ Results: (AREA) Kindergarten Spring results DRA Level A First Grade Fall results DRA Level 1 AREA OF NEEDS Letter/sound association Letter recognition Use of meaning, structure \u0026amp; visual cues in reading. Constructing \u0026amp; writing sentences Teacher\nMs. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Independent writing Independent reading Writing vocabulary DATES REVIEWED Date I Reviewed by: 10/4^0 Ms. Jones - Teacher 10/4/00 Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER STRATEGIES TO BE USED PROGRESS The teacher will model and instruct the student in how to: Hear \u0026amp; record sounds in words through interactive writing Use meaning visual and structure cues through guided reading Provide literacy centers to reinforce letter identification, letter sound association and writing vocabulary The parent will: Listen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT t:* CONFERENCE) PINKCOPY -PARNT(lCONFERNCE) Current services - IDEA 504 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: 2nd School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr, Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Devclopmenlil Reading Assessment _ ALT __ Benchmark Exam EDd-or-Courie________________ AREA OF NEEDS Vocabulary (AREA) Spelling pattom Results: Comprehension 1\" grade Spring results DRA Level 12 Spelling \u0026amp; writing development 2\"* grade Fall results DRA Level 14 Use of structure, meaning \u0026amp; visual cues when Reading STRATEGIES TO BE USED The teacher will model and instruct the student in bow to: Use known spelling patterns to spell and read new words Cross check meaning, structure, and visual cues in reading Use the writing process (edit and revise writing) The parent will\nListen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Independent Writing Independent Reading Reading for Information I Date 10/4/00 10/4/00 DATES REVIEWED Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS I I SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2\" CONFERENCE) PtNKCOPY . PARENT (I\" CONFERENCE) Current services -IDEA 50 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: 3\"* Grade School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Dcveiopmeotal Readiag Asseumeol _ ALT __ Beacbmark Exam End-of-Courae_____________ AREA OF NEEDS Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE DATES REVIEWED (AREA) Comprehension: Predicting Making inferences Reading for information Reading Comprehension Process Writing Date 10/4/00 Results: Second grade Spring DRA Level 14 Development of Spelling patterns for Reading and Writing Spelling Development Vocabulary Development 10/4/00 Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent Writing: Revising Editing STRATEGIES TO BE USED AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS The teacher will model and instruct the student in bow to: Use comprehension strategies to make meaning through guided reading, read alouds, and literature circles Use writing process to write narrative and expository texts, expand vocabulary and develop spelling The parent will: Listen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHERS WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2 CONFERENCE) PINK.COPY -PARNT(l^CONFERENCE) I I I Current services -IDEA 504 ESL G/T TITLE I X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: 4th Teacher\nMs. Jones School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS __ Developmental Reading Assessment X ALT __ Benchmark Exam Eod'Of'Course_____________ AREA OF NEEDS Reading Comprehension: (AREA) Reading for meaning - fiction and non fiction text Results\nReading nanative and expository Date developed: 10/4/00________ SKILLS TO IMPROVE Reading: Monitor comprehension and use fix up strategies Writing: 10/4/00 10/4/00 DATES REVIEWED I Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teach Mrs. Smith - Parent Third Grade Spring results ALT - RIT score 190 Write paragraph with topic sentence supporting details Organize paragraphs to develop cohesive text AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER I pate., STRATEGIES TO BE USED PROGRESS The teacher will model and instruct the student in bow to: Model comprehension strategies through \"think alouds\", self-correct, reread, read on, self question, and summarize Use student conferences to discuss revisions/editing The parent will: Continue to read to and with child Discuss and work with child in various subject areas Encourage child to read-for \" SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHERS WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2* CONFERENCE) PINK COPY - PARENT (1\" CONFERENCE) .a Bnsse-c I Current services -__IDEA Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: Sth G/T TITLEI X School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS __ Developmental Reading Assessment X ALT __ Benchmark Exam End-of-Course_____________ AREA OF NEEDS Reading Comprehension: (AREA) Reading for purpose Results: Use personal background to comprehend 4 th grade Benchmark Exam (ACTAAP) Reading - Below Basic 4'*' grade Spring ALT - RIT score 200 The teacher will: Read functional text Writing: Writing Process STRATEGIES TO BE USED Use activities to establish prior learning/predict new learning Have students read for a variety of purposes Conference student on writing to prompts/using writing process The parent will: Continue to read to and with child Discuss and work with child in various subject areas Encourage child to read-for' SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Reading Comprehension: Read and discuss inferential information Evaluate new information by Comparing Writing: Revise and edit writing for . content/mechanics I STUDENT,(IF APPLICABLE) DATES REVIEWED Date 10/4/00 10/4/00 Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS I I I PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY^.Pjii^^(^ - .ri'\"'* ' 5\" \\ v'jXs 6 LL ft. Secondary English/Foreign Languages Instructional Resource Center 3001 South Pulaski, Little Rock, AR 72206 Phone (501) 324-0510, 324-0513 Fax (501) 324-0504 To: From: Date: All Middle School Principals Suzi Davis September 21, 2000 Attached you will find the sample SAIP form for middle school reading, language arts, writing. Please read below carefully to understand the form and how to fill one out. Assessments Used: 6* grade\n5* grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores\nReading= 211, Language= 212 7* grade\n6* grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores: Reading=215, Language-216 6\"' grade spring State Benchmark Test For Basic and Below Basic scores 8* grade: V'*\" grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores\nReading=220, Language-219 There^^e four areas or goal areas listed by the NWEA for ALT Reading tests, and three ^eas for ALT Language (which include writing skills). Under each of these goal areas are L- -- -------- ________ ran hp. determined which skills in which areas are weak. On the sample, which is a listed several skills. From the report of each child, it can be determined which skills in which areas are . 1 __ til____x1-KAaori' s^ple for reading SAIP only, you will see that in area one. Word Meanings, this student showed weakness skills co A -c were co skills in Uus firs, area wbreh need address.Sl* meanings. In the second area. Interpretive Comprehension, cre were also two remediations needed\none in Snee, and one in authors purpose. A third area and its skill are also listed, but since there is no mention of the fourth area (Literal Comprehension), we know that this child performed satisfactonly m that area and On SAIP, if necessary, a childs language needs and writing needs could be ad^essed. In the future when State Benchmark scores are available, a seventh graders SAIP should also reflect any needs identified by the sixth grade State Benchmark test. Strategies To Be Used: ., , . It has been suggested as a more efficient way of dealmg with this area. that a checklist could be made for skills with the specific needs checked off for each child and this checklist attached to the S^P^It ^uld tSe a team effort to prepare the initial checklist, but after the work is done once it would save time. This SAIP should be available for parent conferences. Progress: This area should reflect data to indicate student is practicing and acquiring skills needed. Notations should be added as the school year progresses. 1 5AmPlc Little Rock School District - Student\nTiffany Smith Cunenl services - _ IDEA 504 ___ESL _ G/T TITLE 1 X OTHER - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year ID#: 100100 Grade: 6th -^2000-2001 Teacher\nR. Martin School: Hogwarts Middle School Principal: Dumbledorf Date developed: 10/4/00 ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS Developnieiitl Reading Assessment X ALT Benctiinark Exam End-of-Course _------------------ I area OF NEEDS 1. Word Meanings 1. (AREA) 2. Interpretive Comprehension 2. Results: 3. Evaluative Comprehension SKILLS TO IMPROVE Context Clues Multiple Meanings Inference Authors Purpose Date: 10-1-00 10-1-00 DATES REVIEWED Reviewed by\nR. Martin, teacher B. Spears, parent 5i'* grade Spring ALT Reading RIT - 208 strategies to be USED rVrTviSrpmctke in predicting word meaning and identifying clues in context Provide students with word lists having multiple meanings and practice different context and meanings. . 2. Use short passages to practice inference and drawing conclusions when formation is not given. Teach purposes of literature and provide practice in identifying the purposes in several forms and identifying fact^ias. 3 Teach meaning and purpose c.----------- . Teach meaning of stereotypes and identify examples with studen . The parent will: 1. Read aloud to child and listen to child read aloud, noting words child has 2 child in all subject areas and the meaning of 3. Sse television and magazine advertisements to show bias and purpose of presented 3 material. Encourage the child to read for pleasure! SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT 3. Identify bias, stereotypes PROGRESS STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHERS WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2\" CONFERENCE) PINK COPY - PARENT (1^^ CONFERENCE) ] Little Rock Public Schools Reading Achievement Level Test Goals 1. Word Meaning a. b. c. d. e. Phonetic skills Context clues Synonyms, antonyms, homonyms Component structure (prefix, suffix, origin, roots Multiple meanings 2. Literal Comprehension a. Recall/identify significant details b. c. d. e. Identify main idea Locate information Follow directions Sequence details 3. Interpretive Comprehension a. b. c. d. e. f. Inference Identify cause and effect Authors purpose Prediction Summarize Identify literary elements (character, plot, setting, theme, etc.) 4. Evaluative Comprehension a. b. c. d. e. Evaluate conclusions, validity (supporting context) Identify fact and opinion Identify literary techniques (figurative language, mood, tone, etc.) Distinguish text forms Identify bias, stereotypes Little Rock School District Language Usage Achievement Level Test Goals 1. Writing Process a. Prewriting skills b. c. d. e. f. Drafting and revising Editing/proofreading Choosing appropriate format Sentence choice appropriate to purpose Paragraph skills (topic and concluding sentences, indenting, etc.) 2. Grammar and Usage a. b. c. d. e. f. g-h. i. Sentence patterns Phrases and clauses Noun forms Verb usage: tenses, irregular verbs, subject-verb agreement Adjective forms Adverb forms Pronoun forms Pronoun antecedent agreement Negative forms 3. Mechanics a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. End punctuation Commas Apostrophes Enclosing punctuation Titles Beginning Capitalization Proper nouns and adjectives Capital I I ! I 7I LL Secondary English, Foreign Languages I I f 5 Memo To: From\nCC\nDate: Re: Middle School Principals ^Suzi Davis September 26,2000 Parent Conferences for SAIP Attached you will find a copy of the information regarding use of the SAIP form for parent conferencing. Please note the part about mailing home the SAIP if the parent is unable to attend a conference or sign the form. I thought the information included in this page was important and might be helpful to you. Please let me know if there is more that you need.  Page 1**4 , Ji / background - Act 999 of 1999 requires LRSD to develop a Student Academic ImnrtJ^lTpian for students not performing on grade level (K-4), not proficient ow XXXark (primary, intermediate, middle), ^d students ~ proficient on Cv XiXA*** J ) 7 f' Al K End-of-Course exams in Literacy, Geometry, Algebra PROCESS, PROCEDURE, AND FORM - DRAFT A Student Achievement Improvement Plan will be developed/revised for students who are not proficient according to the results of\n. Observation Surveys (Grades K-Z\"-*) conducted in September and April, . Achievement Level Tests (Grades 3\"*-11*) conducted m August/September and . EnTo^f Course Exams (Algebra I, Geometry, Literacy) conducted in May, and _1_______1, i-n AAoV th 4' Quarter Benchmark Exams (3'^ -8') in May. The SAIP will document the consideration of cutreut personalized services (apecial Xato English as a Second Language, Title I, Gifted programs etc.) f areas of need, specific skills to improve, strategies that will be implemented. progress. The SAIP conferences in will be reviewed/revised with parents at scheduled in the Fall and Spring. The parent, teacher, and student (if applicable) will ies for the home and school, and discuss which area of needs will be addressed, sriategies The principal, or desi^ee will review and si^ dl  P review progress. . _ are unable to attend the Parent Teacher Conference, a copy of the SAIP will be mailed to them. X form is to be used in heu of current Parent Teacher Conference form. The SAIP will be kept in the classroom during the school year as a working copy for the Al_ _ 0 A IIJ teacher. At the end of the school year. or if the student exits the school, the SAIP would SS iXXts permaneni record folder for review by fiiture teachers. ) I I Snecific strategies will be developed by the teacher, parent, and student (if applicable). IrXST^tegiescancom^ftomavari^ofs^^^^ knowledge and experience, student team meetmgs, or r.  sessions. Some of the sources recommended are\nschool generated problem-solving . The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual by McCamey, Wunderlich \u0026amp; Bauer Second Edition, (see attached cover, index, and sample page) Cost - $36.00 Manual, $190.00 Computer version. District created interactive WEB site for posting and locating strategies that can  S XsXstatf members. This would neeb to be developed. Cost unknown. . Imbed into all curricular suff development training specific strategies to address areas of need that are assessed. 1 s8 TO. FROM. LL little rock school district INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 September 27, 2000 middle school PRINCIPALS I^ENNIS GLASGOW. DIRECTOR OF MATH AND SCIENCE SUBJECT: SAIP Form The SAIP form for middle school mathematics will follow the same format as the iwuauw Tii\u0026gt; will find the sample SAIP form for middle readinq/language arts. Attached you will find the samples oMir ____and the areas and skills listed for the ALT. school mathematics and the areas Below you will find the cut off RIT scores for mathematics\n1 I 6' grade\n7 grade\ns grade\n5\"* grade spring ALT 6* grade spring ALT 7 grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores\nMath = 215 Cut off RIT scores\nMath = 220 Cut off RIT scores\nMath = 227 I) Little Rock School District Mathematics Achievement Level Test Goals 1. Operations a. Whole number computation b. Fraction, decimal, mixed number percents computation c. Computation with positive and negative numbers d. Estimation and rounding e. Applications 2. Number Sense and Properties a. Identify numerical patterns b. Counting and recognition, odd-even, grouping c. Place value, expanded notation d. Powers of ten, factoring, prime numbers, multiples e. Exponents, squares, scientific notation, roots f. Whole and fractional concepts g. Number lines, coordinate graphs h. Applications I 3. Geometry and Spatial Sense i S Identify, describe, classify shapes, figures, and objects b. Classify and measure angles and triangles, Pythagorean Theorem c. Line segments, lines, rays, relationships (perpendicular, parallel, intersecting, etc.) d. Congruence, symmetry, translations (flips, slides, rotations) a. e. Circles (circumference, diameter, radius) f. Coordinates, ordered pairs O' Applications 4. Measurement I I a. b. Linear measurement Measure/estimate perimeter, area, mass, volume in standard and non-standard measures c. Time, rate, speed, ratio, scale d. Weight, temperature e. Units of money f. Conversion within a system g- Compare or convert between systems h. Applications 5. Data Analysis, Statistics, and Probability a. Analyze, interpret data displays b. Probability and prediction c. Measures of central tendency and distribution d. Applications 6. Patterns, Algebra and Functions Equations, variables, expressions b. Equalities and inequalities (=,\u0026gt;,\u0026lt;) a. c. Patterns and functions d. Applications Current services -__IDEA  504 ------ U/l iiiLbi AuinnK.- Little Rock School District - Grad^*^**^h Teacher\nR. Martin Student\nTiffany Smith ED #\n100100 School: Hogwarts Middle School Principal: Dumbledorf Date developed\n10/4/00 ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS _ DevetopmenUl Rudins Asseument X ALT __ Benchmark Eim End-of-Coune________________ /JtEA OF NEEDS SKBXS TO IMPROVE ni\\TES reviewed (AREA) I, Operations 2. Number Sense and Properties 1. Whole number computation Estimation and rounding Date\nReviewed by: Results\n3. Geometry and Spatial Sense 2. Identify numerical patterns Whole and fractional concepts 10-1- 00 10 -1-00 R. Martin, teacher R. Snears, parent 5i'* grade Spring ATT Mathematics RIT - 3. Circles (circumference, diameter, radius) 208 STRATEGIES TO BE USED ^ctiK in whole number computation using a variety of resources including practice sheets, games and computer software^ resources including 2 Provide pracUce in estimation and rounding usmg a variety reso practice s.h eets, gam__e_s_ _a_n_d1 computer CsAoffttwwfalTreC. 3 Develop alternative algorithms for computation. 4 5. Use concrete activities to attributes of circles. and progress The parent will\n1. Practice computation. 2. Discuss material read with child in in mathematics and the meaning of material. 3. 4. Provide opportunities to Use television and magazine advertisements to estimation skills (i.c.. shopping) ..ccH in show mathematical concepts used in real life. Encourage the child to have a positive attitude about problem solving! SIGNATURES - TEACHER parent STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL TC acmpdo tvAoviKin rODV VT?T T rk/ /^ov DA Dwxrr r-** Drxtv rnDV DA D cxrr dp 9LESLEY, BONNIE From: lent: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, September 27, 2000 6:28 PM CARTER, LILLIE RE: SAIP Thanks so much for this nice feedback, Lillie. And thanks for being our victim principal today. You're a great sport. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: CARTER\u0026gt;ltriE ) Thursd^September 21, 2000, LESLEvSOMMlS------ SAIP If52 PM Dr. Lesley, I just finished reading this week's Learning Links. Thank you so much for sharing your philosophy and for sending sample copies of the SAIP. Many years ago, we had to write a plan for students who did not pass the Arkansas M.P.T. (Minimum Performance Test). I know that you are very busy. I just wanted you to know how much I appreciate what you do for our district on a daily basis. This will be shared with my staff during grade-level meetings on Monday and Tuesday of next week. Lillie Carter 1 10 LESLEY, BONNIE From: bSent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY. BONNIE Wednesday, September 27, 2000 6:22 PM COX, ELEANOR PRICE. PATRICIA RE: SAIP'S Thanks so much for this feedback, Eleanor. I will pass it along to Pat as well. We appreciate your taking the time. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: cox, ELEANOR Friday, September 22, 2000 3:11 PM LESLEY, BONNIE SAIP'S I really appreciate your comments in the \"Learning Links\" regarding the SAIP mandate. I do not understand all the complaints or \"disasterizing\" as I call it. This is not anything new. The incentive schools have done this for years. I initiated a practice similar to this at every school I have been principal except Baseline. It does work and helps to keep teachers focused on what needs to be taught and how to use the benchmarks to accomplish these goals. I personally am thrilled about the process, and like you, outraged with the mandate. But, we ae living in different times and we have to go with the flow or find employment elsewhere. Tell Pat thanks for the examples of the SAIP's. Good move for us visual learner (Smile). 1 11LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, September 29, 2000 12:43 PM DAVIS, SUZI RE: More SAIP help I'm free now. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: DAVIS, SUZI Friday, September 29, 2000 11:25 AM LESLEY, BONNIE FW: More SAIP help Maybe this has calmed the storm a little bit for Nancy. We have talked and I will go there next week and get them on task with SAIP. The testing problem I cannot help with much, but I perhaps can give them something. Meantime, I will be here all day as Jim Fullerton has moved me to Monday. So let me know when we can visit. Especially before you get out of here. Who is going with you to see \"Grapes\"? Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: ROUSSEAU, NANCY Friday, September 29, 2000 10:59 AM DAVIS, SUZI RE: More SAIP help I am copying this and distributing it to all of my wonderful English teachers. Thank you, Suzi, for all that you do for the LRSD and my English teachers. You are a most competent, wonderful professional. We thank you here at PHMS -  -----Original Message----- From: DAVIS, SUZI Sent: To: Friday, September 29, 2000 9:43 AM BUCK, LARRY\nBLAYLOCK, ANN\nFULLERTON, JIM\nMOSBY, JIMMY\nBERRY, DEBORAH\nPATTERSON, DAVID\nROUSSEAU, NANCY\nHUDSON, ELOUISE Subject: More SAIP help I will send you by email later this morning a checklist with strategies listed for ail the areas of the ALT tests, reading and language, that teachers can simply check the ones that apply to each student not proficient, and then staple to the SAIP form. It should make teachers' lives quite a bit simpler when filling these things out. I know it won't be a perfect list of strategies, but I wanted to do something to help as soon as possible. Look for it later this morning. 1 12 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 April 3, 2001 TO: FROM: Pat Price Pat Busbea Dr. Ed Williams ^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: DRA Please read the attached document carefully. Think about our own procedures, levels of readiness, SAIP requirements, etc. Lets meet to discuss Friday, April 6, at 1:30 in my office. Thanks! I BAL/adg Attachments I Connecticut State Department of Education An Act Concerning Educational Accountability Q\u0026amp;A  Use of the Developmental Reading Assessment  All Students Grades 1-3  Special Education Students  Bilingual Education Students  Additional Support for 4^*\" Grade Students Scoring Below Intervention Level on CMT 1. How is the DRA used to meet the requirements of Public Act 99-288, An Act Concerning Educational Accountability? Public Act 99-288, An Act Concerning Educational Accountability, states that for each school year commencing on or after July 1, 1999, each local and regional board of education for a priority school district shall require the schools under its jurisdiction to evaluate the reading level of students enrolled in grades one through three, inclusive, in the middle of the school year and at the end of the school year. The legislation further states, a student shall be determined to be substantially deficient in reading based on measures set by the State Board of Education.\" On 12/1/99 the State Board of Education adopted the Developmental Reading Assessment [DRA] as the approved standardized assessment for identifying which students are substantially deficient in reading and in need of additional support for students in grades 1-3. 2. When mu^ the DRA be given as required by state legislation and which texts should be used for the assessment? To fulfill the legislative requirement the state-approved DRA must be administered twice a year to all students in grades 1-3. Based on previous assessments and the judgment of the teacher, the appropriate level text should be used for the assessment. If the student has met the standard on the state identified text or on texts beyond that level, the student will not be identified as substantially deficient in reading. If the student is not able to meet the standard on the state identified text or they can only be assessed on texts below the state identified text, they would be identified as substantially deficient in reading. 1Mid-year, priority school districts must select a four-week period in January-February in which to do the testing. At the end of the year, priority school districts must test during the last week in April and the first three weeks of May. 3. What are the levels at which a student will be considered substantially deficient? The following table provides the DRA substantially deficient standard level information. In order for a student to be considered beyond the substantially deficient level, s/he would have to achieve both of the following standards:  The student would have to read the appropriate text with 95%-100% accuracy\nand  The student would have to receive a score of 3 or 4 on a 4-point rubric assessing the student's ability to comprehend and retell a story Grade Level 1 Mid-Year Level Level 6 Why Are We Stopping Level 14 The Wagon End of Year Level Level 10 Shoe Boxes\" Level 16 The Pot of Gold\" Level 20 \u0026lt;Green Freddie\" Level 24 The Wonderful Day 2 3 4. How often can the DRA be used to assess students? The use of the DRA Kit should be limited for use in classrooms for the following-reasons\n to determine base-line reading levels\n for new students\n for mid-year and end-of-the year state-mandated assessments\nand  to determine a satisfactory level of progress in reading for students for whom a reading intervention has been provided. The state-approved DRA should not be used to practice for future state-mandated assessments. District and school personnel are responsible to ensure that appropriate materials are provided for classroom teachers to continue on-going assessments throughout the school year. Alternate titles have been developed by the publisher of the Developmental Reading Assessment and may be used for on-going assessments. However, these alternate DRA texts at the substantially deficient standard\" levels are not to be used for the state-mandated formal assessment at mid-year or at the end-of-the year. 2 The Developmental Reading Assessment was intended for use with students in grades K-3. It may also be used appropriately to assess students who are performing below expected reading levels in fourth grade. Assessments using the DRA should not take place with more frequency than a six-week interval. The state approved DRA should be used only for the purposes addressed in paragraph 1. Efforts should be made to keep the state approved DRA in a central location in the school and available to classroom teachers and personnel as needed for those stated purposes. 5. What services are required to be provided if a student scores below the substantially deficient level on the state approved DRA? The legislation requires that if a student is found to be substantially deficient in reading based on: 1. 2. 6. the middle of the year evaluation  the school shall notify the parents or guardians of the student of such result.\" 'A District and school personnel should develop a letter to inform the students family about the students performance including the schools plan(s) for intervention and suggestions on what the family could do to assist the child Additionally we recommend that districts should: Develop a personal (individual) reading plan that outlines additional instructional support and monitors student progress. This instructional support may include but not necessarily be limited to tutoring, after school support, Saturday Academies as well as explicit instruction in small-groups. the end of the year evaluation  the school shall develop a personal reading plan for each student. The personal reading plan shall include measures to improve the students reading level, such as tutoring, a transitional class, or a summer reading program ... and shall be maintained until the student achieves a satisfactory level of progress. If a student scores at or above the substantially deficient level does that mean the student is a competent independent reader? No. If the student has scored at the substantially deficient level, the student still requires a great deal of instruction to become a competent independent reader. The score only implies that the student needs intervention in reading. 7. Will bilingual students be assessed using the state approved DRA? I Yes. The legislation states that all students in the priority school districts in grades one through three, inclusive, must be assessed. This has been interpreted to mean that students in bilingual prograrhs will be assessed for their ability to read in English, as measured by the state approved DRA. Only after the English version of the state-approved DRA has been administered, the 3 Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) recommends that Spanish speaking students in bilingual programs be assessed for their ability to read and comprehend in Spanish using the Spanish version of the DRA, Evaluacidn del Desarrollo de la Lecture (EDL). The use of the EDL will allow teachers of bilingual students to plan instruction based on ongoing assessment. 8. How is the DRA also used to fulfill the P.A. 99-211, An Act Improving Bilingual Education, requirement for the annual assessment of academic progress for students in bilingual programs? To be eligible to exit a bilingual program or stop receiving bilingual support, a student in Grades K, 1,2 and 3 must meet the grade level standard on the DRA, in addition to meeting a linguistic standard (third grade students also have to score above the inten/ention level on the CMT). DRA Grade Level Standard K 1 2 3 Level 2 Level 16 Level 28 Level 38 I Can See The Pot of Gold You Dont Look Beautiful to Me Trouble at the Beaver Pond 9. When is the DRA administered to meet the requirements to annually assess students In bilingual programs? The results of the spring DRA assessment (last week in April through third week in May) can also be used to fulfill the assessment requirements for bilingual students. 10. If a student in a bilingual program is identified as substantially deficient in reading and the individual reading plan identifies the need for summer school, must the summer school instruction be provided in the students native language? Yes, if the individual reading plan indicates the need for continued literacy development in the students native language. 11. What is the districts obligation to include measures to improve special education students reading level, such as tutoring, transitional classes, after school and summer school when the student scores below the substantially deficient level? 4The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that public agencies ...ensure that its children with disabilities have available to them the variety of educational programs and services available to non-disabled children in the area served by the agency... As such special education students who are substantially deficient on the state approved DRA must have the same access to measures to improve student learning as regular education students who also scored in the substantially-deficient range. 12.Will students in special education be assessed using the state approved DRA? Yes. ALL special education students in an academic program (1-3) should be assessed with all other students, and if they are not making sufficient progress towards learning to read they should have access to the extra help provided. As such, only severely cognitively impaired students in grades 1-3 who are participating in a functionally based program, which does not include reading should not participate. The Individual Educational Plans (lEPs) of students in this latter group should reflect how they would be assessed on appropriate developmental communication skills. Students who have not been tested using the state approved DRA should not be included in the number of students who are found to be substantially deficient in reading. 13. Do special education students with lEPs need a Personai/lndividual Reading Plan? Yes, every student who has been identified as substantially deficient\" on the state-approved DRA must have a Personai/lndividual Reading Plan. School teams should review the lEPs of special education students who score in the substantially deficient range on the state-approved DRA. Appropriate components of the lEP may be copied and included in the students Personai/lndividual Reading Plan to ensure that the student has a comprehensive and coordinated reading program, with appropriate interventions in place. 14. Who should administer the state-approved DRA7 The classroom teacher is responsible for the administration of the state-approved DRA to all regular education students and bilingual education students. In the case of special education students, the teacher who has primary responsibility for planning and implementing the reading instruction program should administer the state-approved DRA. 5 15. What is the official state-approved DRA retelling rubric and what are the directions? DRA Retelling Rubric Teacher: start at the beginning and tell me in your own words what happened in the story. Teachier may add (ohl^ once)\nTell me more. Important note: No other prompts (questions) may be given to the student prior to scoring the students retelling. Assessors notes should reflect what the child tells the teacher. The assessor should use the story overview to underline phrases and words and to write pertinent words and phrases that the student uses- JPASS (score 3 or 4) ir' . . .\u0026lt;  -  U'.f i.'.zyrv,. V?, h. 4 Retelling reflects very good comprehension:  Captures the essence of the story or information  Sequential: includes important events/facts  Includes important information about the characters and setting  Refers to characters and places by name  Reveals use of background knowledge to interpret 3 Retelling reflects adequate comprehension:  Relates the gist of the story or information  Sequential for the most part: 1 or 2 events/facts may be omitted  Includes some information about the characters and setting  Refers to most characters by name  Literal interpretation FAIL? (score 2 or 1)1. w 2 Retelling reflects some comprehension:  Relates pieces of the story or information  Some events/facts omitted or out of sequence  Mentions most of the characters  Refers to 1 or 2 characters by name  Some misinterpretation 1 Retelling reflects very little comprehension:  Focuses on a limited part of the story or information  Only 1 or 2 events/facts mentioned  Some characters omitted  Refers to characters in common terms (boy, girl, dog, he, she)  Misinterpretation or incorrect information 16. Will the current state-approved rubric and standards be revised as a result of changes in Joetta Beavers newly published DRA? 6 After two years of use, we will re-examine the standards in light of our state results and in light of Joetta Beaver's changes. For the 2000-2001 academic year, these will be NO CHANGES. 17. What are the requirements for providing additional instruction to students in priority school districts who scored below the intervention level on the 4**^ grade CMT tests during the 2000-2001 school year? According to PA 99-288, the additional instruction should be geared to addressing the students' deficiencies and may include tutoring, after school or school vacation programs or weekend school programs. The additional instruction should be provided as soon as possible after the CMT student results are released. The Principal may waive the additional instruction based on the recommendation of the classroom teacher with documentation that the student has demonstrated significant growth in the subject tested and would not benefit from additional instruction. 18. If students scored below the intervention (remedial) level on more than one test, what is the priority for providing additional instruction? Since this is the first year of the requirement, priority should be given to providing additional instruction to students during the school year who scored below the intervention level in reading. If resources are available within the district, a comprehensive program of additional instruction should be provided to students who scored below the intervention level in writing and/or mathematics. 19. What are the summer school requirements for 4'* grade students in priority school districts who scored below the intervention level on the 4**^ grade CMT tests during the 2000-2001 school year? Again, priority should be given to students who scored below the intervention level in reading. These students are expected to attend summer school unless they are exempt by the Superintendent. Exemption from summer school may mean that there is supporting evidence to indicate that a student is performing above the intervention level. Decisions for exempting students from summer school should be made using only standardized procedures and assessment data established at the district level. It is recommended that additional student assessment data to document that progress in reading be obtained through the use of the school secure Reading Comprehension test of the CMT, the DRP, Level 40 {Old Ben Bailey Meets His Match) of the state approved DRA, local district assessments or other standardized reading tests. 20. What if summer school is offered to those students in priority school districts for whom an exemption is not recommended and they do not attend summer school? I Any student who scored below the intervention level on the reading 4* grade CMT in 2000-2001, who was not exempt from summer school and did not attend, shall not be promoted to 5'* grade. 7Where do I have information or questions answered? Name Organization Phone No. DRA Questions Linda Kauffmann CSDE 860-566-3135 Office of Priority Schools/ Implementation of DRA Barbara Beaudin CSDE 860-566-4306 DRA and accountability evaluation model Kristina Eiias^taron CSDE 860-566-1103 LA Consultant/Curriculum questions Nancy Stark CSDE 860-804-2021 Special Ed LA Consultant/Speciai Ed curriculum questions John Frolich Celebration Press/Pearson Learning 914-925-0346 FAX 914-925-0347 vm\n800-435-3499 ext. 12021 Ordering Information H:\\DRA MemostDRA - Q and A Revisions 01 -09-01 .doc 8 Curriculum Mapping (Examples) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Dec. 3, 1998, with agenda for Dec. 9 meeting\nincludes reports on District-Level Curriculum Maps Memorandum to Mona Briggs, July 16, 1999, with copy of a training notebook on curriculum mapping and with charge to put together a training program on curriculum mapping Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Aug. 30, 1999, with agenda for Sept. 1 meeting\nincludes discussion led by Mona Briggs and Eddie McCoy on Curriculum Mapping Project Memorandum in Nov. 9, 1999, Learning Links providing information on curriculum mapping with attached article Memorandum in Nov. 17, 1999, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping training Memorandum in Dec. 1,1999, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping Memorandum in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping E-mail to Mona Briggs, Eddie McCoy, and Kathy Lease, Jan. 18, 2000, requesting that they develop a plan for April inservice on curriculum mapping Memorandum in Jan. 19, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 10. Memorandum in Feb. 16, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 11. E-mail, Feb. 15-17, 2000, relating to training for curriculum mapping trainers 12. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to Brokers and IRC Specialists establishing training schedule on curriculum mapping 13. E-mail to Mona Briggs and Marion Woods, Apr. 14, 2000, relating to additional curriculum mapping training 14. E-mail, Apr. 26-May 2, 2000, relating to plans for curriculum mapping 15. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 6, 2000, with information on curriculum mapping16. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 6, 2000, relating to results of curriculum mapping training LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 3,1998 TO\nDennis Glasgow Judy Teeter Marie McNeal Marion Woods Patty Kohler Dr. Kathy Lease Marion Baldwin Linda Young Debbie Milam Lucy Lyon Leon Adams Carol Green Catherine Gill Marian Shead-Jackson Pat Price Ann Freeman Vanessa Cleaver Paulette Martin FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: December 9 Division Meeting Please be reminded of our Division meeting on Wednesday, December 9, 9:00 - noon. Room 19 here at the IRC. Our tentative agenda follows: 1. Opening Remarks and Announcements Bonnie Lesley 2. Report on Status of CRTs Kathy Lease 3. Brief Reports on Status of Curriculum Maps, K-4 4. Smart Start Data Analysis Dennis Glasgow Marie McNeal Judy Teeter Pat Price Ann Freeman Please invite those members of your departments who should attend. BAL/adg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 July 16, 1999 TO: Mona Briggs FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley,, AAssssociate Superintendent, for Instruction SUBJECT: Curriculum Mapping Attached is a copy of the training notebook that someone picked up for me at last summers training on Curriculum Mapping. Gene Parker has one. I am also attaching a copy of a newsletter article. Id like you and Gene Parker to collaborate on putting together a training package on Curriculum Mapping for, first. Division staff and other Brokers\nfor principals\nand then perhaps a plan to train someone else at each school. I think we should leverage and exploit this new ACSIP expectation to take us to the next step of standards implementation. Lets meet to discuss - you. Gene, and me, on Tuesday, August 10, at 9:00, in Room 19. Attachments BAL/rcm cc: Kathy Lease Gene Parker LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 August 30, 1999 TO: Kathy Lease Mona Briggs Eddie McCoy Ed Williams Yvette Dillingham Marion Woods Patty Kohler Diane Rynders Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Mable Donaldson Pat Price Marie McNeal Carol Green Sue Walls Pam Crawford Linda Austin Debbie Milam Paulette Martin Marion Baldwin Lucy Neal Selma Hobby Leon Adams Marian S. Jackson FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesle' .ssociate Superintendent, for Instruction SUBJECT: September 1 Division Meeting I am looking forward to seeing you at the Sept.1 Division meeting - 9:00 am until Noon in Room 19 here at the IRC. Our tentative agenda is attached. Please let me know if there are topics or action items you would like to add. Attachment BAL/rcm Agenda, Division of Instruction September 1,1999 Discussion: 1999-2000 Work Plan Priorities Team Leaders Discussion and Reading Assignment Why Teams? Roles of Work Teams in School Improvement What Is Our Portfolio of Services? Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Discussion: Curriculmn Mapping Project ACC Curriculum/Assessment Professional DevelopmentScheduling Miscellaneous Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Mona Briggs Eddie McCoy Carol Green Kathy Lease Marion Woods All LL \"/\"l/H 7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 November 4, 1999 I TO: FROM\nEveryone Dr. Bonnie LesleyrA^ociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nCurriculum Mapping I I The ACSIP process requires you to do curriculum mapping. A better reason is that it is a process that ensures that every teacher is aligning his/her lessons with the Curriculum Standards. It's a wonderful professional development actively, and it will move your school forward in being successful. Attached is an article that will be helpful. For more information, study Heidi Hayes Jacobs' book. Mapping the Big Picture. For even more information, call Mona Briggs or Eddie McCoy, 324-2120. I 1 1! Attachment BAL/rcm \u0026gt;1 / I { I -A 2 Lessons Learned from Curriculum Mapping By Charlotte Vlases aToya is excited. Her Sth grade class is planning a field trip to Chickamauga ___Battlefield, a local site made famous during the Civil War. LaToya had a great time when her 4th grade class toured the museum last yearshe even v/rote a paper on her visit. This year, she thinks, itll be a breeze. Theres no way shes going to tell her teacher shes been there beforeLaToya has always appreciated L an easy A.. Many teachers can see a truth reflected in the fictitious scenario above: That although we try to give our students rich learning activities, we sometimes forget that we re building on a childs entire educational experience. What happens, then, is that students like LaToya arent really challenged and dont really deepen their understanding. She may indeed have fun on that field trip. But how did her teacher make sure the trip was as intellectually rigorous as it was enjoyable? How did the teacher extend what LaToya learned during her earlier visit to Chickamauga Battlefield? Here at the Chattanooga School for the Liberal Arts (CSLA) in Chattanooga, Tenn., weve found a way to eliminate such repetitions, as well as gaps, in our curriculum. We map our curriculum so all of our teachers know what we want our students to learn, what they have learned in the past, and what theyll learn in the next gradeand beyond. Just as a road map shows where you are. the teachers within a grade level compared maps and together developed a map that represented the curriculum taught at that grade. These maps were first handwritten on large sheets of paper and posted on a wall in the office, where they remained for all teachers at every grade level to review before any changes were made. As we examined the maps, we began to see where repetitions and gaps occurred in the curriculum. Working together, we started making revisions that would ensure a logical and meaningful curriculum for all of our students. We have changed the maps several times and continue to refine them by adding essential questions, assessments, and lists of the precise skills we want students to acquire. Computer technology has made creating and revising where you've been, and where you are going, a curriculum map. gives the. sam. e information about what is occurring in a classroom, in a school, and in schools throughout a district. A Brief History of Mapping at CSLA Former principal Mary Ann Holt brought the idea of curriculum mapping to CSLA fac-ulty after reading articles by Heidi Hayes Jacobs, author of the 1997 ASCD book Mapping the Big Picture. Holt also attended workshops presented by Jacobs and was convinced that most teachers would find curriculum mapping to be a logical way to see exactly what would be taught each year within our building. What Teachers Say /Curriculum mappin gtakes time, effort.and .a wtaessTo / work witb coheagues to rret\u0026amp;finiee tteeaacchhjinngg^ ppllamnSs.\nSSttiiUll,, .mmaaktiongg: fect.sehse to teachers. Tliey sayitbest: i'After having sperrt raanyhours trymglo rnd^i^ani^a curricuhimsfit theneedsof my:swdents,\nthe.idea,^^^^ .mappingwas^i*m...e.diately, appe^, g-t p-. me\n. 1 , S -. thinkhawiig time to refledbiWhe raaps-vatli^Q^.^\u0026amp;i sw leaguesiisveiy inipoTtanTitp?y^^:^^^y^^?^' 1^\n^'bwnrnapjbml c^genera]yibimt.\u0026amp;  nevvideatobe'-sparked by^ne of m'ypeers dtmng a ..  reflection session: :..v' '7\n, ' - .f-'-^enni^H\u0026lt;mtkih,a}Tnputertec^ ?}: Curriculum inapping helps me -visualize what s bemg ,  taught , ASancy Huston^ foreign'Janguage Tt immediately rn^e sense fb me, because of how it . looks at chiidreris overall irarnmg frbm year to year, 5\" ^dbecauM ofhbwit'cqririders eachteacher and each p\u0026gt;-\ngrade as'a^tal part of an.overall lemfeg process.  _ : 7\nRobert\nV \\ It helps me focus on the objectives I want to teach. maps manageable. By keeping the maps on a database, teachers can easily share and review one anothers documents. At CSLA, our computer technology teacher created map templates for each teacher, making it simple for them to create, revise, and store the curriculum maps. cisms of their teaching plans personaUy. Everyone must be willing to work together. Teachers should never feel intimidated or judged. They must have the freedom to be completely honest when creating their first map so that it truly reflects the operational curriculum. If teachers describe their teach-ing the way they think it should be instead of Lesson Learned: A Collegial Environment Is Key Curriculum mapping isnt easy. Its time consuming and cannot be done alone. Teachers may naturally feel possessive of the units and the curriculum they have developed and perhaps taught for years. It can be difficult when a colleague suggests that a teacher give up a cherished piece of literature or a favorite activity so that someone else can use it. But those are the types of discussions that have to take place and the types of changes that have to occur to successfully implement curriculum mapping. To create a schoolwide curriculum that truly is best for students, teachers have to feel free to express themselves and not take criti-the way it actually is, then the maps will be flawed, and any revisions will be false. At CSLA, we always start the school year with a team-building activity that is fun, and not related to academics. This gives teachers opportunities to get to know one another outsidethe school setting. For example, one school year began with a white-water rafting adventure. Another year we tried a ropes course at a survival camp. The next fall we were sent on a scavenger hunt all around town, using only public transportation. Ismahen Kangles, our current principal, continued the tradition by taking the faculty to a secluded mountain cabin for some reflection time, followed by an outdoor ed a calendar-based map by listing the units lunch at a riverside restaurant. Such activities taught each month of the school year. Then We began slowly. First, each teacher creat 3 set the tone for the kind of camaraderie that must exist before the real work begins and continues. i r Lesson Learned: Support from Administrators Is ^sential To sustain a curriculum mapping approach, teachers must hear from those colleagues who have been there and are willing to share their experiences and results. Creating and refining the maps is a collaborative process that takes a substantial amount of time. Savvy administrators make sure teachers have that time. Here at CSLA, our principal devotes two faculty meetings each month to curriculum mapping work. According to Kangles, teachers need to be given time to revisit and revise their maps if they are to take an active role in bringing about curriculum mapping within their building. Training and time are important elements that an administrator provides, but equally important is the clear expectation set by the principalthat mapping willhe done. Both Holt and Kangles set deadlines for the completion of maps. When the principal sets the expectation that work will be accomplished by a specific date and then offers support, teachers get the message that mapping is a top priority and something that must be done. ! i f Personal Reflections The teachers at CSLA have accomplished a great deal in a fairly short amount of time. We began curriculum mapping with the support of knowledgeable administrators who shared a 'vision. We are committed to curriculum mapping because we are willing to do whatever it takes to create the best learning experience for our students, juh No More First-Year Jitters Preparing teachers for a successful first year of teaching sometimes seems a near-impossible task. Trying to bridge the gap between good theories in college and successful practices in the classroom is a complicated and enormous responsibility for first-year teachers. A new publication written by Amy DePaul and available from the U.S. Department of Education may be just the tool se/o\\nm-/e tttefaacrhrieprrsc nnpepeHd tton nnnott oAnnl Vy ssuurrvviivvee' but also succeed in their first year. Entitled What to Expect Your First Year of Teaching, the book is a compilation of first-year teachers responses to questions about their first year of teaching. Among the issues the book addresses is What Colleges and Universities Should Know. This chapter includes teachers comments about how their education prepared or failed to prepare them for classroom experiences. Many of the respondents stated that they lacked adequate computer training and that they could have benefitted from spending more time in real classrooms and learning more about social problems affecting young people today. These observations relate directly to teachers suggestions on how colleges and universities could improve their education programs. Top among the-suggestions\n Require student teachers to complete an internship at a crisis center to get experience with kids with social issues. The Wisdom of Experience  Help student teachers make connections with students and faculty in local districts so they can connect what theyre learning to the reality of the K-12 school setting.  Create mentoring programs so first-year teachers can share experiences and work with veteran teachers. The teachers who contributed to 'What to Expect Your First Year of Teaching also acknowledged that there were some experiences for which no college or university understanding the absolute commitment they must make to students. Respondents also felt that no teacher preparation program can adequately deal with the real-world challenges of social issues like gangs, violence, and abuse and the need to fill the many demanding roles of a teacher. The teachers whose responses are included in What to Expect were winners of the First Class Teacher Award, an award that honors the nations outstanding elementary and secondary first-year teachers. Other topics in the book include tips on having a successful first year, advice from veteran teachers on being a successful teacher, and what principals and administrators can do to help first-year teachers. H Laura Kelly Editors Note: The entire text 0/What to Expect Your First Year of Teaching is available on the Web at \u0026lt;.http:/fwww.ed .gov/pubs/FirstYear\u0026gt;. 5'S Editor's Note: Charlotte Vlasis is the library media specialist at the Chattanooga School for the Liberal Arts. As media specialist, I am a resource person. But I also serve as a curriculum coordinator because I plan with all teachers and work with everyones maps, she says. SiA\nAwar^winningveteriiteathershave supplied a set oftips to p^s on to their .first-year colleagues.\nMai^ of these suggestiqiw^etips that all teachers would be. advisedto'fbliow. Heres a sampling: It's Vlasis'job to always have the big picture'' perspective, so it's also her responsibility to let teachers know when they're stepping on one another's toes. A lot of times it's easier for me to do that,\" she notes. \"I help make sure that we are developing a curriculum that grows in a spiral and instead of just repeating things.\" Vlasis can be reached via e-mail at \u0026lt; Vlasis_char@al .cps.k-12.tn.us\u0026gt;.  Be consistentdo what you say you are going to do at all times and with  every child.\n' A? s/D.. f. . Ntodelaiovefbrlearning. l Di.i^j v : ' 7\n/.\ni\u0026lt;'\"Maintama'senseofhumori\nyf 'A 'fN j-Sffefavarid^tifintetestingi3idices.qfactivitiesfbrldds.' W N.NN Keep an open doorto parents. A T ,  \u0026gt; i*. Maintain reject above all. yy:,\nD?'A-'i-I'i'\n. ' . In a nut^ell:.bejyourself,'Wofk with'paEents, love-the kids, lqye .teaching\n'\n. Source: From What to Expect Your TirstYear of Teaching,Try A DePaul Septmt b^^ 'T'998iJVasKn^n,L\u0026gt;C:tlJS.D^drfmehtofEducdtipil.'.... I ASCD Professional Development Newsletter 5\n:!ggi856W^sda WE 1 t I t ( t t i 1 t T Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content T he Chattanooga School for the Liberal Arts is one of the schools featured in Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content, a new ASCD video-based staff development program designed to help educators explore curriculum mapping. The series consists of two videotapes and a Facilitator s Guide. The first program, The Essentials of Mapping, examines the purpose and possibilities of mapping and provides an overview of the mapping process as it has occurred in schools. The second video, Putting Mapping to Work, focuses on revising the maps using essential questions, developmental assessments, and computer technology. In bo programs, interviews and on-site observations offer perspectives of the many variables involved in curriculum mapping, including how to develop a school culture that supports mapping. The videos also describe how implementing curriculum mapping enhances student learning. The Facilitator's Guide includes detailed agendas and activities for six workshops three per videotapeas well as handouts, overheads, and additional readings and resources. Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content may be purchased for $326 (ASCD members) or $396 (nonmembers). For more information or to order, call the ASCD Service Center at 800-933-ASCD, then press 2. lilBa : i.^'f-' 1 :? A' \u0026gt;5. CTea.lmg and usmg curri^im' maps'ma^ lead to chmges in the way cur^culuni '., decisibnshremade?  \"S*'-'*' -r-.,. :  i-  Curriculum committees can be replaced with site-based councilsvwho use diejnaps r ftr.a clearpicture of the curriculum taught within the site aiidi^o make d^ioi^ ... .^^about issues that arise:  Member of the site-based councils meet at the (U^ct level to. coordinate laues between feeder schools. 1  Task forces are formed to study iKUK that need further research at e site or.. - district level. They iare disbanded when they have completed the study and inade  . Tecommendations. .Se\u0026gt;.-  To (tteafe a school culture that enables effective mapping, teachers mustbe comfbriable working with one another and feel free to be open Md honMt about their operational curriculum..'._ ....................  All decisions about the curriculum mustbe based on what is best for the leyher.  Mapping improves student performance by providing a clear picture of what Aesm- dent actuaUy experiences in grades K-12. giving teachers an opportunity to refine the curriculum to best-meet thestudents needs.  Source: From Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content, Facmtator s . Guide,^ 1999. Alexdndria,.Vd.:AssociationforSupervisionandG^^mDevelop^t^Ll I///7/9? Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Little Rock School District To: Selected Principals/Schools (Carver, Cloverdale Elem., Geyer Springs, Gibbs, Hall, King, Mabelvale Elem., Meadowcliff, Pulaski Heights Middle, Cloverdale Middle, Southwest Middle, Badgett, McDermitt, Wakefield, Woodruff) From: Mona Briggs, Evaluation Through: Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent\u0026lt;X^Xs Re: Curriculum Mapping Training Date: November 8, 1999 As you know. Curriculum Mapping is a vital part of the school improvement process. Our field representatives from the Arkansas Department of Education will be expecting to see evidence of our mapping as they visit our schools, as this is part of the ACSIP requirement. Your school has been selected for the first round of training\na team from each school will participate in learning this procedure. It will enable you and your teachers to develop and use curriculum, maps. In order to provide your team with all the information and tools that will be needed to train the rest of your staff, we have scheduled one day and a half on January 11 and 12 at the State Police Headquarters facility at Geyer Springs and I-30. The first days schedule will be from 8:30 am until 4:00 pm\nthe second day will begin at 8:30 and will end at noon. Since teachers have had to be out of the building so much this fall for curriculum training, we are suggesting that a team be comprised of the administrator and two or three staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be a principal, a counselor, a media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. It is essential that an administrator be present\nif the principal cannot be present, please permit and assistant principal to attend. The same participants must attend both days. You will be sent another notification of the training\nhowever, I wanted to get this on your calendar well in advance so as to prevent possible conflicts. If you have any questions vvhatsoever, please feel free to contact me or Eddie McCoy. Cl LL Lt Planriing, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Little Rock School District To: From: Selected Principals/Schools ( Bale, Booker, Brady, Central High, Fulbright, Metro, Mitchell, Otter Creek, Rockefeller, Western Jiills, McDermott, Baseline, J. A. Fair, Dunbar) Mona Briggs, Evaluation SpecialistVy^ Through: Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent Re: Curriculum Mapping Training Date: November 19, 1999 1' 4 iiS As you know, Curriculum Mapping is a vital part of the school improvement process. Our field representatives from the Arkansas Department of Education will be expecting to see evidence of our mapping as they visit our schools, as this is part of the ACSIP requirement. i  I\u0026lt; Your school has been selected for the second round of training\na team from each school will participate in learning this procedure. It will enable you and your teachers to develop and use curriculum maps. In order to provide your team with all the information and tools that will be needed to train the rest of your staff, we have scheduled one day and a half on January 18 and 19 at the State Police Headquarters facility at Geyer Springs and I-30. The first day's schedule will be from 8:30 am until 4:00 pm\nthe second day will begin at 8:30 and will end at noon. fj  'S? i Since teachers have had to be out of the building so much this fall for curriculum training, we are suggesting that a team be comprised of the administrator and two or three staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be a principal, a counselor, a media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. It is essential that an administrator be present\nif the principal cannot be present, please permit an assistant principal to attend. The same participants must attend both days. You will be sent another notification of the training\nhowever, I wanted to get this on your calendar well in advance so as to prevent possible conflicts. If you have any questions whatsoever, please feel free to contact me or Eddie McCoy. 9 LL l|P|av Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Little Rock School District January 12, 2000 To: From\nSelected Principals (Central, J.A. Fair, Dunbar, Baseline, Bale, Brady, Otter Creek, Rockefeller, Western Hills) , Mona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist Through\nKathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent RE: Curriculum Mapping Training Your school is scheduled on February 9 and 10,2000 to participate in Curriculum Mapping training. Our new ACSIP process requires this as part of the school improvement planning process. In order to provide you with the information and materials needed to present to your staff, please identify a team from your school consisting of an administrator and two or three other staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be the principal, a media specialist, a counselor, and a curriculum specialist. This will prevent you from having teachers out of the building. The same participants must participate both days. The training will be held at the State Police Headquarters. It is located off 1-30 at the Geyer Springs exit. The facility is located south of 1-30 on the access road. You will need to come through the main doors to the information desk. You will receive visitors' badges and will be required to sign in. The workshop is in Classroom A\nthe information desk clerk can direct you to the room. The first days schedule is from 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. The second day will begin at 8:30 and will end at noon. Have each team member bring a plan book from last year for use in applying the skills learned on day 1. The more detailed the planbook, the better it will be for you to do the mapping. Be sure and eat a hearty breakfast, as we are not permitted to bring food or drink into the classroom area. However, there is a break room where you can purchase drinks and snacks during the mid-moming and mid-afternoon break. LESLEY, BONNIE From: pent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, January 18, 2000 5:39 PM BRIGGS, MONA\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nLEASE, KATHY R. Curriculum Mapping--April Inservice Please think through what the schools will need if we let them do Curriculum Mapping training on the April inservice day. I know the videos will be an issue. Can we get permission from ASCD to copy the tape for use that one day? I know we bought several tapes already, but we certainly don't have 50 for the schools to use. Should we combine some schools, perhaps? Let me know what you think. 1 To: u- 1 nloo t .1 1 I 1 I From: Through: RE: Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 January 14,2000 Selected Principals (McClellan, Forest Heights, Henderson, Chicot, Dodd, Fair Park, Forest Park, Franklin, Garland, Jefferson, Fulbright, McDermott, Hall, Pulaski Heights Elementary, Mann Magnet) Mona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent Curriculum Mapping Training Your school is scheduled on March 7 and 8,2000 to participate in Curriculum Mapping training. As you know, the states ACSIP process requires mapping as part of the school improvement planning process. In order to provide you with the information and materials needed to teach your staff, please identify a team from your school consisting of an administrator and two or three other staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be the principal, a counselor, the media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. This will prevent you from having a number of teachers out of your building You are encouraged to invite your broker to the training, as well. The same participants should participate on both days. The training will be held at the State Police Headquarters. It is located off 1-30 at the Geyer Springs exit. The facility is located south of 1-30 on the access road. You will to come through the main doors to the information desk. You will be given a visitors badge and will be required to sign in. The workshops is in Classroom C\nthe information desk clerk can direct you to the room. The first days schedule is from 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. The second day will begin at 8:30 a.m. and will end at noon. Have each team member bring a plan book from last fall or last year for use in applying the skills learned. The more detailed the plan book, the better it will be for you to do the mapping activities. Be sure and eat a hearty breakfast, as we are not permitted to bring food or drink into classroom area. However, there is a break room where you can purchase drinks and snacks during the mid-morning and mid-afternoon breaks. Please e-mail me when you have identified your school team. Call me at 324-2120 if you have any questions. f UL Planning, Research, and Evaluation Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas To: Selected Principals (McClellan, Forest Heights, Henderson, Chicot, Dodd, Fair Park, Forest Park, Fulbright, Garland, Jefferson, Fulbright, McDermott, Mann, Pulaski Heights Elementary) /I From: Mona Briggs, Technical Assistance ^9^ Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent for RE: Curriculum Mapping Training Date: February 14, 2000 This is just a reminder that your school is scheduled for March 7 and 8 to participate in Curriculum Mapping training. Please identify a team from your school consisting of an administrator and two or three other staff members. If you are experiencing difficulty in getting substitutes, you may choose to bring the counselor, media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. Some principals have felt strongly, particularly at the secondary level, at math and/or language arts teachers should be included. That decision is up to you\nyou may also invite your broker as weU. However, we wiU be doing training for brokers in April. The important thing is that the same participants attend both days. Don't forget, the training wiU be held at e State Police Headquarters, located at Geyer Springs exit. You must enter through the front entrance and check in at the front desk where you wUl be given a visitor's pass. The workshop will be held in Classroom C. Please arrive early enough to go through the check-in procedures and still be ready to work at 8:30. The first day is tightly scheduled. The first day's schedule is from 8130 until 4:00. The second day will begin at 8:30 and end at noon. Have each team member including yourself bring a plan book to use in applying the mapping skills. If you have questions, please call or e-mail me. I know this is a busy time of year, but earlier in the spring is always better than later when you consider aU the end of the year activities that you will be involved with. Thanks for your cooperation! LESLEY, BONNIE From: Bent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, February 17, 2000 12:29 PM BRIGGS, MONA RE: CM You always make me smile. Thank you. Oh, by the way, I can pay the $4000 plus for the inservice day. Just send me the bill and don't bother the schools with that. Have you heard that we may use the April day for snow day make-up and then move the inservice day to the end of the school year? Does that make a difference in our licensing agreement? Whatever you decide about New Orleans is fine, but I have the money if you want to go. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: BRIGGS, MONA Thursday, February 17, 2000 12:10 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: CM Dear B, Having just read Gayle's request, Eddie and I think it would be great for Gayle and Cassandra to be able to go to the pre-conference. Gayle really wants to go and Cassandra did not even get to go to Wilson because of the money issue at that time. Eddie and I believe that the sessions are well presented\nthere is some resistance, as will always be the case when you move peoplej out of their comfort zone. Actually, the resistance has less than one would expect\nthat last session, one school had some \"issues. II Gayle and Cassandra can bring back the information to us\nspending that money on all of us would not be an efficient use of sorely limited funds. There's a lot we need to know about this, but we don't think we will get that kind of knowledge in a conference setting where we hear the overview from a speaker and just listen. However, we do think that a site visit at some pointperhaps in the summer when we have more timeto a school district that has been doing mapping for some year would be extremely beneficial for the \"Bobsey Twins\" aka AAONA and EDDIE! (smile) So, keep that in mind... 1MAE from PRE who are doing NWEA ASAP...yadda, yadda, yadda From: Sent: To: Original Message- Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, February 17, 2000 12:00 PM BRADFORD, GAYLE\nBRIGGS, MONA\nSTEELE, CASSANDRA\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nMcNEAL, MARIE\nGLASGOW, DENNIS: DAVIS, SUZI\nCLEAVER, VANESSA GILLIAM, ANITA RE: CM If any or all of you would like to attend the ASCD pre-conference on curriculum mapping (see Gayle Bradford's appeal below), then I will fund it out of my budget. Please send your forms to Anita Gilliam for processing. From: Sent: Original Message- To: LESLEY, BONNIE BRADFORD, GAYLE Thursday, February 17, 2000 11:26 AM Subject: Importance: RE: CM High Sorry I missed you last night - I'll be at the NSF meeting at 8:30 tomorrow at Adult Leisure Center. Let me tell you what I wanted to discuss. I'm not sure but think that probably Kathy, Sadie or Mona/Eddie have told you what a fiasco we had in the last curriculum mapping training. There was much negativism on the part of one school in particular and comments as to lack of expertise on the part of the presenters. Well, we (in the opening portion of the workshop) explained that we were not experts and that we were learning along with everyone else but had been slated to deliver this information to them in an orderly fashion to assist them in training their teachers to do CM. We also explained that mapping is a state mandate and have no choice about implementing - however, noting that it was chosen by the state because it has been shown to be effective in increasing student achievement. Anyway, at the end of the session, the four of us met. I told them and later told Sadie and Kathy that I feel quite inadequate. I immediately got on the internet and found that there is a two-day session at ASCD this year (March 22/23) where Heidi Hayes Jacobs is doing CM. I asked Sadie about it - she suggested that I sit down and talk with you about it. I believe we need the training since this is a long-term commitment on our part - a multi-year process. I am requesting that we be allowed to get the training in March so that we can be ready for the rest of the training and implementing all seven phases of Jacobs' model - we're still at phase one but need the fine-tuned information from a training session on the model. We also need to visit a school (s) where the model has been implemented and \"pick their brains\" as to how their training took place, timelines for implementation of the seven phases, etc. Could you please send us to the training? I'm not the type person who feels good about doing half-ass work - presentations need to be good - I don't like to go before a group of folks and present information, let them know what we have lying ahead, and then can't field questions. PLEASE HELP! Gayle B. Bradford Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 501.324.0568\nfax: 501.324.2213 gbbradf@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us Original Message----- From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, February 16, 2000 10:02 AM BRADFORD, GAYLE RE: CM I'll be there for the Board meeting on Thursday and for the compliance meeting on Friday morning. Original Message From: BRADFORD, GAYLE 2 Sent: To: Subject: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 1:17 PM LESLEY, BONNIE CM Hi, Will you be coming over to this building in the next few days? I'd like to talk with you about CM training. I won't be in your shop for a number of days because of cluster meetings, etc. around here. Thanks. Gayle B. Bradford Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 501.324.0568\nfax: 501.324.2213 gbbradf@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 3 DO Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District March 27, 2000 To: Brokers/IRC Specialists From: Mona Briggs, Technical Assistance Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent for P.R.E. I RE: Curriculum Mapping Training We are providing a one-day curriculum mapping training session on April 24, 2000, for Brokers and interested IRC Specialists who have not yet had the training. The training will be held at the State Police Headquarters, located at 1-30 and the Geyer Springs exit. You will be required to enter the front entrance and check in at the front desk where you will be given a visitors pass. The workshop will be held in Classroom C. The workshop will begin at 8:30 a.m. and will conclude at 4:00 p.m. Be sure and eat a hearty breakfast, as we are not permitted to bring any food or drink into the room itself. There is, however, a break-room where drinks and snacks can be purchased during morning and afternoon breaks. Please let me know if you are not going to be able to attend. You can telephone me at 324-2120 or e-mail me. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks!LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, April 14, 2000 10:40 AM BRIGGS, MONA\nWOODS, MARION LEASE, KATHY R. RE\nCM Day for High Schools The high schools have two and one half days of pre-school inservice. They must use one of those days to do curriculum mapping. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: BRIGGS, MONA Friday, April 14, 2000 10:25 AM WOODS, MARION LEASE, KATHY R.\nLESLEY, BONNIE CM Day for High Schools M, Is there a way we can build in time during our summer pre-school days for the five high schools to inservice their staffs on Curriculum mapping? They cannot do it in June with everyone else due to CAP activities. They have concerns about how they are going to be able to do it. Let me know what you think. Thanks. Seek first to understand, then to be understood Mona mrbrigg@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 LESLEY, BONNIE aFrom: lent: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, May 02, 2000 3:24 PM BRIGGS, MONA RE\nCM District Timeline See Anita for a time for us to meet. -Original Message- From: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: High BRIGGS, MONA Wednesday, April 26, 2000 5:09 PM LEASE, KATHY R.\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nSTEELE, CASSANDRA\nBRADFORD, GAYLE FW: CM District Timeline Great minds run in the same vein...Eddie and I have been \"saying\" we have got to get this stuff nailed down. I gave Daniel the tapes to copy and he completed the taping and they are ready for June 5. We need to get a memo out to principals and yes, we need to determine expectations and a timeline...etc. Kathy and Bonnie: would you guys be willing to sit down with us for a few focused minutes and give us your input on our next steps? If so, give me some times and I will get with Gayle, Eddie, and Cassandra and set up the time and date. Let me know... MONA Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: High BRADFORD, GAYLE Wednesday, April 26, 2000 4:36 PM BRIGGS, MONA CM District Timeline Mona, I am really antsy about getting our CM in focus for both now and the future -- we need to sit down with Kathy and Bonnie, plan/draft a timeline for the district and get their input as to implementation levels, etc. Remember, the principals and even the team members attending the training had the \"need\" to know where they are going -- our district's plan in getting the whole process implemented from the time the teachers map their lesson plans, take their individual maps on to their grade levels, and then on to the final stage of having those maps established -- posted in their buildings for all to see -- and then on a semester basis, reviewing the previous semester's map and modifying those areas they see where changes need to be made, etc. Sorry so long -- kind of thinking as I am typing. BOTTOM LINE -- PLEASE, LET'S GET INPUT FROM KATHY AND BONNIE. Bye, Gayle Gayle B. Bradford Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Uttle Rock, AR 72201 501.324.0568\nfax: 501.324.2213 gbbradf@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 LESLEY, BONNIE a From: lent: Subject: McCOY, EDDIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:50 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: curriculum mapping models I checked this out and it's very interesting. I printed some of the grade levels in the areas of math and language arts. They did a good job of focusing on content, skills/concepts, and assessment. The Sth grade curriculum is divided into six units, each lasting four weeks. This example may be helpful to schools using thematic units. This can serve as a good example for those schools having difficulty with the mapping concept/process! Of course, they appear to be further along in the process than we are. Thanks for the \"heads up.\" We have received a lot of positive feed-back on Monday's curriculum mapping activities! Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY. BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 8:36 AM BRIGGS, MONA\nMcCOY, EDDIE FW: curriculum mapping models Want to check this out? Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: MADDOX, BEVERLY Friday, June 02, 2000 3:14 PM BUCK, LARRY\nROGERS, SHERRY\nBOYKIN, PATRICIA BRIGGS, MONA\nWILSON, VEKISSA\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nLACEY, MARIAN G. curriculum mapping models  File\ncurriculum mappping.doc  If this site is still active, it could contain some useful models. I'm going to visit it before Monday, if I have time. I know you would be interested. Beverly 1LESLEY, BONNIE From: pent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 12:06 PM BRIGGS, MONA RE: curriculum mapping models Great news! Pinch me tool Making taking the pressure off them helped. Now they are doing it because they want to-not because we said they had to. Original Message- From: Sent: To: Subject: BRIGGS, MONA Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:36 AM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: curriculum mapping models Thanks! I have continued to get positive reports--from Rightsell, Baseline. Mann, and Southwest. They really got into it! My husband was mapping his physcial education classes and is gonna complete his map over the summer...pinch me now! Original Message- From: Sent: To: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 8:36 AM BRIGGS, MONA: McCOY, EDDIE Subject: FW: curriculum mapping models Want to check this out? Original Message- From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: MADDOX, BEVERLY Friday, June 02, 2000 3:14 PM BUCK, LARRY\nROGERS, SHERRY\nBOYKIN, PATRICIA BRIGGS, MONA\nWILSON, VEKISSA\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nLACEY, MARIAN G. curriculum mapping models  File: curriculum mappping.doc  If this site is still active, it could contain some useful models. I'm going to visit it before Monday, if I have time. I know you would be interested. Beverly 1\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_374","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Writings on Program Evaluation-School District Improvement''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Writings on Program Evaluation-School District Improvement''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/374"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\"WRITINGS\" ON PROGRAM EVALUATION SCHOOL/DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTWritings on Program EvaluationSchool/District Improvement School Improvement 1. Document: Guidelines to School Improvement Planning. August 1999 (distributed to participants of summer 1999 Campus Leadership Team Institute)\nsee pp. 1-16 of using data for decision making and prioritizing\npp. 29-30 on Plan Evaluation.) 2. Memorandum in Feb. 9, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on conducting a formative evaluation of the progress on the School Improvement Plan with attached ERS research article: School Improvement\nFactors Leading to Success or Failure 3. Document of notes made by Bonnie Lesley in efforts to analyze the first ALT results in spring 2000, by school 4. Memorandum in Dec. 16, 1998, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley establishing the waiver process, with attached application form, including a required evaluation design. Title I 5. Memorandum to Cabinet from Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 4, 1999, requesting feedback on a draft plan to restructure the Districts Title I program in order to align it with new literacy and mathematics curricula and Smart Start, as well as with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ^7 6. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley, June 9, 1999, clarifying Title I program issues and the importance of aligning Title I programs with efforts to improve achievement. 7. Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 12, 1999, on issues relating to changes in the Districts Title I Plan for 1999-2000. ^7 8. Memorandum to John Walker, et al, from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 1, 1999, relating to changes in the LRSD Title I Plan for 1999-2000\nattaching copy of the plan. Arkansas Quality Award 9. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award to 1999 application for Level I Award, September 8, 1999 37 10. Planning document to write the application for the Arkansas Quality Award, prepared by Bonnie Lesley in April 200011. E-mail to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 26, 2000, thanking them for contributions to the writing of the application for the Arkansas Quality Award i3 12. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff. May 4, 2000, with attached copy of application to Arkansas Quality Award program 13. Application for the Arkansas Quality Award: Little Rock School District: Dedicated to Excellence, May 5, 2000 14. Agenda for planning meeting for Arkansas Quality Award site visit. August 14, 2000, with attachment, Arkansas Quality Award Application Procedure 15. Agenda for Arkansas Quality Award Site Visit, August 16-18, 2000 30 16. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award after site visit on August 16-18, 2000. Evaluation Reports from ODM 17. Memorandum to Ann Brown and ODM Staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 4, 1999, in response to draft of their report. ^0 18. Memorandum from Ann Brown to Bonnie Lesley, Oct. 15, 1999, in response to Aug. 4 memorandum. 19. Letter from Kathy Lease to N.W. Marshall at ODM, Oct. 11, 1999, stating concern that NCEs were used to make judgments in Achievement Disparity report. 20. Letter from N.W. Marshall to Kathy Lease, Oct. 22, 1999, in response to her concerns. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 10, 2000, with copy of feedback from ODM on curriculum documents. 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 16, 2001, with assignment to rewrite the grade-level and course benchmarks for the parent publications\nexample attached. (Reference feedback from ODM evaluation of curriculum documents, April 25, 2000). Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Supplement to the Handbook for Campus Leadership Team Developed by the Division of Instruction Little Rock School District August 1999 1School Improvement Planning This draft of the guidelines for School Improvement Planning is the result of a commitment made by the Little Rock School District to consolidate all the planning requirements at the school level so that when a school designs its annual and long-range School Improvement Plan, it is satisfying district requirements, Title I requirements, and ACSIP requirements. To the extent possible, the LRSD uses the language and definitions of ACSIP and ACTAAP to reduce confusion. The School Improvement Plan that you produce will serve also as the Title I plan for the schools involved in that program. In some cases, to satisfy federal and state requirements. Title I schools will also submit some supplemental information to the School Improvement Plan. See p. 68 in the Handbook for Campus Leadership Team for the LRSD planning calendar. Page 65 is a glossary of planning terms that may also be helpful. School Performance Report If you study the ACTAAP document that is included in the back of your Handbook for Campus Leadership Team, you will see references in that paper (p. 10) to the School Performance Report or, as we may call it, the Building-Level Report Card. See also pp. 16-17 in the Handbook in the local section on Collective Responsibility. The School Performance Report, mandated in law in the last legislative session, will be published annually by the ADE, mailed to all parents, and included on the ADE web pages. This report is a part of the overall ACTAAP system and is included in what is required under Public Reporting of results. The indicators on the School Performance Report are the same, in many cases, as the Performance Indicators in ACTAAP, but they include some additional ones as well. It is important for everyone to understand that we have both this Public Reporting document or School Performance Report and the ACTAAP accountability system that includes a separate set of indicators, a reward system, and a sanction system. They are two different things, but there are overlaps in the indicators in some cases. The challenge, then, of the Campus Leadership Team is to develop your School Improvement Plan in ways that will impact not only the Performance Indicators under ACTAPP and the LRSD Quality Indicators, but also the indicators that will be reported on the School Performance Report. The first School Improvement Reports will be published based on the 1999-2000 data, and they are to be available no later than September 15, 2000. You are going to want to show growth in as many of the indicators as possible, of course, so your School Improvement Plan is a vehicle to achieve those improvements. A list of the indicators that ADE will be required by law to report follows: 1Elementary Schools The report for elementary schools shall include three-year trend data and allow parents or guardians to compare the schools performance with state and national averages in areas and shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures: A. B. C. D. School safety Discipline Norm-referenced test results Criterion-referenced test results E. Percentage of students promoted to the next grade level F. Certified staff qualifications G. Total per-pupil spending H. Assessment of the local taxpayer investment in the school district I. Percentage of students eligible to receive free or reduced price meals J. Average salary of staff K. Average attendance rates for students Middle and High Schools The report for middle and high schools shall include three-year trend data and allow parents and guardians to compare the schools performance with state and national averages in areas which include, but not be limited to, the following: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. School safety Discipline Norm-referenced test results Criterion-referenced test results Percentage of students promoted to the next grade level Certified staff qualifications Per-pupil spending Assessment of the local taxpayer investment in the school district Percentage of students eligible to receive free or reduced price meals Average salary of the staff Average attendance rates of students Drop-out rate Graduation or completion rates College remediation rate (for high schools only)\nand Collegiate admission test results 2School districts may prepare and distribute supplemental materials concerning the information contained in the school performance reports, and the LRSD will do so. step 1: Review/Revise the School Mission Statement Mission statements are dynamic and should periodically be reviewed to determine whether changes should occur and to keep the school mission aligned with the LRSD Mission. Step 2: Baseline Data\nTaking Stock Collecting, Profiling, and Analyzing Data Conduct a comprehensive data collection and analysis of the baseline data for each of the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators for your school. (See reprints of pages for elementary schools, middle schools, or high schools at the end of this document.) Fill in the Your Results column with the baseline data as a first step in this process. You may wish to add pages to include other data, including data to address from the School Performance Report. Your analysis must include a careful disaggregation of the trend and baseline data (by race, gender, socio-economic status, LEP/non-LEP, Sped/non-Sped, etc.) You may wish to group the indicators by subject, program, or grade level to determine the preponderance of evidence about your schools performance for each sub-group. Think of yourselves as detectives at this step of the work. Gather evidence, including evidence revealed from other data you may have availablesuch as grades, portfolio assessments, survey information, other program assessments (i.e., computer lab test results), etc. You should also examine data related to indicators that are not listed in the Quality Indexparent involvement data, for instance, or teacher attendance rates, or percent of students participating in co-/extra-curricula activities, or how high school students are using their electives, etc. These other indicators undoubtedly have implications for some of the broader areas of achievement. Do not indulge in finger-pointing or blaming. Your business is to improve, not to dwell on the past. Stay focused on the kinds of discussions that make a difference in student achievement: curriculum, staff development, supervision, instructional programs, student assessment, action research, program evaluation, instructional budget. 3School School Improvement Plan Year Priority 1 Supporting Data\n. Goal(s): One-Year Benchmark(s): 4 School School Improvement Plan Year Intervention: Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget i 1 5 step 3: Selecting Priorities Using your data analysis, make decisions about 3-5 priority areas for your School Improvement Plan. You must include the following two priorities until your school has 100 percent of the students performing at the proficient level or above on the State Benchmark or End-of-Level tests\nImprove student achievement in reading and writing literacy. Improve student achievement in mathematics. One priority area may include all the measurements in the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators related to a program area-mathematics, for instance. Some examples of middle school mathematics performance indicators are as follows: Performance on State-Mandated Criterion-Referenced Tests Performance on SAT9 Performance on District-adopted CRT Enrollment in Pre-AP courses Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 Hints You may want to consider as an action an activity related to other Quality Indicatorsespecially those relating to ensuring appropriately licensed teachers or ensuring that all staff participate in 60 hours or more of professional development, as those hours relate to the planned interventions. If your priority area is mathematics, for instance, student learning would undoubtedly be impacted with better trained teachers in mathematics content, instructional strategies, and assessment strategies. In other words, you can address some of the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators without selecting them among your priorities. Be aware that you may also have a priority area that is not explicitly addressed in the Quality Indicatorssuch as Improving parental involvement Improving the teacher attendance rate. Remember, however, to make decisions about priorities based on data, and remember that success has to be determined with data, so start at this step with building an understanding of how success will be measured if there are no stated Quality Indicators that match the selected priority area. 6step 4: Supporting Data Record the data that your have identified as your rationale for selecting each priority area. In other words, show your schools performance in two or more Quality Indicators that indicate your need to focus on that area as your priority. You may (and are encouraged to do so) include disaggregated data in listed your Supporting Data. Examples for a middle school follow: State Benchmark ExamGrade 6 Mathematics: 32% performing at or above the proficient level\n80% of those not performing at the proficient level or above are African- Americans, and 70% of those are male. SAT9 Grade 7 Total Mathematics: 23% at or above the SO** percentile\n65% of African American males are in the lowest quartile. % enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8: 12%\nonly 3% are African American males. Note 1\nThe examples above indicate that the school must include one or more interventions designed to be effective with African American males. The interventions might include some actions related to program enhancements, to special tutoring programs, to more use of cooperative learning instructional strategies, to recruitment of African American male mentors, to an emphasis on parent involvement, or, perhaps, a special professional development program for the staff that would enable you better to understand what the root problems are and what the school can do to impact those problems. Note 2: Title I schools can also use this step to begin identifying students who require targeted assistance to support their achievement of the curriculum standards/benchmarks. Disaggregation of data and then an analysis of those data will enable the school to design more effective interventions. Remember that even if a Title I school decides to be a schoolwide project, the school still has the responsibility to target the lowest achievers for special assistance or programming. Step 5: Setting Goals See the pages above with the tables for elementary, middle, and high schools. In the fourth column of those tables you will see a series of goal definitions from which to select for this section of your plan. Remember that there are three kinds of goals: 7absolute perfoimance goals that include a specific percent of students who are expected within a given period of time to perform at a specific level\ntrend goals that establish an expected improvement of one cohort of students performance compared to last years cohort at that level (this years fourth grade compared to last years fourth grade, for instance): and improvement goals that establish an expected improvement of the same cohort from a pre-test to a post-test (this years sixth grade as compared to those same students in grade 4). You might also think about these three kinds of goals in this way: Performance goals are long-term goalswhere students are expected to be within five or ten years, for instance. Trend goals are one-year goalsthe typical way that we look at achievement datahow we did this year as compared to how a different cohort did last year. Trend goals set one year at a time become your Benchmarks (see Step 6 below). If you achieve your trend goals consistently over a ten-year period according to the State Indicators, you would achieve the performance goal for those indicators. Again using middle school mathematics as an example, you might choose the following goals: 100% of our schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics on the State Benchmark Examination. 65% of our schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*^ percentile in mathematics on the SAT9. At least 30% of our schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics on the SAT9. 90% of our schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester on the District-adopted CRT. 890% of our schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. Note: The examples above do not include every possible mathematics goal from the Quality Indicators. Your team will choose those which it sees as most important orthose that you believe you can impact in this particular year. Again, if there is an achievement gap that needs to be addressed, then the school may wish to state its goal statements in terms of improvement of achievement for African American males, for instance: At least 50% of African American males who performed at Below Basic and Basic levels in grade 4 shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 mathematics on the State Benchmark Exam. The percent of African American males enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 shall improve from 3% to 20% in 1999-2000. ACSIP Advice in Goal Setting: Critical Questions According to the ACSIP documents, the following are important in the goalsetting process: A goal is directly linked to a priority. A goal narrows the scope of the priority. Two or three goals per priority would be advisable. Goal selection should be guided by the critical questions for Federal Programs, Special Education, and Equity. (See below, plus two additional categories: LEP Students and Parent Involvement) Goals are achievement-driven. The ACSIP Critical Questions follow: Federal Programs Will Title VI be used to support the plan in ways that...  Promote equitable quality education for all students?  Provide training in support of local school reform efforts?  Provide leadership in support of local school reform efforts?  Provide for technical assistance of local school reform efforts?  Involve parents, teachers, administrators and private schools in the decision-making process? 9Does the plan allow for one or more of the following areas?  Supplemental (not required by the State) technology related to the professional development to assist school personnel regarding how to effectively use equipment and software for instructional purposes?  Instructional materials programs for the acquisition and use of instructional materials?  Programs that include promising education reform components (Effective Schools Research, etc.)?  Programs to improve the higher order thinking skills of disadvantaged students and to prevent students from dropping out of school?  Provisions for gifted and talented children?  Provisions that are consistent with the Goals 2000: Education America Act?  Activities authorized under Title I, Sections 1116 and 1117, to give all children the opportunity for high performance, to establish needs assessments to perceive deficient areas, and to implement research-based actions that address deficient areas? Special Education Does the plan provide children with disabilities the appropriate modifications, adaptations, and supplementary aids and services to ensure that they have equitable access to the same curricula content as their nondisabled peers? Will the plan facilitate the improvement of the academic performance of children with disabilities? Does the plan hold an expectation of high achievement based on high standards, and does it hold students, the school, and the district accountable for learning and teaching? Does the plan guarantee educational equity for all children? Does the plan allow for flexibility in providing meaningful instruction closely linked to the general curriculum/ appropriate activities enabling all students to be successful in the real world? Does the plan ensure accountability by providing a mechanism for monitoring lEP modifications within the regular classroom? Does the plan evidence issues and ideas presented in Enhancing Student Success Through Accountability and Leadership, published by the Accountability Task Force on the Individualized Education Program and Program 10Effectiveness Evaluation, Arkansas Department of Education, Special Education (October 1998)? Does the plan address the professional development needs of all district personnel relative to meeting the needs of children with disabilities? Does the plan address the use of technology to assist children with disabilities access to the general curriculum/ appropriate activities enabling all students to be successful in the real world? Equity Are students who are educationally disadvantaged achieving at the same level as the advantaged students? Will there be evidence that teachers have high expectations for every student as a result of the plan? Are resources being provided to assist all students in attaining high levels of achievement? Are all students being challenged? Are all groups of students given opportunities and encouragement to be involved in all school programs? What evidence is there that teachers have high expectations for all students? Are resources provided to assist educationally disadvantaged students in overcoming environmental and other handicaps? What evidence is there that learning deficits of certain groups of students are overcome? Are students enrolled in all programs at the same proportions as their representation in the school population? Are academic goals the same for all groups of students? Are all student groups represented in advanced and intermediate courses? Are all constituencies of the school (teachers, administrators, parents, students, and community representatives) involved in developing school procedures that ensure equity? Parent InvolvementTitle I The Districts application for Title I funds requires us to assure the state that all of our Title I schools have complied with the following mandates for parent involvement. Be sure that you have addressed each obligation. If you are currently out of compliance, then Parent Involvement may necessarily become one of your priorities. 1. The District assures that each Title I school shall jointly develop with and distribute to parents of participating children a written parental involvement policy, agreed upon by the parents that described the means of carrying 11 out the requirements of parent involvement and the shared responsibilities for high student performance. 2. If the parent involvement policy is not agreed upon, the comments of those in disagreement are attached to the District plan. 3. Did each Title I school in the District convene an annual meeting, at a convenient time, to which all parents were invited and encouraged to attend, to inform parents of their schools participation in the Title I program and their right to be involved prior to submitting the District plan? 4. Did each Title I school in the District offer a flexible number of meetings in the development of the plan, such as morning or evening and provide (if funds are available) transportation, child care, or home visits, as such services relate to parental involvement? 5. Did each Title I school in the LEA involve parents in an organized, ongoing, and timely way, in the planning, review, and improvement of programs under this part, including the school parental involvement policy and the join development of the school wide plan for their school? 6. The District assures each Title I school will provide parents of participating children the following:  Timely information about programs\n School performance profiles and their childs individual student assessment results, including an interpretation of such results\n A description and explanation used to measure student progress and proficiency levels that students are expected to meet\n Offer opportunities for regular meetings to formulate suggestions, share experiences with other parents, and participate in decisions relating to the education of their children\nand  Offer timely responses to suggestions made by parents. 7. The District assures that if a schoolwide plan is not satisfactory to the parents of participating children that those parents' comments on the plan will be made available to the Department of Education. School-Parent Compact 8. The District assures that each participating schools has jointly developed with parents of all participating children a school-parent compact as part of its parent involvement policy that outlines how parents, school staff, and students will share responsibility for improving student achievement. 129. The Compact will: Describe responsibilities of schools and parents that enable participating children to meet the states student performance standards. Describe the parents responsibilities for supporting learning such as monitoring attendance, homework completion, TV watching, volunteering in their childs classroom, and positive use of extracurricular time. 9. The District assures that parents will be provided assistance to participating parents in the areas of: Understanding the National Education Goals, State Content and Student Performance Standards, State technical assistance for schoolwide and targeted assistance school components, state and local assessment. Title I parent involvlement requirements, how to monitor student progress, and how to work with educators to improve the childs performance. 10. The District assures that parents will be provided with materials and training and coordinate literacy training to help parents work with their children to improve achievement. 11.The District assures that teachers, pupil service personnel, principals and other staff persons will be educated in the value and use of parent contributions, how to work with parents as equal partners, implement parent programs, and build ties between home and school. 12.The District assures that it will integrate parent involvement programs and activities with other pre-school programs. 13. The District assures that community-based organizations and businesses will be encouraged to form partnerships between schools at all levels. 14. The District will conduct other activities such as a parent resource center and provide opportunities for parents to hear child development and child rearing issues that are designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children. Limited-English-Proficient Students The Office of Civil Rights will expect to see components such as the following in your school plan: Are the needs of LEP students considered in your schools plan (not just in the Newcomer Centers, but in every school where there are LEP students enrolled)? 13Wiaf is.tftaemscimsi' is. teaching English language skite arid itnssdSuiction for LEP students? Are LEP studsints is aligned with the curriculum framewor'^s and iShe,.a^j^jpriate grade-level or course benchmarks? Are critical documents translated i.ritelhe'language of students homes? When \"educationally disadvantaged children are discussed and plans made to meet their needs, are LEP students included? What is the professional development plan so that all teachers who serve LEP students participate in training in ESL methodologies, assessment strategies, and cultural sensitivity? step 6: Establishing Benchmarks State Benchmark Examinations For each of your goal statements, you must establish the amount of growth that you intend to achieve this school year. According to the ACTAAP document (in reference to performance on the State Benchmark Examinations or End-of-Level Tests), p. 15, On average, each schools trend goal for annual rate of reduction in the number of students below proficient will be determined by dividing the total percent of students below the proficient level by 10. Remember that a trend goal compares the performance of one cohort of students with anotherthis year's grade 8 students as compared to last years grade 8. Therefore, at least for 1999-2000, you can compute your benchmarks for the State Benchmark Examinations according to the following formula: 100% minus % of your students currently performing at or above the proficient level divided by 10 equals the number of required percentage points to meet your trend goal Assuming that you had in 1998-99 32% of the students performing at or above the proficient level: 100 minus 32 equals 68. 68 divided by 10 equals 7 points of required improvement. Your 1999-2000 benchmarks would, therefore, be as follows: 1432 (1998-99 performance) + 7 points of required improvement = 39% at or above the proficient level Note: It is important here as a part of your work to calculate exactly how many students you are required to move up to get the 7 points of improvement. Look to see how many students are at grade level and calculate how many of them would equal 7 percentage points. State your benchmark in a measurable statement that includes who, what, when, and how much. In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve 7 points so that at least 39% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in grade 8 mathematics. Who\nWhat: When: grade 8 students in the LRSD school State Benchmark Examination in mathematics In 1999-2000 How Much: 7 points improvement (from 32 to 39% at or above proficient level) Then the 2000-01 benchmark would be 39% +7 = 46%. Etc. In 2000-01, at least 46% of the grade 8 students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in mathematics. To Consider: A divisor of 10 indicates that to stay off the States identified list of schools requiring improvement, a school would have 10 years to meet the state goal of 100% of the students performing at or above the proficient level, assuming the school meets the required improvement goal each year. We in Little Rock cannot be satisfied with that time frame since our average performance is at an unacceptable level in many schools. We cannot wait 3-4 years, for instance, for a minimum of 50 percent of our students to meet the state standards. We have to accelerate our grovizth a lot if we are to catch up with other districts and if our kids are to be competitive with their peers not just in Arkansas, but also nationally and globally. Research on restructuring that works in terms of improved student achievement indicates that two variables that are the most powerful are as follows:  every students access to a rigorous curriculum (teaching the tested curriculum, in other words, the curriculum standards/benchmarks\nalignment of teachers lesson plans with the state curriculum frameworks and district benchmarks) 15developing a true sense of collective responsibility everybody doing whatever it takes in terms of commitment to improve teaching and learning. This variable includes a strong emphasis on professional development and ongoing learning. SAT9 Benchmarks Computing the benchmarks for performance on the SAT9 is done a little differently. If the Quality Indicator you are considering is the one relating to at lOact Rk norAanI __ i_ _ .1 .-^th oc X f -------------------------------------72'-'^'\" ly i'j M WI ik\n? I c\niain lu lu CJI L performing at or above the 50 percentile, then the calculation is as follows\n65/o minus % of your students currently performing at or above the 50 percentile ^ided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing at or above the 50*^ percentile. Assuring that you had in 1998-99 only 22% performing at or above the 50 percentile: 65 minus 22 equals 43 43 divided by 10 equals 5 points of required improvement. (That is not five percentile points, but 5 percent more of the students tested performing at or above the 50* percentile.) Your benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve by 5 percentage points (from 22% to 27%) the percentage of students performing or above the 50 percentile on the grade 10 SAT9 mathematics test. at it is important for you to calculate exactly how many students would constitute 5 percentage points. If you are working on improving the percentage of students in the highest niiartUo thAn _____i_ . . . _ a quartile, then you compute your benchmark as follows: 30% giinus % of your students currently performing in the highest quartile divided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing in the highest quartile. Assuming that you had in 1998-99 only 4% performing in the highest quartile: 30 minus 4 equals 26. 26 divided by 10 equals 3 points of required improvement in the percent of students performing in the highest quartile. 16Calclulate how many students that would be. Benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve at least 3 percentage points (from 4% to 7%) in the percent of students performing at the highest quartile on the grade 5 SAT9 reading test. Most schools badly need to work on moving students from the lowest quartile to the higher levels of performance. The formula for computing the benchmark is as follows: 90% minus % of your students currently performing in quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (above the lowest quartile) divided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing above the lowest quartile. Assuming that you had in 1998-99 57% performing in the lowest quartile and only 43% above the lowest quartile: 90% minus 43% equals 47 47 divided by 10 equals 5 points of required improvement in the percent of students performing above the lowest quartile. Calculate how many students that would be. Benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD will improve at least 5 percentage points (from 43% to 48% in the percent of students performing above the lowest quartile on the grade 7 SATO mathematics test. In General To compute your benchmark, you have to know two things to start with:  The performance goal for the performance indicatorsthe percent expected (i.e., 100% will be proficient\n65% will be above the 50th percentile\n65% will enroll in Pre-AP and AP courses, etc.)  Your schools performance last year. Step?: Designing Interventions Now that you have your data analyzed, your priorities determined, your goals selected, and your benchmarks established, you are ready to do the real work of developing the plan for improvement. An intervention is a significant strategy, research-based program, or major initiative designed to solve the problem defined by your selected priority (definition from ACSIP document). 17a Your first School Improvement Plan is both a long-term plan (3-5 years) and a short-term plan (one year). After you have thought through the long-term plan, and if you stay with it, then updating the plan one year at a time is not that difficult. Your annual plan simply deletes what is already accomplished and adds any new action steps required to implement the next years plan or adds some new interventions. Good Campus Leadership Teams are always thinking ahead two to five years, knowing that everything cannot be accomplished in one year, but getting clear about what needs to happen this year in order to take the next steps to reform during the following year. If your school does not have a long-term plan in place with which you are comfortable, then your work must be to design as quickly as possible your 1999- 2000 plan for improvement in spring 2000. There is much that you can do to align your lesson plans with the State Curriculum Frameworks and the District Benchmarks so that all students are exposed to the tested curriculum. There are programs that you can put into place early in the year for maximum impact on student achievement. There are effective teaching strategies that you can use that will enable more students to be effective learners. There are assessment strategies that you can use to check student progress frequently and then to modify and adjust your teaching so that more students are successful. All the faculty can make a commitment to form a professional community now that supports an attitude of collective responsibility for results. But begin now as well to start thinking ahead to your 2000-01 plan. Ideally, the design of effective interventions needs to begin in summer 1999 to include in the 2000-01 plan in order for there to be time for the team to do research, to visit schools where the intervention is being successfully implemented, and to involve staff and parents in ways that ensure buy-in. A part of every schools plan realistically includes a plan to plan for the next year and down the road, always looking ahead to what steps should be phased in for total restructuring. Schools that wait until the plan is almost due to begin the process are not likely to get desired improvements. Planning is ongoing, not an event. An intervention, in general, is something new that your school decides to do that enhances, supplements, or goes beyond the District-established programs so that the performance of targeted students improves. The implementation of ELLA, for instance, is not a school-level intervention. Neither would be the implementation of the new TERCS mathematics programs. Both are already established. You may find the following research-based criteria helpful in selecting appropriate program interventions for your school: f i 1 18What Factors Contribute to Program Effectiveness? (from Show Me the Evidence! By Robert Slavin and Olatokunbo Fashola, Corwin Press, 1998) 1. 2. 3. Effective programs have clear goals, emphasize methods and materials linked to those goals, and constantly assess students' progress toward the goals. There is no magic in educational innovation. Programs that work invariably have a small set of very well-specified goals ..., a clear set of procedures and materials linked to those goals, and frequent assessments that indicate whether or not the students are reaching the goals. Effective programs leave little to chance. They incorporate many elements, such as research-based curricula, instructional methods, classroom management methods, assessments, and means of helping students who are struggling, all of which are tied in a coordinated fashion to the instructional goals. Programs almost always have their strongest impacts on the objectives they emphasize. Effective and replicable programs have well-specified components, materials, and professional development procedures. There is a belief in many quarters that each school staff must develop or codevelop their own reform model, that externally developed programs cannot be successfully replicated in schools that had no hand in developing them. ... In fact, over time evidence has mounted that reform models that ask teachers to develop their own materials and approaches are rarely implemented at all. Studies of alternative programs implemented under similar conditions find that the more highly structured and focused programs that provide specific materials and training are more likely to be implemented and effective than are less-well-specified models. ... Although there are examples of success in models lacking clear structure, the programs with the most consistent positive effects with at-risk students are those that have definite procedures and materials used in all participating schools. Effective programs provide extensive professional development. A characteristic shared by almost all of the effective programs we identified is the provision of extensive professional development and follow-up technical assistance. Few, if any, provide the classic half-day, one-time workshops that constitute the great majority of inservice programs, especially those usually provided with textbook adoptions. On the contrary, most of the successful programs we identified provide many days of inservice followed by in-class technical assistance to give teachers detailed feedback on their program implementations. Typically, teachers work with each other and with peer or expert coaches to discuss, assess, and refine their implementations. The training provided is rarely on generic strategies from which teachers pick a few ideas to add to their bags of tricks. Instead, training focuses on comprehensive strategies that replace, not just supplement, teachers' current strategies. Effective programs are disseminated by organizations that focus on the gualitv of implementation. The programs identified in their review that have been associated with consistent positive effects in many settings tend to be ones that are developed and disseminated by active, well-structured organizations that concentrate efforts on ensuring the gualitv of program implementation in all schools. These organizations, often based in universities, provide training and materials and typically create support networks among program users. 19Some examples of interveritk\u0026gt;.asbs^ffimnitaTj( iisrrgusojea^ no school is limited to these) might include the fclfeKwbg,:  Reading Recovery  After-School Resfeg Cfejfc tutoring)  Accelerated Reader  Reading Across the Curriculum  Professional development for teachers in one or more of the following areas: reader-response strategies, reciprocal teaching, the writing process, McRat, assessment strategies, ESL methodologies, adaptive strategies for inclusion, etc.  Extended-Year Program  HOSTS (Helping One Student to Succeed)  Junior Great Books  Family Literacy program  Schoolwide Independent Reading Program  Reading Is Fundamental Some examples of interventions in secondary language arts (again, no school is limited to these) are as follows:  Project AVID (to improve enrollment and success in Pre-AP and AP courses)  Reading Clinic (one-on-one tutoring)  Summer enrichment program for rising freshmen  Reading in the Content Areas  Writing Across the Curriculum  Development of a schoolwide language policy  Professional development for teachers in one or more of the following areas: reader-response strategies, reciprocal teaching, the writing process, use of learning logs, assessment strategies, ESL methodologies, adaptive strategies for inclusion, etc.  Great Books  Schoolwide Independent Reading Program Waivers An intervention may also be something that the school decides to do instead of the District program. In that case, however, the Campus Leadership Team must submit and obtain approval of a waiver. See pp. 8-9 in your Handbook for Campus Leadership Team for a copy of the regulations on waivers and pp. 57-60 for a copy of the waiver application. (Call Bonnie Lesleys office for an e-mailed template for convenience.) A waiver application must include research that will predict more success for your students than the District-established program. Examples of when a waiver is required follows: the Districts instructional language arts programs for elementary schools are ELLA and Effective 20Literacyor Success for All. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. The districts phonemic awareness program is Animated Literacy at the kindergarten level. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. The Districts grades 6-8 program for regular-level students is a two-period block of the Reading and Writing Workshop. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. Schoolwide Restructuring or Reform An intervention may include a series of steps to implement a schoolwide project, such as the ones described by Dr. Steve Ross in the July 23 inservice for principals. Some examples of schoolwide change models include Boyer's The Basic School, Slavins Roots and Wings, or Great Expectations for the elementary level. Middle school schoolwide reforms include those outlined in Turning Points, SREBs Middle Grades Initiative, or Levins Accelerated Schools. Some examples of high school reforms include Sizers Coalition of Essential Schools, SREBs High Schools that Work, and the Johns Hopkins models for Talent Development High Schools. These examples are examples only, i ot recommendations for adoption. Each school should consider carefully wliich model for change would be most appropriate forthat school, whether resources are available for implementation, and whether staff and parent support can be built. More information will be provided on the options available for schoolwide change for 2000-01 planning. Title I schoolwide projects are expected to adopt such a model or to design their own, using the CSRD criteria established from research on the variables that are necessary to impact student achievement. Components of Comprehensive School Reform Programs (Obev-Porter) A comprehensive school reform program is one that integrates, in a coherent manner, all nine of the following components: 1. 2. 3. 4. Effective, research-based methods and strategies. A comprehensive school reform program employs innovative strategies and proven methods for student learning, teaching, and school management that are based on reliable research and effective practices, and have been replicated successfully in schools with diverse characteristics. Comprehensive design with aligned components. The program has a comprehensive design for effective school functioning, including instruction, assessment, classroom management, professional development, parental involvement, and school management, that aligns the schools curriculum, technology, and professional development into a schoolwide reform plan designed to enable all studentsincluding children from low-income families, children with limited-English proficiency, and children with disabilitiesto meet challenging State content and performance standards and addresses needs identified through a school needs assessment. Professional development. The program provides high quality and continuous teacher and staff professional development and training. Measurable coals and benchmarks. A comprehensive school reform program has measurable goals for student performance tied to the States challenging content and student performance standards, as those standards are implemented, and benchmarks for meeting the goals. 215. 6. 7, 8. 9. Support within the school. The program is supported by school faculty, administrators, and staff. Parental and community involvement. The program provides for the meaningful involvement of parents and the local community in planning and implementing school improvement activities. External technical support and assistance. A comprehensive reform program utilizes high-quality external support and assistance from a comprehensive school reform entity (which may be a university) with experience or expertise in schoolwide reform and improvement. Evaluation strategies. The program includes a plan for the evaluation of the implementation of school reforms and the student results achieved. Coordination of resources. The program identifies how other resources (federal, state, local, and private) available to the school will be utilized to coordinate services to support and sustain the school reform. Curriculum Mapping An intervention in 1999-2000 (but a part of your data collection and analysis after this first year) that every school should do early in the school year is the curriculum mapping required as a part of the ACSIP process:  Calendar-based curriculum mapping is a procedure for collecting a data base of the operational curriculum in a school and/or a district.  Each teacher in this initial step completes a map.  The format is consistent for each teacher but reflects the individual nature of each classroom.  Each teacher reads the entire school map as an editor when all the maps are completed.  Places where new information was gained are underlined.  Places requiring potential revision are circled.  The maps are next used in a planned alignment of the operational curriculum with the Frameworks and criterion- referenced tests. Note: Mona Briggs and Eddie McCoy are members of a team in the new School Improvement Department who will be trained and available to help you train key people in your school to conduct the required curriculum mapping. This activity very important in aligning what it is that is taught with what it is that is tested. Some of the mapping has already been done at the District level. Teachers have received copies (or will in the August Preschool Inservice) of documents that display the relationship of the District grade-level and course benchmarks to the State Curriculum Frameworks, the SAT9 objectives, and to adopted text rnaterials. The step for schools to complete includes mapping teachers lesson plans against these areas and to identify whether critical elements likely to be tested on the benchmark examinations are indeed taught before the dates of the examinations. 22Curriculum Map Content Area/Course Grade Level Page___ of Month Unit Topics/Skills Strand/Content Standard (Framework) Student Learning Expectation Standard (Framework) LRSD Benchmark 23 Alignment (from the ACSIP process): Step 1: All the teachers in the school map the subjects and courses they teach. Step 2: The Curriculum Alignment Document is used to categorize the results of the maps. Step 3: The findings of the Curriculum Alignment Document are summarized (e.g., 4 teachers are introducing\n0 teachers are teaching/assessing\n0 teachers are reviewing/maintaining\nStrand: Patterns, Algebra and Functions, Content Standard 2, Student Learning Expectation: Grades 9-12, PAF.2.1. Use equations, absolute value equations, inequalities, absolute value inequalities, and systems of equations and inequalities to solve mathematical and real-world problems. Step 4: Committees of the faculty organize curricula so that concepts in the frameworks are thoughtfully and systematically introduced, taught and assessed, and reviewed and maintained. This step is part of the schools improvement plan because it is a complex process that requires extensive committee work and faculty consensus. 24Compiling Mapping Results ... Lang. Arts Framework List all strands and student learning expectations for the appropriate grade levels in this column. Not Covered Introduced Taught \u0026amp; Assessed Reviewed/Maintained 25 The ACSIP documents outline the following actions to take in Editing, Auditing, Validating, and Creative Development Tasks: Gain information Avoid repetition Identify gaps Identify potential areas for curriculum integration Match with learner standards/benchmarks Examine for timeliness (taught before the test administration?) Edit for coherence Teachers are further encouraged to Edit for Repetitions:  Recognize the difference between repetitions and redundancy.  Adopt curriculum spiraling as a goal. To find possible areas for curriculum integration, teachers are encouraged to:  Peruse the map and circle areas for integration of content, skills, and assessment.  These areas can serve as the springboard for curriculum planning at the teacher/team/school levels. 26Step 8: Actions For each intervention, you need to outline the major steps that the school will take to implement the selected intervention. Remember to include: Steps to provide necessary professional development for successful implementation of the intervention. Include both the initial training, plus the follow-up or peer coaching or networking that are necessary to provide ongoing support of teachers. The plan must clearly show the relationship of any planned professional development to the successful implementation of a selected intervention. Steps to purchase or otherwise secure necessary resources, such as buying instructional materials, recruiting mentors, or soliciting used books appropriate for classroom libraries. Steps to put the intervention in place, such as identifying students to be targeted for special tutoring, consultations with parents, designing necessary forms, planning communications, collaborating with other staff, etc., etc. Steps to conduct formative evaluations (such as action research projects) so that you can modify or adjust quickly, if necessary, the implementation of the plan to ensure greater success. Steps to conduct a summative evaluation to determine the impact of your intervention on your goal(s). The continuous planning cycle includes four basic phases: plan, do, study, act. Then the cycle begins again. Taking a new look at the baseline data (see Step 1 in this planning guide) should be an outgrowth of your summative evaluation of the previous year's plan. complete sentences for each action statement. Begin each sentence with a verb. Some examples follow: 1. 2. 3. Enroll Ms. Jones in training to implement Reading Recovery. Conduct schoolwide parent meeting to update them on progress of implementation. Apply for a grant to purchase Accelerated Reader and ample books for program implementation. 274. Invite Pat Busbea to lirain, oz\u0026gt;wa\\7s ttfGttfhe w'hole school can support Reading Recovery, 5. Set up an action research to .Kieasure (eftectv eness of the new Animated Literacy program at the itexe'. Step 9: Person(s) RespomiWe Assign someone at your school the responsib'ifity for each action to ensure that the action step is actually implemented. Distribute leadership responsibilities, and do not assume that the only people involved are those listed. Some action steps will require committees or teams or task forces. The person listed is responsible for convening that group. Remember to include parents, as appropriate, in these groups. Step 10: Timeline Indicate the approximate time that the action is to start and when it should be fully implemented. An agenda item for the Campus Leadership Team is to monitor implementation of the plan and to conduct formative evaluations of the quality of the implementation. Interventions designed to impact the spring test results should, obviously, be in place when school starts for maximum impact. Step 11: Resources Identify the necessary new resources required to implement your intervention. Some examples follow: $14,000 for professional development $10,000 for purchase of classroom libraries 8 volunteers to assist with independent reading program 40 mentors for at-risk students Reassignment of Title I aide to parent liaison responsibilities $3000 for teacher pay to run the after-school Reading Clinic Step 12: Budget Indicate how you plan to pay for any required costs under the appropriate column. You can mix and match your funds as necessary. Examples of a budget to purchase classroom libraries follow: District $500 Title I $8000 APIG $1500 Note 1. The school must total all the entries of the three columns when the plan in complete. 28The District column cannot exceed the amount of money in your school budget for the specified categories of expenditures. The total of all the Title I expenditures must be no greater than your schools Title I allocation. The total of all the entries under APIG must not exceed your APIG grant. If a school has other sources of money to fund its interventions, then a note should be made on the form to indicate the source of the other funds, such as PTA, CSRD grant, etc. Note 2: Title I schools specifically (but recommended for all schools as well) are required to include the following minimums in their budgets:  1 % of the total Title I allocation must be spent on parent involvement  10% of the total Title I allocation must be spent on professional development that is clearly related to the achievement of your school goals and to the planned interventions. step 13: Plan Evaluation Planning how you will evaluate your plan is a critically important step in the planning cycle. You must plan for both formative and summative evaluations. Formative Evaluations Formative evaluations of the quality of your plans implementation should be conducted as a regular part of the business of the Campus Leadership Team.  Is implementation occurring according to the planned timelines?  Are the people assigned responsibility carrying through?  What evidence (surveys, observations, anecdotes, action research, interim student achievement data such as grades, CRT scores, etc.) is there that the intervention is working?  Are resources adequate?  Do formative data indicate a need for modifications or adjustments to the plan?  How well does everyone (teachers, parents, community, students, etc.) understand the intervention? How well are you communicating?  What next steps are suggested?  What are you learning about change and implementation of other interventions?  What additional professional development do you need to be more effective? 29What is the evidence that you will achieve your benchmark goal? Are you doing whatever it takes to get the desired results? (Remember Dr.Terrence Roberts levels of commitment? We cant just think about it, or try, or do what we can. We must do whatever it takes.) Summative Evaluation Summarize your implementation process of each intervention. Outline what concluded to be strengths and weaknesses in the implementation. Give recommendations for next year. you Summarize the impact of each intervention on student achievement. Did you achieve your benchmarks? Is there a preponderance of evidence that you made a difference with your intervention? 30Quality Indicators for Elementary Schools Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1990-00 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 4 4 K-5 K-5 K-5 K-5 4 4 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Performance on State- Mandated Criterion Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Goal (Definition) 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%.__________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually._______ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.___________________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 32 Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 K-5 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Average Daily Attendance Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K-5 1999-00 K-5 Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. ___________________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 1999-00 K-5 School Safety 1999-00 K-5 Other School Selected Indicators Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually.______________________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. _________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. LRSD Elementary School Quality indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 90% of a schools kindergarten students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 1999-00 1 Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test The percent of kindergarten students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. _________ ____________ 90% of a schools grade 1 students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy._______________ 33 Baseline Year 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50'^ percentile in reading._______ The percent of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50' percentile will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students shall perform at or above the SO' percentile in grade 5 mathematics. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 34 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 5 5 5 5 5 2-5 2-5 2-5 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9. the Norm-Referenced Ma^ematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of students performing at or above the 50**' percentile in grade 5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.__________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics.__________________________ The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading each semester._________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._____________ Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 35 Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 mathematics pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 36 Quality Indicators for Middle Schools Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) 1999-00 7-8 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________ _______ School Dropout Goal (Definition) 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in grade 6 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 mathematics. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics. 100% of a schools grade 7 or 8 students who complete Algebra I shall perform at or above the proficient level. 100% of a schools grade 8 students who complete Geometry shall perform at or above the proficient level. 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance________ Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12*^ grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._____________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 37 Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 State Indicators Tier I Professional Development Goal (Definition) Your Results 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development.______________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 State-Mandated Indicators Tier II Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 38 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) State-Mandated Indicators Tier II ___________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Drop-outs 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 6-8 Other School Selected Indicators The percent of students completing Algebra I performing at or above the proficient' level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students completing Geometry performing at or above the \"proficient level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Goal (Definition) Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12**^ grade._________________ Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of .\"noroved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and jyiolent acts. Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 39 LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Your Results Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50**' percentile in reading._______ The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the SO* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'*' percentile in mathematics. Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 40 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test a Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50^ percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________________________ At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the \"proficient level in reading each semester.________________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester._________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.___________ Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1 41 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year.________________________________ _ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8.___________ The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 42 Quality Indicators for High Schools Baseline Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 9-12 9-12 11 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test_______ ________ School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher_________ Professional Development School Safety Goal (Definition) 'P-' 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Reading and Writing Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12** grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually._______ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 43 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 11 State-Mandated Indicators Tier II________________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test_________________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Goal (Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Drop-outs Goal (Definition) 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development High schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12* grade.________________ Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate.___________________ ____ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 44 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 9-12 I__ . School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) School Safety Other School Selected Indicators L-RSD High School Quality Indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 1998-99 10 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Goal (Definition) Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.___________________________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Goal (Definition) 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50**^ percentile in reading._______ The percent of students performing at or above the 50' percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._____________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 45 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 Grade Levels 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9-11 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*^ percentile in mathematics. The percent of students performing at or above the 50**' percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.___________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics.___________________________ The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in reading each semester. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 46 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 2002-03 2002-03 Grade Levels 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-12 9-12 12 12 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test______________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Honors Seal on High School Diploma Honors Seal on High School Diploma Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.____________________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. _______________________________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a high schools students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year._____________________________ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas.__________________________ The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 47 Baseline Year 1998-99 Grade Levels 11-12 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Taking the ACT 1998-99 1998-99 11-12 11-12 Taking the ACT Performance on the ACT Performance on the ACT 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Taking Advanced Placement Examinations 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above on the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________ 65% of a high schools graduates will take at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________________ 90% of a high schools students taking AP examinations will score a 3 or above. Your Growth Your Score 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements The percent of a high school's students earning a score of 3 or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________________ 100% of a high schools seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony. The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 48 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 February 7, 2000 TO FROM: Everyone r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nSchool Improvement If you are on track with your School Improvement Plan, you have gathered all 5?? available data from the first semester to conduct a formative evaluation of your progress. (See Chapter 13 in Guidelines to School Improvement Planning). Its also time to start making decisions about next years plan. The attached ERS publication on School Improvement is a good one to share with your CLT and even the whole faculty. You can use it to measure where you are - and to determine what you may need to do next. r Attachment BAL/rcm 1I   School Improvement: Factors Leading to Success or Failure I  ss Education leaders in schools across the country are asking: How can we increase the levels of learning for all our students? Many of them are considering externally developed, comprehensive models of school improvement. Others are developing their own schoolwide improvement models. Still others are identifying and addressing needs for improvement in specific subjects or skills. Whatever the approach, and despite the hard work of those involved, school improvement efforts do not always succeed. But research and experience from schools and districts engaged in school improvement provide valuable guidance that can increase the chances of success. f^C^I This ERS Informed Educator discusses the importance of planning and selfstudy in implementing school improvement efforts. It describes several major studies that provide valuable information about what factors lead to the success or failure of school improvement efforts. Knowing about these factors can help you ensure that your school or school districts school improvement efforts achieve their goalhigher student achievement. Developing a Roadmap Stories of successfill school improvement sound a common themi the importance of using data during both planning and implementation. The Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory recommends:  collecting, analyzing, and using data to Inform decision making throughout the improvement process\n using a variety of research tools and a flexible approach to accommodate different situations and research questions\n looking at baseline data, monitoring the improvement process, and studying impacts\nand  forming a small research team comprising staff, community members, and students, which regularly collects data (Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory 1999). Participants in the school improvement process should use data and information to discuss progress on a regular basis, and should make changes to the original plan as needed. In its report Turning Around Low-Performing Schools, the U.S. Department of Education talks about why it is so important to use data to support school improvement efforts. Specifically, Measuring progress and setting standards and analyzing the information to identify patterns of failure and their causes enables schools and districts to diagnose low performance and attack specific problems with concrete solutions (1998,30). School Readiness for Change Robert Slavin, a long-time researcher on school improvement, cautions schools and districts to consider seriously another element that can have a profound impact on school improvement efforts school readiness for change. Although the staff in some schools maybe ready to effectively engage in their own school improvement efforts -with little assistance, other schools may need substantial and ongoing support to develop and implement their plans successfully. Slavin also identifies a third category of schools those in which even the most heroic attempts at reform are doomed to failure. Schools of this type may have recently lost key staff, may suffer from poor relationships among staff, or may have lost funding. Improvement efforts in these schools 2000 Clarendon Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22201 Phone: (703) 243-2100  Fax: (703) 243-5971  www.ers.org Copyright 1999 Educational Research Service. Reproduced with permission. ILGUCiLiUiicLi ikCiCd-ivix uctviuc S^faddressing the basic problems (1997, ^ftom lini -while a school may need ^Ossendal to take a realistic view of as need. feat Affect the Success of B Implementation ffiy,. major studies conducted in recent a rich source of information about the ^at lead to the success or failure of school efforts. In this section, we summarize jof several of these studies. Many of the blap and reinforce each other. pof the Special Strategies Studies Eand Stringfield, in Ten Promising Pra- ^'Jucating Ail Children, observed that imple- Bbf reform programs varied greatly among ae'fent sites studied in the federally con- peial Strati jies studies. The researchers i^ftat many of these programs can work is jiffice that one or more will work at a speafic i\u0026amp;jrtce Ba particular team of teachers and adminis- ^\nNone of these programs can be made ^?proof, school-proof, or district-proof The which the program was implemented had aeiil of power to facilitate or impede its Mutation (1997,127-128). on the experiences of the research teams S$tudied, the researchers identified the foists that were key in most successfill school Kht efforts: ffs^c perception of local strengths and areas ^of improvement, combined with clear at were understood and embraced by fpn of persons who would be affected by gsion in selecting the program and mj iout the whole process of implementation, jhess of members of the school, district. immunity to undertake the reforms. ^g access to long-term, program-specific Kal assistance and support from beyond the (that is, from external program developers ^yersity collaborators). act and state commitment to ongoing staff ropment supporting the school Improvement The context in which the program was implemented had a great deal of power to facilitate or impede its implementation. Rebecca Herman and Sam Stringfield, 1997  The schools and districts ability to obtain and maintain sufficient fiscal support.  A commitment by district and school administrators to maintain the program through a sometimes turbulent implementation stage and to give the program time to have an impact. This last point was especially critical. The researchers concluded that, while it is important to consider accountability, the focus on outcomes must be balanced with patience for process. When a school or system discontinued one program and substituted another without providing strong evidence of cost savings or program effectiveness, teachers tended to become cynical about investing their energy in new programs (Herman and Stringfield 1997,127-130). Findings of the Study of Effective Schools Programs A 1995 report generated as part of a Congressionally mandated study of Effective Schools programs and other school-based reforms identified features common to schools successfriUy engaged in reform. As part of the study, administrators in a sample of 1,550 districts were asked to respond to a mail survey containing questions about the status of comprehensive school-level improvement efforts. The study design also included Intensive site visits to 32 schools, in which the researchers observed what was really happening in schools that considered themselves involved with comprehensive reform (QueUmalz et al. 1995). The research team used their observations in the 32 schools to develop what they termed key features of successfrd reform strategies. These features provide valuable direction for schools beginning their comprehensive reform efforts, no matter what model they decide to adopt. In general, the successful school-based reforms had three key features\n-2-ft: i  Challenging learning experiences for all I students. This feature tended to emerge from I four coordinated elements: high teacher I expectations\nchallenging curricula\nexploration of \\ a variety of alternative configurations of students L and teachers\nand exploration of alternative 5 assessment methods.  A school culture that nurtured staff collaboration and participation in decision making. The most successfill school-based reforms took place in schools that created cultures of collegiality by finding ways for staff and the community to work together on significant changes needed in their schools. Equally important to shared decision making was the reformulation of the roles and authority exercised by teachers and administrators.  Meaningful opportunities for professional growth. In the successfill schools, teachers set staff development priorities keyed to their vision of the reform goals in their schools. Typically, staff development topics related to technical areas such as curriculum, instruction, and assessment, or to managerial areas such as schoolwide planning or collaborative decision making. In some instances, teacher teams developed strategic plans that allowed sustained, coherent immersion in an area. Forsaking a grab bag of one-session workshops, teachers sought the expertise and time necessary to acquire, implement, and reflect on innovations on an ongoing basis. Study of Six Benchmark Schools In a recent study reporting his observations of six schools that were demonstrating success -with their . school improvement efforts, Gordon Cawelti found that each of the six schools follows a different path: \u0026amp;fheir educational programs and approaches vary greatly. But aU focus on student achievement as an sVend goal (1999, 3). Cawelti identified six additional chaA racteristicz*sf* that provizdn e Tvroa 1l1u1 ao brliel icnsii zgrhritT rftoTr* cscz*hooz\"ol leaders involved with school improvement efforts:  There is a focus on clear standards and improving results.  Teamwork is a way of life and helps ensure ac-u countability. People in these teams meet reguand solve problems. larly to examine assessment results and plan instruction based on these results, to plan cooperative instructional activities, and to communicate n  The principal is a strong educational leader. These six schools are led by principals who know that they must focus on the whole system, that they must facilitate the work of others, and that they must solve many problems every day.  Staff members are committed to helping all students achieve. These teachers spend e?rtra time working with students and planning to make the school better.n  Multiple changes are made to improve the instructional life of students, and these changes are sustained over time. These six schools have not raised achievement by changing just one factor, such as schedule, teaching methods, or technology. Substantial improvement comes when a school is able to undertake several changes in an organized fashion and sustain and perfect them n over a period of at least three to five years (Cawelti 1999,63-65). Suggestions from the Education C ommis-sion of the States: Clear and Continuous Communication Is a Key The Education Commission of the States, in its publication Listen, Discuss, and Act: Parents and Teachers' Views on Education Reform, provides suggestions for schools and districts interested in engaging the entire school community in their efforts to improve student achievement. Three key suggestions include:  Communicate well with teachers. The experience of schools and districts across the country clearly shows that if teachers, are not informed and active participants in the process, reform efforts win fail. Teachers who are satisfied with the basic ideas of a reform effort may have enormous frustrations with the way the effort is implemented. Give teachers a voice in the process treat them as partners with the school and district in the reform. Also, let them know up front how much time any changes will involve, what the effect on their work will be, and what they can expect to happen.  Be clear about what it means to set high standards for aU students, and what it will take to meet them. Survey and focus group results strongly suggest that parents and teachers are more inclined to support a goal of improving success for all students rather than buying into the notion that all children can learn at high -3- Lducationai Kesearcn dervice Ilevels. They believe the goal of having all stu- ^dents achieve at stellar levels is counterproductive Sand unrealistic. In other words, higher standards Kfor all receive more support than high standards K\u0026amp;r all. Agendas that include setting high stan- fedards also need to spell out clearly who set the Bistandards and what resources (including instruc- Etion, materials, and time) wiU be provided to help c*' 'children meet them. Show how new ideas enhance, rather than re- 1 place, the old ones. This research shows that ^parents and educators are primed for school re- sform, but they worry that the innovations are not B feasible or wiU go too far. They recognize the K peed for students to go beyond the basics and Rjeam more complex skUls, but fear that basics are fe hot being taught adequately. When you are intro- fc during something new, show how it works with ^'what is already there. For instance, There will  be portfolios and other demonstrations of stu- fedent work, along with more traditional standard- ^tzed tests. Bridge the gap between peoples expeFA riences and expectations and the changes being ^implemented, then show how the changes im- prove learning for students. ^Applying these guideUnes for communication iSfifig the complex processes of selecting and imple- 's [enbng a comprehensive model for school improveJ I ^t, one that wiU affect teachers, students, and the ^^rnunity at large, should be considered as impor- ^mas what goes on day-to-day at the school site. K -4 f t^-Performing Texas Schools Kh summarizing his observations of schools that ive/experienced success with school improvement, \u0026gt;nnson identifies three broad groups of factors that Khlve a profound impact on a schools efforts, ^e are: ^^ttitudes, expectations, and reasons. Successful - ^programs are characterized by a wiUingness to ^question current practices, chaUenge conven- ^tional wisdom, and explore every opportunity for improving teaching and learning...the focus is on ^improving instruction in every aspect of each ^students school experience. ^Comprehensive, focused, meaningful planning. g^This must include an in-depth assessment of i^sgengths and needs, the estabUshment of chal- ^fenging and measurable goals, and an intensive ^Kearch for options that might lead the school from current levels of performance to the challenging goals articulated in the planning process.  Commitment to continuous improvement. This must include a sense of ownership by aU staff in every aspect of the plan, the development of systems for regularly gauging progress, and systems for celebrating success. Successful programs are characterized by a willingness to question current practices, challenge conventional wisdom, and explore every opportunity for improving teaching and learning. Joseph F. Johnson, 1997 In Johnsons view, the manner in which principals, teachers, parents, and other school leaders address these factors may substantially influence whether their schoolwide program wiU bring focus and power to academic reform efforts (1997, online). Examples of Promising School Improvement Efforts The Memphis City Schools Experience Memphis City Schools has, for the past few years, provided a case study of schools in the midst of reform. As of spring 1995,45 of the Memphis schools had begun implementation of New American Schools designs, with six different designs represented. Researchers studying first-year implementation of the programs in these schools concluded that:  AU of the restructuring efforts required a great deal of energy, time, and commitment from the teachers, administrators, and school community.  Restructuring initiatives that provided classroom materials and guideUnes for instruction generaUy started faster than designs emphasizing teacher- developed materials.  Issues of focused leadership and ongoing, focused professional development appeared Ukely to determine substantial parts of the long-term successes of the schools. However, relative to what -4-it 1 t: V, Educational Research Service L might be called reasonable progress, the re- L searchers concluded that the Memphis start-up were successful, with no t, implementations J unresolvable problems (CRESPAR 1997). She Clover Park Experience r The Clover Park School District outside Tacoma, Washington began its journey of change in 1995. \"pie district took a careful and comprehensive look at fwhat factors contributed to the success of the effort, information about the role of the school board and lientral office in encouraging, promoting, and sup- ^^orting change at the school level provides valuable ^^guidance to other school districts. These were the guidelines used to direct district-level involvement SB.3 ^and activity: at W' W\nI B ?* '^J:-  -sj?\n' Board members set initial goals and had frequent and significant opportunities to remain informed about the process of implementation and school reform. All staff understood and were committed to beliefs driving the comprehensive reform effort first and foremost that all children can and will learn. Decisions were required to be based on data and research. ' District money was reallocated to support comprehensive reform.  A comprehensive needs assessment process that promoted collaboration, focused on data and research, and worked well with district priorities was designed and supported.  District structures responsive to the needs of schools were put in place.  Hiring and transfer procedures ensured a good match between schools and staff.  During the change planning process, district staff got to know principals well and supported them as they helped them to provide strong leadership at their schools.  District staff learned to talk the talk of the individual school. Staff development was tailored to individual school needs and the requirements of would not have been as pervasive or as positive (Davis, Sagmiller, and Hagans undated). Hugh Burkette, Clover Park superintendent, talks about some lessons he has learned from the process of supporting implementation of schoolwide improvement in the districts schools. He says:  Comprehensive school reform has to be approached in a thoughtful way. We had to use a process that passed the teacher-test of work worth doing. The self-study process they embraced took timeall yearbut it gave us powerful results. Our staffs collected so much data about their schools. They looked at it hard\nthey identified needs\nthey did the research about what works, what met the needs of their kids. They didnt skip steps. And when they were done with their process, each staff was ready... to make an organized change.  A national model cannot be your whole school reform...You get different parts and have to backfill where the model doesnt address significant school needs. Models dont answer all of the questions, or address all of the needs. They dont fix everything.  Our teachers and staff taught me that every school is unique. At the same time, we insist that the models be Implemented as designed. Their success is based on all of the component parts being implemented.  Establish structures at the district level that help schools stay focused. All of our schools... have developed comprehensive school plans....Because each goal is followed by a series of concrete strategies with timelines and assessment measures, there is no such thing as the failure of a plan. If one or the other strategy doesnt work, our schools go back and revise the strategies. They try again (1998, 7-11). i the specific reform model. In the view of observers of the Clover Park pro- 1 cess, without clear direction from the board and superintendent, and active support of district staff. W these changes (in student achievement) most likely Anticipating and Dealing with the Impact of Change Change is not easy, even when those involved are committed to making the effort. In Implementing Schoolwide Projects: An Idea Book for Educators, the authors talk of the challenges of change and note: Practitioners confront considerable obstacles as they design and implement more coherent educational services... Success stories do not unfold without false starts, and the routes to improvement are -5-\\s/  circuitous (Pechman and Fiester 1994). They go on to identify challenges that persistently confronted schools involved in implementation of schoolwide improvement:  Adequate Time to Learn New Roles. The transition to a schoolwide project involves introducing new and expanded roles, academic expectations, and management structures. Even new resources require that long-standing practices be adjusted. These changes can be disconcerting or overwhelming to some members of the school community. Even with broad support, new initiatives can be tricky to coordinate smoothly.  Communication and Involvement. Without exception, schoolwide project planners said that project success is direcdy related to the quality of communication among planners and the degree to which teachers are partners in planning and implementation. The biggest pitfail is lack of communication, remarked a principal whose school is in its second project cycle.  Adequate Preparation for New Resources. Successfill school-wide projects require extensive training of all teachers in uses of technology, new content and methods, and teaching styles.  Including Parents and the Community. Organizers of schoolwdde projects find that it is not enough to improve instruction, curricula, or materials. Success for the project depends on support from parents, businesses, special-interest groups, and fraternal organizations.  Awareness of Achievement Variability. Despite the strong academic programs and comprehensive assistance that schoolwide projects offer children, student performance on standardized tests can fluctuate from year to year. Dips in achieve- ment in schoolwide projects that are working well are rarely unexpected. Teachers know when a group of students have confronted difficulties, and the teachers anticipate performance below their goals. However, it is significant that these schools have structures that allow staff to adjust the program as needed.  Stabilizing Change. The most consistent threat to schoolwide project success is the change in leadership that occurs all too often and too early in the life of many projects. It is not uncommon for enthusiastic district managers, seeing the success of a creative leader in initiating a schoolwide project, to move that leader into a new administrative slot well before the new initiatives stabilize, sometimes as soon as only one or two years after a project gets under way. (Pechman and Fiester 1994). The Importance of Leadership No discussion of factors that affect school change efforts would be complete wdthout attention to the crucial, yet difficult role that leadership plays. Tony Trujillo, superintendent of the Ysleta School District in Texas, highlights a key component of this role in supporting school improvement: My job is to get ordinary people to do extraordinary things (Ragland et al. 1999,18). How do leaders accomplish this role? In her discussion of leadership characteristics that facilitate school change, Mendez-Morse identifies six characteristics of successful leaders of educational change:  vision, specifically that students learning is of primary importance\n believing schools are for learning\n valuing the professional contributions of staff, relating well to people, and able to foster collaborative relationships\n being a skilled communicator and listener, someone who can articulate a vision and communicate that shared vision to all in the school community\n acting proactively. Initiating action as well as anticipating and recognizing aspects of the environment that might interfere with efforts to carry out the mission\n_  taking risks but not carelessly or thoughtlessly\nencouraging others to be risk takers by providing a safe environment (1999). Participants in several U.S. Department of Education focus groups agreed with the importance of vision and v^ues, and identified the school leader as key to maintaining the vision during the often difficult process of school change: These leaders seldom claim to have invented the vision or the underlying values and beliefs\ninstead, they perceive themselves to be keepers of the dream. They embrace it wholeheartedly and make sure that everyone else does too...Developing and  maintaining the vision challenges a leaders ability to determine how well what is happening matches reasonable expectations at a given stage of implementation. In addition, when faced with problems, effective leaders see multiple solutions that preserve the spirit of the vision. They find it important to -6-Lducaiionai x\\esearcn Service   T study the nature of vision and recognize the stages of its development...Although the details of participants visions varied, each put students squarely in the center (U.S. Department of Education 1996). Hugh Burkette, the Clover Park superintendent, adds one additional responsibility for a leader of change: Leadership means being relentless. Being relentless means being single-minded and purposeful... Of every action and every decision we ask a single question: how does this act support increased student achievement?...! cant emphasize to you enough the power of beUef in providing leadership (1998). Summary In the current climate of change and reform, schools and districts across the nation are engaged in school Improvement efforts. These efforts may be comprehensive and school-wide, or they may be more narrowly aimed at specific areas. It is important to recognize that school improvement is a complex process, and that even a well-designed approach can fail unless school leaders put in place the conditions that support its success. This ERS Informed Educator has provided an overview of factors that can contribute to the success or failure of school improvement, based on research and experience. By incorporating an understanding of these factors into their planning, educators can focus their efforts so that their hard work and collaboration result in significant progress towards the goal of increased learning for aU students. Sources Burkette, Hugh E. 1998. Making Comprehensive School Reform Work. Presentation at Improving Americas Schools Regional Conference (Portland, OR): October 21, 1998. Cawelti, Gordon. 1999. Portraits of Six Benchmark Schools: Diverse Approaches to Improving Student Achievement. Arlington, VA\nEducational Research Service. CRESPAR. 1997. Scaling Up: The New American Schools in Memphis. Johns Hopkins University and Howard University: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk. Online. (September 1997). http\n//scov.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/septl997page07.html. Davis, Deborah, Kay SagmiUer, and Rex Hagans. Undated. Implementing School Reform Models: The Clover Park Experience. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Online, -www.nwrel.org/csrdp/ clover.html. Education Commission of the States. 1996. Listen, Discuss, and Act: Parents and Teachers Views on Education Reform. Denver, CO: Author. Hetman, Rebecca, and Sam Stringfield. 1997. Ten Promising Programs for EducatingAl! Children: Evidence of Impact. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Johnson, Joseph. E, Jr. Promising Practices: Creating School-wide Programs that Make a Difference. 1997. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana Center, The University of Texas at Austin. Online, http://www.starcenter.org/ptomise/ schppromise.htm. Lake, Robin J., et al. 1999. Making Standards Work: Active Voices, Focused Learning. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education. New American Schools. 1998. Blueprints for School Success: A Guide to New American Schools Designs. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. 1999. Self- Study. Portland, OR\nAuthor. Online, http:// www.nwrel.org/ scpd/natspec/self. html. Mendez-Morse, Sylvia. 1999. Leadership Characteristics that Facilitate School Change. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational development Laboratory. Online, http:// www.sedl.org/change/leadership/welcome.html. Ohio Department of Education. 1999. Transforming Learning Communities: A Research Project on School Change. Columbus, OH: Author. Online, http\n// schoolimptovement.ode.ohio.gov/ tic/ default.html. Pechman, E., and L. Fiestet 1994. Implementing Schoolwide Projects: An Idea Book for Educators. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service. Online, http:// www.ed.gov/pubs/SchlProj. Quellmalz, Edys, et al. 1995. School-Based Reform. Lessons from a National Study: A Guide for School Reform Teams. Menlo Park, CA\nSRI International. Online. http://'www.ed.gov/pubs/Reform/pt2a.html. Ragland, Mary A. et al. 1999. Urgency, Responsibility, Efficiency: Preliminary Findings of a Study of High-Performing Texas School Districts. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana - Center, The University of Texas at Austin. Richardson, Joan. 1998. Data Provides Answers for Student Learning. Results (October 1998): 1,6-7. Schaffer, Eugene C., Pamela S. Nesselrodt, and Samuel C. Stringfield. 1997. Impediments to Reform: An Analysis of Destabilizing Issues in Ten Promising Programs. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Slavin, Robert E. Undated. Sand, Bricks, and Seeds: School Change Strategies and Readiness for Reform. Baltimore, MD\nCenter for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk. Online. www.successforaU/ sandbrickhtm. Talley, Susan. 1999. Perpectives: What Does It Take to Reform a Low-Performing School? From At-Risk to Excellence (Spring 1999): 2-3. U.S. Department of Education. 1996. The Role of Leadership in Sustaining School Reform: Voices from the Field. Online. (July 1996). http://'www.ed.gov/pubs/ Leadership. U.S. Department of Education. 1998. Turning Around Low-Performing schools: A Guide for State and Local Leaders. Washington, DC: Author, 1998. I L -7- to Educational Research Service IO' oi More Information on Factors that Contribute to the Access of School Improvement Efforts info-Files on related topics. The following are just a few of the ER5 Info-Files on topics related to change Wschool improvement. Each ERS Info-File contains 70-100 pages of articles from professional journals. i ^maries of research studies, and related literature concerning th^topic, plus an annotared bibliography that deludes an ERIC-CIJE search. Base price per Info-File: $32.00. ERS Comprehensive subscriber price: $16.00. fo Individual subscriber price\n$24.00. To order, contact Educational Research Service, 2000 Clarendon ^iilevard, Arlington, VA 22201. Phone: (800) 791-9308. Fax\n(800) 791-9309. Or order online through the ERS ^eb site, wvw.ers.org. Add the greater of $3.50 or 10% of total purchase price for postage and handling. Phone Visa, MasterCard, or American Express. f A ^d Web site orders accepted with purchase order number or School Restructuring (#IE-194). Provides various perspectives on efforts to change education, including examinations of successes and failures in school reform, why reform efforts succeed or fail, school staff opinion about change efforts, and how to facilitate reform. . Strategies for Educational Change (#IE-244). Reviews models for creating change in schools\nbarriers to change\nfostering a culture/climate that facilitates change\nroles for school administrators in bringing change to their schools\nand sustaining changes in schools. 'About ERS Educational Research Service (ERS) is the nonprofit foundation serving the research and information needs of education leaders and the public. ERS ^^Eprovides objective, accurate, and up-to-date research ' and information for local school and school district decisions. .^ ERS, established in 1973, is sponsored by seven ACnational associations of school administrators: ft  American Association of School Administrators  American Association of School Personnel Administrators  Association of School Business Officials  Council of Chief State School Officers  National Association of Elementary School Principals National Association of Secondary School Principals National School Public Relations Association. The Informed Educator Series 4^-. Educational Research Serrdee prepares the publica- tions in The Informed Educator series to provide busy education leaders with concise, yet comprehensive overviews of the most current research and informa- V tion on topics of priority concern in education. Each publication in this series is designed to keep education leadersincluding central-office administrators, principals, curriculum specialists, teachers, and othersup to date on a leading or emerging issue in education, enabling them to make the best decisions for the children and youth they serve. Prepared by the ERS staff, publications in The Informed Educator series are intended to provide an objective, comprehensive summary of research and opinion appearing in the current literature. The inclusion of any specific assertion or opinion here is not intended to imply approval or endorsement by Educational Research Service or any ERS sponsoring organization. Other topics in The Informed Educator series include\n Helping Students Deal with Conflict and Anger  Curriculum Integration  Beginning Reading Instruction: Research and Practice  Productive Communication with Parents  Ability Grouping: Ejfects and Alternatives  Integrating Technology into the Curriculum  and more! Ordering Information\nStock No. IE-348. Base price per copy\n$9.60. Comprehensive subscriber price: $4.80. --------- available.Schooldistrictsmayalsopurchaseacamera- ready reproducible, which includes unlimited reproduction rights within the district. In addition, Individu^ suD- scriptions for standing orders for each new publication in The Informed Educator series are available. For infor- Individual subscriber price: $7.20. Quantity discounts are mation, contact ERS Member Services Information Center, 2000 Clarendon Boulevard, Arlington, VA 222U1. Phone:(800) 791-9308. Fax: (800) 791-9309. E-mail: msic@ers.org. Web site: www.ers.org -8-Analysis of Achievement Level Tests, Spring 2000 Little Rock School District School Badgett Interpretations _____________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 3 to 4 Math higher than District average Grade 3 seems strongest: higher than average gains in all three tests from grade 2 Grade 5 seems weakest: declines in all three tests from grade 4 Scores below LRSD average in all areas #35 in LRSD in Grade 2 Reading, Language, and Math #35 in LRSD in Grade 5 Reading, Language, and Math Average total growth points (76) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 26 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 22 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 28 points Mathematics: Grade 223 points below the national median Grade 310 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 517 points below Language: Grade 220 points below national median Grade 32 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 514 points below Reading: Grade 233 points below national median Grade 32 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 518 points below 1 School Bale Interpretations_________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 4 to 5 Math higher than District average Grade 4 seems weakest: less than average growth in all three areas Scores higher than LRSD averages in Grades 2 and 3 Language and in Grades 2-3 Reading #33 in LRSD in Grade 5 Reading Way below average (62) in total growth points Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 17 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 18 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 27 points Mathematics: Grade 212 points below national median Grade 37 points below Grade 410 points below Grade 510 points below Language: Grade 25 points below national median Grade 3AT the national median Grade 48 points below Grade 511 points below Reading: Grade 211 points below national median Grade 36 points below Grade 49 points below Grade 514 points below 2 School Baseline Success for All Interpretations_________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 4 to 5 Math and Reading above District average growth Scores lower than LRSD in all test areas Grade 3 appears to be strongest. #33 in Grade 4 Reading, #34 in Grade 4 Language, and #33 in Grade 4 Math Below LRSD average in total growth points (73) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 25 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 23 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 25 points Mathematics: Grade 216 points below national median Grade 38 points below Grade 413 points below Grade 514 points below Language: Grade 212 points below national median Grade 35 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 59 points below Reading: Grade 217 points below national median Grade 38 points below Grade 413 points below Grade 512 points below 3 School Booker Arts Magnet Interpretations_______________________________________ Growth from grade 4 to 5 higher than District average in all three test areas Scores higher than District averages in all test areas #10 in Grade 2 Reading, #7 in Math #9 in Grade 3 Reading #9 in Grade 5 Reading, #10 in Math Above District average in total growth points (78) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 24 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 27 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 27 points Mathematics: Grade 27 points below national median Grade 33 points below Grade 43 points below Grade 52 points below Language: Grade 26 points below national median Grade 31 point below Grade 4-AT national median Grade 51 point above national median Reading: Grade 28 points below national median Grade 34 points below Grade 42 points below Grade 54 points below 4 School Brady Success for All Newcomer Center Interpretations___________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 Math, Language, and Reading higher than average District growth Growth from grade 3 to 4 Language and Reading higher than average District growth Grade 3 seems strong Grade 5 seems weak\ngrowth lower than District averages Score in Grade 3 Math equal to District average #33 in Grade 2 Reading, #31 in Math Above District average in total growth points (84) Grade 2 to 3 Reading = 29 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 26 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 29 points Mathematics: Grade 218 points below national median Grade 35 points below Grade 44 points below Grade 511 points below Language: Grade 215 points below national median Grade 34 points below Grade 43 points below Grade 59 points below Reading: Grade 220 points below national median Grade 39 points below Grade 44 points below Grade 513 points below 5 School Carver Science Magnet Interpretations__________________________________________ Growth from grade 3 to 4 in all three test areas higher than District average, Growth from grade 4 to 5 Reading higher than District average Grade 3 seems weak\nlower than average growth #3 in Grade 2 Reading, #2 in Language, #3 in Math #6 in Grade 3 Reading, #6 in Language, #6\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"umc_awr_50587","title":"Correspondence and General National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1999","collection_id":"umc_awr","collection_title":"Advancing Workers’ Rights in the American South","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999"],"dcterms_description":["Folder of materials from the \"National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1956-1999\" series from the AFL-CIO Civil Rights Department records"],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights","Labor movement"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence and General National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Maryland, College Park. Libraries"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hdl.handle.net/1903.1/50587"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["records (documents)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1690","title":"Court filings concerning teacher retirement and health insurance remedy","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1999-01"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Joshua Intervenors","Little Rock School District","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School employees","Teachers","Teachers--Salaries, etc.","Retirement"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning teacher retirement and health insurance remedy"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1690"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["37 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, advisory letter from Joshua intervenors; District Court, Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) prehearing brief on the teacher retirement and health insurance remedy; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) pre-trial brief re: teacher retirement and health insurance remedy; District Court, order; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) post-trial submission; District Court, Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) post-hearing brief on the teacher retirement and health insurance remedy; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) post-hearing brief concerning remedies on the issues of teacher retirement and health insurance; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) supplemental response to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's), Little Rock School District's (LRSD's), and North Little Rock School District's (NLRSD's) motions for attorneys' fees and costs; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. JQHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY Ar LAw 1723 BROAl)WAV l,JTTl.E ROCK, Alu\u003c..~NSAS 72206 , TEU:Pl!0:-IE (501) 374-3758   FA.\\ (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile - 324-6096 1 anuary 4, 1999 Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge  United States District Court 600 West Capitol Llittle Rock, AR 72201 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD Dear Judge Wright: 315 P02 '02 JAN OJ ' 99 17:02 This is to advise that the Joshua Intervenors hereby adopt by reference the Little Rock School Dsitrict's Prehearing Brief On The Teacher Retirement and Health Insurance Remedy. JWW:js cc: Mrs. Ann Brown All Counsel of Record  IN TIIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LI'ITLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF vs. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS INTERVENERS INTERVENERS :MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S PREHEARING BRIEF ON THE TEACHER RETIREMENT AND HEALTH INSURANCE REJMEDY I. Introduction. This hearing concerns the method for calculating the three Pulaski County school districts' damages for the State of Arkansas' violation of the 1989 Settlement Agreement with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs. On July 1, 1998, the Eighth Circuit affirmed this Court's finding of liability and remanded for a detennination of the districts' damages. LRSD v. PCSSD, 148 F.3d 956 (8th Cir. 1998). In making that detennination, the Eighth Circuit offered the following guidance: On remand, it will be up to the District Court, in the first instance, to decide exactly what relief is appropriate. The three Pulaski County districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding for teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed This does not mean that these districts are entitled to receive both an amount equivalent to what the old system would have produced for teacher retirement and health insurance, and the whole amount now paid to them as Equalization Funding. Such a result would be double recovery, a windfall. But the districts are entitled to be held hannless against any adverse effect of the funding change. This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance - would have produced, and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing. The appellants suggest that this effort will necessarily involve speculation. Admittedly it cannot be exact, but we believe that the District Court can make a reasonable and informed estimate. LRSD v. PCSSD, 148 F.3d 956, 968 (8* Cir. 1998). As the State, LRSD, NLRSD md Joshua interpret the Eighth Circuit's opinion, the districts' damages should be calculated as follows: (1) determine the amount the districts would have received for teacher retirement and health insurance under the old Act 34 funding system; (2) determine the amount the districts actually received for teacher retirement and health insurance under the new Act 917 funding system; and (3) subtract (2) from (1). II. Discussion. A PCSSD's overall remedy argument. Although PCSSD originally agreed with the other parties' interpretation of the Eighth Circuit's decision, PCSSD now argues that the districts' damages should be based on an overall comparison between the old Act 34 funding system and the new Act 917 funding system. Compare Docket Nos. 3174 and 3187 to 3227. This argument ignores the previous findings of this Court and the opinion of the Eighth Circuit and should be rejected as a matter oflaw. First, the argument ignores the previous findings of this Court. This Court rejected this same argument when it was made by the State. The Court stated: While the state may contend that the settling districts will receive more formula money under the new funding scheme, the Court finds that because the new funding scheme does not consider the number of eligible employees but instead is based upon ADM, equalized by the wealth of the district, requiring the settling districts to pay health insurance matching from equali1,lllion or local funds is not a \"fair and rational\" adjustment to the funding formula. 2 Docket No. 2968, Memorandum Opinion and Order, p. 5 ( emphasis supplied). Assuming PCS SD' s calculations are correct, LRSD would recover nothing under an overall remedy. Docket No. 3227, Exhibit A Consequently, LRSD would be forced to use equalization funding or local funds to pay its teacher retirement and health insurance costs. As quoted above, that is exactly why this Court found that the Act 917 funding system violated the Settlement Agreement with regard to teacher retirement and health insurance. It would be absurd to now adopt a \"remedy'' that brings about the same result. Not surprisingly, an overall remedy results in a windfall to PCSSD. PCSSD claims that the overall change from Act 34 to Act 917 decreased PCSSD's total state funding by $3,794,039 in 1996-97 and $2,781,691 in 1997-98. Docket No. 3227, Exhibit A, p. 3. PCSSD seeks to recover these amounts as its remedy for the State's liability with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs. However, according to PCSSD's own calculations, its loss for teacher retirement and health insurance totaled only $1,830,003 in 1996-97 and $1,679,881 in 1997-98. Docket No. 3186, Exhibit A and B. Thus, an overall remedy results in PCSSD being awarded damages more than three million dollars in excess of its actual loss in teacher retirement and health insurance funding. The difference between PCS SD' s teacher retirement and health insurance loss and its overall loss results, at least in part, from the adverse impact on PCS SD of the change in the funding formula for distributing general state aid, what was called MFP A under Act 34 and what is now called equalization funding under Act 917. PCSSD seeks to recover this amount despite the fact that no court has found that the Act 917 funding formula per se violates the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement permits the State to make \"[f]air and rational adjustments to the funding 3 formula which have general applicability blltwl,ich nd,,ce tire proportion of State aid to any of the Districts .... \" Settlement Agreement ,U.L (emphasis supplied). Therefore, even if PCSSD is correct in its assertion that it received less general state aid under the Act 917 funding system compared to what it would have received under the Act 34 funding system, this does not establish that Act 917 funding formula violates the Settlement Agreement. PCSSD bears the burden of proving that Act 917 was not a fair and rational adjustment to the funding formulcl. PCSSD moved for summary judgment on this issue on September 2, 1997, while the teacher retirement and health insurance appeals were pending before the Eighth Circuit. Docket No. 3042 and 3043. This Court denied that motion on January 12, 1998 \"[b ]ecause there are genuine issues of material fact in dispute regarding the state funding formula.\" Docket No. 3104, p. 2. Those issues of material fact remain unresolved. Second, PCSSD's argument ignores the precise issue before the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit clearly limited its opinion to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs. In the opening paragraph ofits opinion, the Eighth Circuit stated that \"[t]he question presented is whether changes made by the State of Arkansas in the funmng of retirement and health insurance for teachers violated [the Settlement Agreement].\" Id. at 963 ( emphasis supplied). The Eighth Circuit began its discussion stating, \"This case has to do with two important categories of school operating expenses: contributions for teacher retirement and employees' health insurance.\" Id. ( emphasis supplied). Nothing in the Eighth Circuit's discussion indicates that the court went beyond the question presented to find that the Act 917 funding formula violated the Settlement Agreement. Third, PCSSD's argument ignores the whole of the Eighth Circuit's opinion. Taken in the context of the question presented, the remedy contemplated by the Eighth Circuit was clearly limited 4 to the districts' loss in teacher retirement and health insurance funding. the Eighth Circuit began its description of the remedy by stating that \"[t]he three Pulaski County districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding for teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed \" Id. at 968 ( emphasis supplied). The Eighth Circuit recognized, however, that the districts' equalization funding included some amount for teacher retirement and health insurance. lg. at 965. Accordingly, it directed this Court to reduce the districts' damages by this amount in order to prevent a double recovery. The Eighth Circuit stated: The three Pulaski County districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding/or teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed This does not mean that these districts are entitled to receive both an amount equivalent to what the old system would have  produced/or teacher retirement and health insurance, and the whole amount now paid to them as Equalization Funding. Such a result would be double recovery, a windfall. Id. (emphasis supplied). Thus, the first step in determining the districts' damages is to calculate \"what the old system would have produced/or teacher retirement and health insurance.\" Id. What the old Act 34 system produced for teacher retirement and health insurance was the districts' actual costs for those programs. Summarizing its explanation of the remedy, the Eighth Circuit concluded: Id. But the districts are entitled to be held harmless against any adverse effect of the funding change. This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance - would have produced, and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing. 5 Reading these final two sentences in isolation, PCSSD contends that the Eighth Circuit's opinion calls for an overall remedy. However, the failure of the Eighth Circuit to repeat for the third time \"for teacher retirement and health insurance\" after the words \"produced\" and \"producing\" in no way indicates that the Eighth Circuit intended to completely depart from the rest of the opinion and the preceding sentences in the same paragraph. These final two sentences may properly be read as follows: This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance- would have produced [for teacher retirement and health insurance], and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing [for teacher retirement and health insurance]. The Eighth Circuit most certainly would have expressly stated and explained the basis for an overall remedy if such was its intention. This it did not do. Rather, it described the logical course this Court should follow in determining the districts' damages \"for teacher retirement and health insurance.\" The Eighth Circuit's use of the phrase ''MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance\" should not be construed as a mathematical equation, but rather as a general description of the old Act 34 funding system. Even if construed as a mathematical equation, however, the phrase in no way dictates an overall remedy. As discussed above, the preceding sentences make it clear that the Eighth Circuit was concerned with \"what the old system would have produced for teacher retirement and health insurance.\" Id. Both this Court and the Eighth Circuit have recognized that, under the old Act 34 funding system, the State paid the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs outside of the funding formula used to distribute MFPA. See LRSD v. PCSSD,'148 F.3d at 963. 6 Thus, the tenn MFP A essentially means zero in this context. In accord with this understanding, all of the parties, including PCSSD, originally submitted a proposed remedy based on the districts' actual costs. Docket Nos. 317 4-77. Finally, the Eighth Circuit's rationale for finding that the Act 917 funding system violated the Settlement Agreement with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs cannot be extended to the entire Act 917 funding system or the entire Act 917 funding fonnula. Quoting this Court's teacher retirement opinion, the Eighth Circuit explained: [I]nstead of directly funding each district based on the number of employees, the State has included funds for teacher retirement in the new funding scheme which distributes funds on a per ADM basis equalized by the wealth of the district. Just as the workers' compensation \"seed money'' fonnula worked to the detriment of the employee-heavy Pulaski County districts, so too does the distribution of teacher retirement contributions though the new funding formula give the districts less money to fund teacher retirement. While the three Pulaski County school districts may fare better under the new funding scheme from a state aid perspective, there is no question that the amount of their teacher retirement funding, previously directly funded by the State based upon the eligible salaries paid to their employees, will be reduced and result in unequal state funding. Id. at 967. The change from the Act 34 funding formula to the Act 917 funding fonnula does not suffer from this same defect. While teacher retirement and health insurance funding were based on the number of employees, the Act 34 funding formula was not. To summarize, the districts' remedy must, at a minimum, place them in a position which will not require them to use equalization funding or local funds to pay their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. An overall remedy would not achieve this because LRSD would be denied any recovery, notwithstanding an obvious loss of funding under Act 917 to pay these costs. Moreover, the Eighth Circuit's opinion cannot be fairly read as calling for an overall remedy. In discussing the issue and in outlining the remedy, the opinion clearly addresses only the districts' claims as to the 7 teacher retirement and health insurance programs. The Eighth Circuit's opinion should not be read to grant relief beyond the issues before the court. Bailey v. Henslee, 309 F.2d 840 (8* Cir. 1962) Therefore, an overall remedy should be rejected, and the districts' damages should be based on their loss of teacher retirement and health insurance funding. B. Damages based on the districts' loss of teacher retirement and health insurance funding. 1. Actual costs vs. equal funding. To award the districts damages based on their loss of teacher retirement and health insurance funding, this Court must resolve three additional issues. First, the State disagrees with the districts and Joshua on the starting point for calculating the districts' damages. The State argues that the districts' damages should be based on their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs. The districts and Joshua contend that the State should be required to pay the districts the same percentage of teacher retirement and health insurance costs paid by the State to all other school districts in Arkansas. In both the 1995-96 and 1996-97 school year, the State paid school districts outside Pulaski County 107% of their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs.1 In order to provide equal funding to the three Pulaski County districts, the starting point for their damages should be 107% of their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs. Docket No. 3187, Exhibit 1. 1Using Exhibit A to the Declaration of Tristan D. Greene (Docket No. 3176), this percentage may be calculated by first subtracting the actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs of the three Pulaski County districts from the statewide total to obtain the actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs of other districts in the state. The amount other districts received in excess of their actual costs is equal to the total desegregation adjustment shown in column 4. The total desegregation adjustment is then added to the actual teacher retirement costs of other districts. This equals the actual amount received by other districts in the state for their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. The percentage of costs received by other districts in the state is determined by dividing the actual amount received by other districts in the state by the actual costs of other districts in the state. In both 1996-97 and 1997-98, this percentage is 107%. 8 In the Eighth Circuit's workers' compensation opinion, the court defined the workers' compensation \"program\" as \"equal State funding of workers' compensation for all school districts.\" LRSD v. PCS SD, 83 F.3d at 1018. Accordingly, the Eighth Circuit found that this Court \"correctly held that the State must disburse seed money to the Pulaski County districts in the same percentage as it does statewide.\" Id. ( emphasis supplied). 2 Likewise, the State must disburse teacher retirement and health insurance funding to the districts \"in the same percentage as it does statewide.\" Therefore, the starting point for determining the districts' damages should be the percentage of teacher retirement and health insurance costs paid by the State to other districts in Arkansas rather than the three Pulaski County districts' actual costs. See Docket No. 3187, Districts' Brief, for a more complete discussion of this issue. 2. The amount of equalization funding received for teacher retirement and health insurance. The second issue concerns the amount of equalization funding received by the districts to pay their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. The State, LRSD, NLRSD and Joshua disagree with PCSSD as to the appropriate method for calculating this amount. The State proposes a methodology which takes into account the equalizing effect of the Act 917 funding formula. On August 19, 1998, all three districts agreed that the State's method was appropriate. See Docket No. 2Specifically, this Court stated: [T]he Court does find that the State must assist the three Pulaski County school districts to the same degree that it is assisting the other districts in the state. Thus, the state must fund the same proportion of the cost of each of the three Pulaski County school district' workers' compensation insurance as it pays for all the other school districts in the state beginning with the 1994-95 school year. Docket No. 2337, Memorandum Opinion and Order filed Jan. 13, 1995, p. 6-7. 9 3187. However, it appears PCSSD now intends to pursue its alternative methodology, which assumes that the Act 917 funding formula distributed equalization funding based only on a district's Average Daily Membership (''ADM''). PCS SD' s methodology should be rejected because it conflicts with the findings of this Court which were affirmed by the Eighth Circuit and because it fails to take into account the equalization effect of the Act 917 funding formula. (a) The State's methodology. The State proposes that the amount of equalization funding received by the districts for teacher retirement and health insurance be determined by a simple two-step calculation. First, the total teacher retirement and health insurance costs for all school districts in the state is divided by the total amount of state aid distributed through the Act 917 funding formula to get a percentage. Next, this percentage is multiplied by the total amount of Act 917 funding received by a district, with the  result being the amount of Act 917 funding the district received for teacher retirement and health insurance. The State's methodology recognizes that there is no way to trace funding for teacher retirement and health insurance through the Act 917 funding formula. As this Eighth Circuit noted, teacher retirement and health insurance funding \"has been folded into the over-all Equalization Funding system .... \" Id. at 965. Because money is fungible, the only reasonable assumption that can be made is that the funding for teacher retirement and health insurance was equally distributed among school districts. Therefore, the State's methodology assumes that, if 15% of equalization funding for all districts was for teacher retirement and health insurance, then 15% of LRSD's equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance. 10 The present case is similar to trust cases involving the commingling of trust assets with other assets. In effect, the State has commingled the teacher retirement and health insurance funding with equalization funding. Where a trustee commingles trust assets with other assets, the trust maintains a right to the trust assets based on their proportion to the whole. See, e.:\u0026., Restatement (Second) of Trusts,  202, comment n. Similarly, the amount of teacher retirement and health insurance funding the districts received should be based on the proportion of teacher retirement and health insurance funding to the whole of equalization funding. This is the result achieved by the State's methodology. The State currently uses this proposed methodology to detennine the amount of equalization funding school districts receive from the Education Excellence Trust Fund (\"Trust Fund\"). Ark. Code. Ann.  6-5-307 (Michie Supp. 1997) requires school districts to spend funding from the Trust  Fund on teachers' salaries. Ark . . Code. Ann.  6-5-307 (Michie Supp. 1997). Like the teacher retirement and health insurance programs, funding from the Trust Fund was once distributed outside the funding formula. When the State began distributing the Trust Fund as a part of equalization funding, school districts still needed to know the amount of funding they received from the Trust Fund in order to determine their compliance with Ark. Code Ann.  6-5-307. The State developed the methodology it now proposes in the present case to detennine the amount of equalization funding a district received from the Trust Fund. This methodology has already been subjected to public comment and adopted by the State Board of Education. The State's regulations setting forth this methodology are attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Most importantly, the State's methodology provides the greatest benefit to desegregation in that it results in the greatest monetary award for each school district, including PCS SD. See Docket 11 No. 3187, Districts' Response, Exhibit 1. Under PCSSD's own methodology (which assumes the districts recover more than their actual costs), PCS SD damages total $3,509,884 for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 school year. Docket No. 3186, Exhibit A and B. However, using the State's methodology ( and also assuming the districts recover more than their actual costs), PCS SD' s damages total $4,142, 571. See Docket No. 3187, Districts' Response, Exhibit 1. PCSSD's method had a much more significant impact on LRSD. Under PCSSD's methodology, LRSD's damages total $10,726,693. ill Exhibit 2 attached. The State's methodology results in a damage award to LRSD of Sl 7,819,759. See Docket No. 3187, Districts' Response, Exhibit 1. (b) PCSSD Methodology. PCS SD proposes calculating the amount of equalization funding received by the districts for teacher retirement and health insurance based on the assumption that each school district received the same amount per ADM. PCS SD takes the total teacher retirement and health insurance costs for all districts and the State and divides that amount by the total state ADM. The resulting per ADM amount is then multiplied by a district's ADM to determine the amount of equalization funding received by the district for teacher retirement and health insurance. PCSSD's methodology should be rejected for several reasons. First, it assumes that all districts received the same amount per ADM and thereby fails to take into account the equalizing effect of the Act 917 funding formula. As this Court has found, \"the State has included funds for teacher retirement in the new funding scheme which distributes funds on a perADM basis equalized by the wealth of the district.\" Docket No. 2930, Memorandum Opinion and Order, p. 9 (emphasis supplied). The equalizing effect of the Act 917 funding formula means that districts with greater local resources receive less equalization funding. For example, due to 12 differences in local resources, LRSD received $1,858.73 per ADM in equalization funding in 1997-98 and PCS SD received $2,815.47 per ADM in equaliz.ationfunding in 1997-98. See Exhibit 3 attached. PCS SD contends, however, that both districts received $428.18 per ADM for teacher retirement and health insurance. ~ Exhibit 2 attached. Thus, according to PCS SD, 23% ofLRSD' s equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance while only 15% ofPCSSD's equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance. No rational basis supports the assumption that a greater proportion of LRSD' s equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance. PCS SD' s method would result in LRSD being forced to use equaliz.ation funding or local funds to pay its teacher retirement and health insurance costs, but this is why the change to Act 917 violated the Settlement Agreement with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs in the first place. As this Court stated, \"requiring the settling districts to pay health - insurance matching from equaliz.ation or local funds is not a 'fair and rational' adjustment to the funding formula.\" Docket No. 2968, Memorandum Opinion and Order, p. 5. PCS SD attempts to justify the use of a pure ADM calculation by making the assumption that the money for teacher retirement and health insurance was removed from the Act 917 funding formula after equalization and distributed separately. However, there is no factual basis for making this assumption. Teacher retirement and health insurance funding was not removed from equalization funding, and it was not distributed separately after distribution of equaliz.ation funding. Rather, teacher retirement and health insurance funding was commingled with equalization funding. Therefore, the State's methodology provides the only reasonable means for determining the amount of equalization funding the districts received for teacher retirement and health insurance. 13 3. PCSSD's cap argument. Finally, PCS SD argues that the Eighth Circuit's opinion requires a comparison of the overall impact of the change from Act 34 to Act 917 for the purpose of establishing a limit or cap on the districts' damages. While this would not affect PCSSD, calculations submitted by PCS SD indicate that it would bar any recovery by LRSD. Docket No. 3227. PCSSD's motive in making this argument results from a concern about the disparity in teachers' salaries betweenPCSSD and LRSD. PCSSD apparently hopes to prevent LRSD from following through on a promised pay increase contingent upon its recovery in this case. The best indicator of the lack of merit in this argument is the fact that the State itself does not make it, despite the fact that the State would be the real beneficiary if the argument prevailed. As the State concedes, however, a cap on the districts' damages in the manner suggested by PCSSD would violate the Settlement Agreement. - First, capping the districts' damages based on an overall comparison between Act 34 and Act 917 would violate Paragraphs II.E. and II.L. of the Settlement Agreement by depriving the districts of the benefit of the change in the funding formula. The final sentence of Paragraph II.E. prevents the State from using general state aid (now equalization funding) to supplant its funding obligations under the Settlement Agreement. It provides, \"The funds paid by the State under this agreement are not intended to supplant any existing or future funding which is ordinarily the responsibility of the State of Arkansas.\" Settlement Agreement, ,i II.E. Therefore, assuming for the purpose of argument that LRSD benefitted overall from the change to the Act 917 funding system, the fact remains that the State failed to pay the same percentage ofLRSD's teacher retirement and health insurance costs as it paid to other school districts in the state, and this violates the Settlement Agreement. 14 A cap on the districts' damages as suggested by PCSSD would also violate Paragraph II.L. of the Settlement Agreement. The Eighth Circuit described this paragraph as an \"anti-retaliation clause.\" Id. at 966, quoting LRSD v. PCSSD, 83 F.3d 1013, 1018 (8* Cir. 1996). Discussing Paragraph II.L. in the workers' compensation decision, the Eighth Circuit explained: Id. Its purpose, by its very words, is to prevent the State from cutting other programs in order to pay for its desegregation commitments. U: for example, the State had passed a statute decreasing or eliminating workers' compensation payments for the settling districts only, while maintaining its system of paying the costs to other school districts, this portion of the Settlement Agreement would have clearly been offended. The flaw in PCSSD's cap argument can also be demonstrated by consideration of a hypothetical statute. Assume the State passed a statute adopting the Act 917 funding system but continuing to directly pay school districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs. Assume e next that the statute provided that the State would not pay the three Pulaski County districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs to the extent they benefitted from the overall change in the funding formula. Such a statute would clearly violate the Settlement Agreement. In this hypothetical, numerous school districts in the state would receive increased state aid as a result of the change in the funding formula, but only the three Pulaski County districts would be required to use any increase in state aid to pay their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. PCS SD' s cap argument brings about the same result as the hypothetical statute. Therefore, a cap on the districts' damages would, in and of itself, violate the Settlement Agreement and should be rejected. The Eighth Circuit stated in its teacher retirement and health insurance opinion that its decision in the workers' compensation case \"points the way towards a proper solution of the present appeal.\" The Eighth Circuit's opinion in the workers' compensation case in no way indicates that the 15 districts may only recover damages to the extent that they lost money overall due to the change in the funding system. The court simply held that \"the State must disburse seed money to the Pulaski County districts in the same percentage as it does statewide.\" LRSD v. PCSSD, 83 F.3d at 1018. The court imposed no requirement that the districts must lost out overall as a result of the overall funding changes, and this Court should not interpret "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1017","title":"\"Critical Performance Priorities, End of Year Report,\" Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School employees","School facilities","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["\"Critical Performance Priorities, End of Year Report,\" Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1017"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"lru_tulane-moore_70384","title":"Desire Housing Project","collection_id":"lru_tulane-moore","collection_title":"Long Civil Rights Movement: Photographs from the Ronnie Moore Papers, 1964 -1972","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Louisiana, Orleans Parish, New Orleans, 29.95465, -90.07507"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999"],"dcterms_description":["The Desire Housing Project in New Orleans.","reference@amistadresearchcenter.org"],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["New Orleans, La. : Tulane University Digital Library"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Desire Housing Project (New Orleans, La.)","New Orleans (La.)"],"dcterms_title":["Desire Housing Project"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Amistad Research Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/islandora/object/tulane%3A70384"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Physical rights are retained by the Amistad Research Center. The materials in this exhibition are being made available for personal and scholarly research use only. Copyright is retained in accordance with U.S. copyright laws. If you are the rightful copyright holder of an item represented in this exhibition and wishes to have it removed, please submit a request to reference@amistadresearchcenter.org including proof of ownership and clear identification of the work, preferably with URL."],"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs"],"dcterms_extent":["5 x 7 inches"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":407,"next_page":408,"prev_page":406,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":4872,"total_count":81191,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1909},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2740},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":197},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}