2018 State Review Panel Progress Monitoring Recommendation ...€¦ · supportive of the school’s...

© 2018 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Recommendation Form - 1

2018 State Review Panel Progress Monitoring Recommendation Form School/code & District/code: Adams City High School/0024 & Adams County 14/0030

State Review Panelists: Biaze Houston, Starla Pearson, Nancy Sanger, Johan Van Nieuwenhuizen

Recommendation Meeting Date: October 11, 2018

Current State-directed Action: The State Board concluded that the revised management proposal of the district, which meets the department’s rubric and is consistent with the recommendation of the Commissioner, is a statutorily-authorized accountability pathway pursuant to §22-11-209(2)(a), C.R.S.

Panel’s 2018 Recommendation:

The State Review Panel recommends management by another private or public entity other than the district for Adams City High School, in addition to the external management partnership currently in place, based on an analysis of compiled data and documentation, as well as a site visit conducted September 24th and 25th, 2018.

Evidence and Rationale:

The State Review Panel recommends continuing and expanding the relationship with Beyond Textbooks and adding

a management partner by a private or public entity other than the district. The Beyond Textbooks (BT) partnership

has the potential to positively impact efforts to improve instructional outcomes for students. Prior to the partnership,

there was no building-wide implementation of curriculum and assessments aligned to standards. Now, teachers are

planning for, and delivering, standards-aligned instructional resources as a result of the BT partnership. However, this

partnership does not address all critical matters at Adams City High School (ACHS). In addition, because BT does not

serve as an oversight entity, there is a need for an additional management partner to ensure effective structures are

established for accountability and decision-making authority.

There is apparent readiness by Adams City High School (ACHS) to engage productively with, and benefit from, the

partnership with BT. However, the stipulations of the management agreement impede the school’s ability to fully

engage the partnership, limiting the scope. BT was contracted to serve as an external management partner to support

ACHS, as directed in the summer of 2017 by the State Board of Education, to provide a comprehensive program of

curriculum development, instructional improvement, student assessment, and multi-level interventions. This support,

in present form, is only provided to support 9th and 10th grade in math and English language arts (ELA). There is a

need to expand the partnership across the school to support all grade levels and content areas in order to support all

grade levels in standards-aligned instruction, learning, and assessment. Moreover, the State Board acknowledged a

concern regarding the lack of plan for how ACHS would address the needs of 11th and 12th grades. When the school

addressed this concern, BT was not part of the approach to support 11th and 12th grades. It is stated in the Pathways

Proposal that the areas of curriculum, instruction, assessment, and enrichment and re-teach will be addressed by the

district’s turnaround strategy and not through the BT partnerships.

Additionally, BT only serves in a consultation capacity. BT provides assessment resources, support with alignment of

instructional materials, facilitation of professional learning to onboard staff to BT resources and supports and

facilitated site visits and debrief sessions to provide recommendations to the school and district for next steps. While

BT is fulfilling the contractual agreements of their partnership with ACHS, actions do not represent the intended

purpose of an external manager, which includes oversight and decision-making authority. BT explicitly stated that its

intent was not to serve in an oversight capacity, but to work alongside the school as a partner.


ACHS needs an external partner that will provide leadership development and support, coaching, ongoing

professional development, and talent management, in addition to increasing the instructional support BT is providing.

Currently, there is no structure to support the development of leadership capacity to effectively lead the turnaround

work at ACHS. The ACHS principal is in her second year and tenure at this school is her first principalship. While the

principal and one assistant principal currently participate in the RELAY Principal Academy and in regular meetings with

the district BT coordinator and the school’s leadership to discuss implementation, there is not a strategic focus by BT

to develop leadership capacity for actions needed to effectively implement BT. The school requires a partnership that

will provide strategic support to the school’s leadership to ensure effective oversight and implementation of change

efforts.

It would be a greater risk than benefit to ACHS to abandon BT at this time. Staff frequently referenced the continuous

change as making the work difficult. Therefore, to dissolve the partnership with BT at this time would not be

supportive of the school’s efforts toward improvement. Prior to BT, teachers were creating their own curriculum.

BT has alleviated the need for teacher-created materials by providing a clearer trajectory of learning in alignment to

grade level standards. However, BT must be a systemic approach and not isolated to 9th and 10th grade in only ELA

and math. Furthermore, ACHS needs to begin focusing on not just the “what” that BT provides, but “how” to

effectively plan and deliver instruction that supports engagement and critical thinking.

ACHS is bound by the union contract, which presents challenges particularly in relation to professional development

and talent management. The school cannot ensure that teachers are adequately supported and trained. They have

one half-day release a month only and must offer “optional” professional learning options for teachers, resulting in

some teachers being minimally developed around the school’s priorities. The school believes they have mitigated this

issue and are currently requiring PLC meetings three times a week; however, these meetings are serving as planning

meetings and the time is not being capitalized to accelerate learning. Opportunities to use Professional Learning

Communities (PLCs) time to provide professional learning has been minimal. ACHS needs consistent, ongoing, and

required time for professional learning for their staff to ensure they are equipped with the tools and skills needed to

effectively execute the instructional program. Also, there has been significant administrative and staff turnover at the

school. There is a need for support in talent management to provide flexibility in the hiring and transitioning of staff in

addition to explicit support around recruitment and retention.

In addition to the partnership with BT, there is a need for external management with a partner that is willing to take

on the decision-making authority needed to ensure that there is effective oversight, clear roles and responsibilities,

professional learning and supports, progress monitoring, and accountability for strategies and practices needed to

lead the change efforts at ACHS that the district currently has been unable to support for more than seven years.

The State Review Panel does not recommend innovation school status. Innovation requires strong leadership and an

infrastructure that is adequate to implement change to improve results, of which ACHS is not currently positioned to

provide. As well, innovation was the original recommendation from the State Review Panel in Spring 2016 but the

State Board of Education decided that – due to a change in school and district leadership – innovation was not the

best route. The school’s current principal is inexperienced and has not yet developed the leadership capacity to

effectively implement an innovation plan. Innovation could provide opportunities for the school to petition for

waivers that would alleviate some of the constraints the teacher contract currently poses around how administration

can direct teacher time and hiring practices and preferences. There is minimal evidence, however, to indicate that the

school has a readiness for innovative approaches or practices that would result in benefits that the potential waivers

could provide. Furthermore, innovation requires a culture of trust between the district leadership and school that

does not yet exist.


The State Review Panel does not recommend conversion to a charter school. There is limited support for this from

the district and the community because ACHS is the only comprehensive high school in the district. By converting

ACHS to a charter, students and their families would not be provided with school choice options, which is the intent of

a charter. Rather, students would be forced to attend a charter school if they were not able to feasibly consider other

schooling options outside of the district. While the panel does not recommend conversion to charter, the team

discussed how conversion to a charter would bring the school many of the things that the team is recommending a

management partner provide. Some examples include an opportunity to expand learning time, flexibility with

scheduling, fewer hiring constraints, the ability to build/rebuild the school’s infrastructure to better support teaching

and learning, as well as autonomy from the union and district mandates that impede turnaround efforts.

The State Review Panel does not recommend closure. ACHS is the only comprehensive high school in the district and

there is not another school for Adams 14 students to attend. There are other districts with comprehensive high

schools that are within an eight-mile radius, but it is not clear that there is capacity to support the students of ACHS.

As well, there would be interest conflicts posed regarding taxes and local funding transfer. ACHS students also

indicated they would not choose another school if given the option. While students stated they do not like some

things about their school, students felt that attending ACHS was part of the history of their families and community.

The students indicated a desire to stay at ACHS; they just want ACHS to be a school that better serves their needs.

State Review Panel School Progress Monitoring Site Visit Feedback Form 2018-19

© 2018 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Progress Monitoring Site Visit Feedback Form - 1

Purpose: The State Review Panel (SRP, or the Panel) was created by the Accountability Act of 2009 to provide a critical evaluation of the State’s lowest-

performing schools’ and districts’ plans for dramatic action and provide recommendations to the Commissioner and the State Board of Education. The

Panel’s work is informed by a review of documents (e.g., Unified Improvement Plan) and, in some cases, by a site visit. The site visit component was added

in 2013 to strengthen panelists’ understanding of the conditions in the schools and districts that are further along on the accountability clock. The

expectation is that the site visit will inform their recommendations to the Commissioner and the State Board of Education about potential actions at the

end of the accountability clock. For schools and districts that continue to remain on the accountability clock, the SRP will conduct an additional progress

monitoring site visit that will be used to assess the actions the school or district was previously directed to take, the fidelity to which the school has

implemented directed actions, and the amount of time the school has had to implement the actions to achieve results. The expectation is that the site visit

will inform their recommendations to the Commissioner and the State Board of Education about potential actions at the end of the accountability clock.

Prior to arriving on site, panelists conducted a document review aligned to the six key areas in the Accountability Act. On site at the school, the site visit

team used evidence collected through classroom observations, focus groups, interviews, and document review to come to consensus on capacity levels in

relation to the six key areas. This report presents the school’s/district’s capacity levels in relation to the six key areas and a summary of evidence for each. Reviewer Name(s): Biaze Houston, Starla Pearson, Nancy Sanger, Johan Van Nieuwenhuizen Date: September 18, 2018

District Name/Code: Adams County 14/0030 School Name/Code: Adams City High School/0024

SRP Progress Monitoring Site Visit Summary Capacity

Level:

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Developing

2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Developing

3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance.

Developing

4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with, and benefit from, the assistance provided by an external partner. Developing

5. There is likelihood of positive returns on State investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing.

Developing

6. There is necessity that the school remain in operation to serve students. Yes



SRP Evaluation based on Progress Monitoring Site Visit

State Review Panel Criteria Claims & Evidence

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X ] Developing [ ] Not Effective

1.1: Leadership acts as a change agent to drive dramatic achievement gains.

• Leadership communicates a relentless commitment to the school turnaround.

• Leadership makes data-driven changes to the academic program and organization to promote dramatic achievement gains.

• Leadership conveys clear expectations for performance for all stakeholders, including leadership, teachers, students, and partners.

• School leaders distribute leadership responsibilities to appropriate individuals or groups.

School leadership is beginning to act as a change agent to drive

dramatic achievement gains.

● According to district leaders and school leaders, leadership changed

with a new principal and four new assistant principals (APs) last

year with two of those APs replaced by two new APs this year.

The district reported making a strategic decision to change the

leadership at Adams City High School (ACHS). Teachers reported

having five different principals in the last five years prior to the

start of the current principal who is now in the second year of her

tenure.

● The school leadership has defined last year as “year zero” and this

year as “year one” as a way to reset based on capacity levels to

implement new systems and structures. For example, in “year

zero,” the principal reported not having enough of the

administrative and support staff to implement the current model of

distributed leadership responsibilities that includes 5 APs who each

serve over a grade level and specific content and program areas,

and deans and counselors at each grade level, along with three

instructional coaches who are assigned to PLCs. Further, school

leadership described “year zero” as not having professional

development (PD) to differentiate for content and language

support for English Language Learner (ELL) students. The series of

changes that year overwhelmed teachers. This year, however,

teachers knew what to expect coming into the school year.

1.2: Leadership establishes clear, targeted and measurable goals designed to promote student performance.

• Leadership communicates clear and focused goals that are understood by all staff.

• Educators understand their responsibilities for achieving goals.

• Leadership maintains school-wide focus on achieving established goals.

• Leadership allocates resources in alignment with goals and critical needs.

• Leadership has established systems to measure and report interim results toward goals.

1.3: Leadership analyzes data to identify and address high priority challenges, and to adjust implementation of the action plan.

• Leadership communicates data trends and issues, ensures timely access to data, and models and facilitates data use.

• Leadership openly shares results and holds staff accountable for results and effective use of data.

• Leadership first concentrates on a limited number of priorities to achieve early, visible wins.

• There is regular progress monitoring of performance and implementation data and, as appropriate, results lead to elimination of tactics that do not work.

• Benchmarks are used to assess progress toward goals; goals are adjusted as progress is made.

• Data on progress toward goals drives organizational and instructional decision making.



1.4: Leadership establishes high expectations for student learning and behavior.

• The school holds high expectations for academic learning.

• Educators set high expectations for learning and clearly convey these to students.

• Educators convey that students are responsible for raising their performance and encourage their participation in learning.

• The school provides a safe environment to support students’ learning and, in the case of a virtual school, ensures that students’ interactions between and among themselves and school staff are respectful and supportive.

• Leadership ensures that the school’s physical environment is clean, orderly, and safe.

● The external partner reported that the Beyond Textbook (BT)

district liaison occasionally supports Professional Learning

Communities (PLCs) based on requests from school leaders

and/or teachers.

● School leadership and instructional coaches reported that they rely

on instructional coaches to provide feedback about progress of

PLCs and teachers, as well as needs for next steps. Further, school

leadership reported that instructional coaches are primarily

responsible for supporting PLCs and that the principal and APs

neither attend nor participate in the PLC work.

● Teachers and students were unable to clearly and consistently

articulate leaderships’ expectations for performance. Some

teachers referred to the expectation for Content Learning

Objectives (CLOs), Agendas, and Exit Criteria to be posted in the

classroom. As well, some teachers referenced PLC participation

and the development of six-week unit plans. Some teachers and

students also referred to the goal of getting students to college.

However, among teachers, these were not consistently reported

expectations for performance.

Leadership analyzes data to establish measurable goals; however,

those goals have not been clearly articulated or monitored.

● School leadership was able to identify the school’s priorities as

being the trend of fives: Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores of

500, ACCESS scores of 5, Advanced Placement (AP) exam scores of

5, and attending classes 5 days a week. However, teachers, school

partners, and community groups were unable to consistently

explain the school’s expectations and goals for improved school

performance. Most stakeholders generally referenced the goals of



helping students graduate, go to college, and improving

attendance.

● School leadership stated that within the two years in which the

new principal has been at the school, she has involved teachers in

developing the mission and vision of the school. A facilitator was

brought to the school to help school staff craft a vision and mission.

The school staff that participated included 18-to-20 teachers who

served as department chairs. School leadership indicated, however,

that only 3-to-4 of the teachers who participated in this work are

still employed at the school.

● School leadership indicated that goals were communicated during

beginning-of-the-year professional development and in the Week-

At-A-Glance (WAAG) communication sent out to school staff by

the principal. As well, school leaders indicated that they are very

familiar with the school goals; most referenced the college

readiness and attendance goals stated above. Some articulated a

goal to improve the academic culture of the school; however, this

was not specifically reported by all groups.

● School leadership indicated that their Instructional Leadership

Team (ILT), consisting of department chairs, met at the beginning of

the year to review data and analyze targets that were not met.

Additionally, school leadership and documents reviewed indicated

that some teachers spent time analyzing the School Performance

Framework reports to identify challenges and possible root causes.

● Some teachers reported that some data sources are reviewed,

such as Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) data and exit

ticket data. Some teachers reported using exit ticket data to inform

the next day’s instruction or to have students self-assess

understandings. However, teachers did not report a consistent

purpose for use of the exit tickets, nor did the site visit team



consistently observe teachers implementing the use of exit tickets

at the end of class.

● School leadership and teachers indicated that professional growth

plan goals are developed for the entire staff and include goals

around aggressive monitoring and CLOs and that the focus on CLOs

is a continuation from last school year.

● Instructional support staff reported that some teachers in some

PLCs are reviewing data, that instructional support staff is starting

to teach teachers to create instructional groups using STAR data

and reported one PLC that gives common assessments each week

and works together to score the assessment.

● BT provided a documented entitled, Adams City High School

Beyond Textbooks Feedback which indicated that the school’s areas

of concern include the following: deepening understandings of the

difference between activity and learning objectives; increasing the

level of rigor (BT noted there were improvements compared to last

year); addressing the lack of urgency with instructional time and

engaging bell-to-bell learning; improving Reteach/Enrich time and

not using it as simply homework help; reducing time spent on

students doing activities and identifying “early finisher” tasks;

engaging questioning strategies at higher levels that engage all

students, rather than being answered by the teacher; and,

engaging all students during instruction and not allowing students

to opt out. BT-related internal and external staff did indicate,

however, that the school has been responsive to feedback they

have received from site visits.



Leadership is beginning to establish high expectations for student

learning and behavior.

● Teachers reported that students are not being held accountable for

behaviors. For example, there are no consequences for students

when they are tardy or absent from class. Further, deans reported

various iterations of attendance and tardy interventions this school

year. For example, initially deans issued tardy slips to students in

the hallway as their pass to class; they had to recently abandon the

practice because it was too time-intensive. Instead, they expect

teachers to mark students tardy. The site visit team did not observe

teachers marking tardy students. Deans stated that tardy students

serve a detention at lunch, during a study period, or after school

during which they engage in college-ready activities; however,

teachers reported that they knew of no students who had served

a detention for tardiness.

● As well, staff reported there is minimal communication to indicate

what actions have been taken to address student misbehaviors

after students have been referred to the office by teachers for

administrative intervention and support. Deans indicated that due

to the large number of students, they are more focused on assisting

teachers with classroom practices and responses that keep

students in school and class.

● Site visit team observations indicated an atmosphere in which

interactions did not demonstrate a strong sense of community. For

example, students were observed bumping into each other in the

hallway without acknowledgement and using profane gestures and

language toward each other. In addition, there were several

observed instances where redirections given to students by school

staff were ignored.



● School leadership, teachers, and students indicated that there are

specific expectations for students in the classroom. For example,

there is a no-cell phone and no-headphones policy. Additionally,

the site visit team observed evidence of the reinforcement of these

expectations through signs posted around the school and in

classrooms. Parents, however, indicated they would like for the

school to be consistent in their implementation of this policy.

● School staff reported that prior to BT, school resources were not

grade-level appropriate. Also, there were varying opinions among

staff about what types of texts or instructional resources should be

used to support both grade-level content and needs for students

not yet at grade level.

● Students reported that they did not believe school staff had

confidence in their academic abilities and that teachers did not

always follow through in addressing misbehaviors that disrupted

the learning environment.

● School staff reported that the staff of ACHS believe in their

students, their potential, and have a desire to see them succeed;

however, some staff referred to factors beyond their control that

negatively impact how well students could be fully engaged in

school, including attendance, home/life circumstances, and

behaviors in which students are not held accountable.

● The community group reported feeling that ACHS is a safe place for

their students.

● Students indicated that the school is a safe place; however, they

had safety concerns and indicated that it would not be difficult for

a catastrophic event to take place. Additionally, they believe that

campus security should be provided additional training on how to

positively engage with students.



● Teachers also reported observing interactions between

administration and students as only occurring when there is a

behavior-related need. Teachers reported that students would feel

more supported by the administration if more positive interactions

between administration and students took place, rather than those

interactions just occurring when a student is being redirected for

negative behavior.





2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X ] Developing [ ] Not Effective

2.1: The district leads intentional, strategic efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the academic program and the sustainability of the organization.

• The district/superintendent ensures ongoing leadership development for emerging and current school leaders with a focus on building leadership capacity to lead turnaround efforts and sustain improvement.

• The district/superintendent provides adequate oversight of schools’ work to deliver the curriculum, monitors instruction on a regular basis, and provides adequate support and feedback to principals to improve instruction.

• The district provides adequate systems by which to capture and store data, report it to schools, and make it accessible for instructional staff to utilize.

The district provides resources to support strategic efforts toward

effectiveness of the academic program.

● BT indicated that they do not serve as an external management

entity. When the agreement was made, they declined oversight

responsibilities and stated that they preferred to work side-by-side

with district staff. They indicated that they provide resources,

professional learning, and observations with feedback that includes

recommendations to the school and district. BT does not, however,

monitor whether the school is implementing the feedback and

leaves the responsibility of oversight to the school and district.

● District leadership reported that a BT coordinator was hired this

year and that district leaders conduct weekly walkthroughs at each

school using a common observation tool. Further, school leaders,

district leaders, and BT staff reported that BT representatives

conduct observations six times throughout the year. The day

following a site visit, BT provides feedback to site administrators

on strengths and areas of concern and give their top five

recommendations to the school. The BT group then engages

a separate session with district leadership and provides holistic

district data on trends across the district.

● District leadership reported that district staff conduct observations

of the school using a common tool; these data are used among

district leaders but are not systemically shared with school

leadership or teachers.

2.2: School leadership has a strong focus on recruiting and retaining talent; creates and implements systems to select, develop, and retain effective teachers and staff who can drive dramatic student gains; evaluates all staff; and dismisses those who do not meet professional standards and expectations.

• Leadership has created and/or implemented an organizational and staffing structure that will drive dramatic student gains.

• Leadership recruits and hires teachers with commitment to, and competence in, the school’s philosophy, design, and instructional framework (e.g., trained and experienced with curriculum, certified/licensed to teach, qualified to teach subject area).

• Trained mentors provide beginning teachers with sustained, job-embedded induction.

• Leadership ensures the evaluation of all staff and dismisses those who do not meet standards and expectations.

• Leadership provides teachers with active, intense, and sustained professional development (PD), including guidance on data analysis and instructional practice, aligned to school improvement efforts. o PD is informed by ongoing analysis of student

performance, instructional data, and educators’ learning needs.

o PD requires teachers to demonstrate their learned competency in a tangible and assessable way.

o PD engages teachers in active learning (e.g., leading instruction, discussing with colleagues, observing others, developing assessments), and provides follow-up sessions and ongoing support for teachers’ continued learning.



o The quality of professional development delivery is regularly monitored, evaluated, and improved.

● BT indicated that they provide opportunities to engage in

conversation with school leaders; however, they stated that they do

not provide explicit leadership development to support

implementation of BT practices, strategies, and resources.

● District leadership indicated that the school’s principal and an

assistant principal are currently participants in the RELAY Graduate

School of Education Principal Manager program; district leadership

members have also been participants. The principal reported that

she and one of the APs are part of the RELAY cohort for this school

year that included two weeks of training over the summer and

ongoing training throughout the year.

● District and school leadership indicated that the principal coach

visits ACHS three times a week. School leadership reported that it is

a structured meeting to discuss the progress made implementing

the improvement strategies. According to district and school

leadership, the superintendent and principal coach attend these

meetings.

● District and school staff discussed Illuminate as being the current

district assessment platform. Instructional support staff indicated

that Illuminate is used to house data and is aligned to Colorado

Academic Standards (CAS). Teachers indicated that they can input

data into the platform, but it is not required.

● School leadership and district leadership reported that the district

allocated additional sources of funding to support ACHS in hiring

interventionists for English language arts (ELA) and math.

2.3: School leadership ensures that the school has sound financial and operational systems and processes

• School leadership ensures that the organizational structure supports essential school functions, and that roles and responsibilities of all individuals at the school are clear.

• School leadership has established effective means of communicating with school staff.

• School leadership ensures that the school meets all compliance requirements and deadlines set by the State, including the submission of school improvement plans, financial statements, school audit, calendar, and student attendance.

• School leadership effectively manages the school budget and cash flow; there is a plan for long-term financial sustainability.

• The school leadership effectively manages operations (e.g., food services, transportation, school facilities).

2.4: School leadership provides effective instructional leadership.

• School leaders ensure that the school implements a coherent, comprehensive, and aligned curriculum. o School leaders ensure that curriculum, instruction, and

assessments are aligned with State standards, aligned with each other, and coordinated both within and across grade levels.

o School leaders ensure that instructional materials are selected and/or developed in accordance with a school-wide instructional framework and aligned with established curriculum standards.

o School leaders ensure that the curriculum is periodically reviewed and revisions are made accordingly.

• School leaders provide meaningful feedback on teachers’ instructional planning and practice. o Leaders regularly provide meaningful feedback on

instructional planning. o Leaders regularly observe instruction and provide

meaningful, timely feedback that helps teachers improve their practice.

• School leaders provide conditions that support a school-wide data culture. o Teachers have easy access to varied, current, and

accurate student and instructional data. o Teachers are provided time to collect, enter, analyze, and

represent student data and use tools to help act on results.



o School leaders ensure that all teachers receive PD in data use (e.g., how to access, read, and interpret a range of data reports; frame questions for inquiry; analyze data, assessment literacy, use data tools and resources).

School leadership attempts to hire and retain staff who can support

the achievement gains and professional standards needed, given the

current state of the school.

● District and school leadership indicated that school leadership was

able to participate in recruitment activities with the district to

identify educators for vacancies.

● District leadership, school leadership, teachers, and community

members indicated that turnover is a challenge for ACHS. School

and district leadership noted that, given the current initiatives and

direction in which the school is going, some staff members self-

selected to leave the school. School leadership indicated that some

of the staff attrition from last year to the current school year was

strategic, with some staff being non-renewed.

● District leadership indicated a high level of confidence in the current

school leadership team.

● Teachers indicated that new teachers do not receive consistent

support and mentorship. Additionally, both new and experienced

teachers indicated that, when they are seeking support, they reach

out to their colleagues.

● Teachers were unable to clearly define the PD in which they have

participated this year. BT discussed various opportunities for PD that

were provided in the first year of implementation. Last school year,

there were five BT PD trainings in addition to a full day Leadership

Team retreat that included the superintendent, principal, teacher

leaders, and district office staff. This year, teachers who were not

present last year for PD attended training at another school that

covered content covered in last year’s PD.

● As a condition of the external management contract, the Pathways

Proposal states that BT will deliver PD. The BT group reported two

2.5: The school provides high-quality instruction.

• Classroom interactions and organization ensure a classroom climate conducive to learning.

• Classroom instruction is intentional, engaging, and challenging for all students.

• The school identifies and supports special education students, English language learners, and students who are struggling or at risk.



key focus areas in need of PD – student engagement and reteach/

enrichment. Yet, the BT group was unable to clearly identify what

next steps would be taken to support these needs. Additionally,

district and BT leaders indicated that the only BT-provided PD

offered to ACHS thus far this year was for new teachers who missed

the introductory BT PD last year. The PD was hosted at a local

elementary school site.

● School leaders indicate that while the restructured schedule includes

time for PLCs to meet three times a week with an intention to

deliver PD during that time, there is not a clear plan for professional

learning. School leaders noted that originally, there was a plan to

conduct PLCs Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, and to use some

Tuesdays and Thursdays to deliver PD to teachers. School leadership

states that this plan, however, has been difficult to implement; the

teacher contact calls for teachers to have one uninterrupted

planning period per day. On Tuesday and Thursday, the school uses

a block schedule that results in teachers having one plan time that

runs for 90 minutes versus the 54 minutes on the Monday,

Wednesday, Friday schedule. Even though the time for planning is

longer on Tuesday and Thursday, teachers have only one planning

period that cannot be administratively directed. As a result, the only

time for directed PD is within the once-a-month early release days.

● A review of the ACHS PD schedule documents indicated some lack

of coherence in PD that is being offered during a designated time

outside of the school day. There are three strands of PD: one for

new teachers, one for PLC leaders, and one that is “opt-in” for

teachers. The PD for PLC leaders that is designed for new PLC leaders

includes a range of topics: evaluation; lesson planning; trauma-

informed care; progress monitoring and Constructing Meaning;

engagement strategies; project-based learning; and reflection.



However, as it pertains to “opt-in” PD, there is more clear alignment

with overarching topics, such as Assessment Analysis and

Engagement strategies running throughout the year and subtopics

within each category that focus on more specific aspects of each

topic.

● According to BT, results of the site visit did not indicate that PD is

evaluated for effectiveness. Further, teachers indicated that PD is

not differentiated to meet the needs of more experienced staff.

School leadership is beginning to provide instructional leadership.

● According to district and school leadership and BT staff, BT

curriculum is used to plan and deliver instruction and assessments

aligned to 9th and 10th grade math and ELA. Teachers, however,

report varying levels of fidelity to implementation of these

resources.

● Some teachers indicated that they are observed by instructional

coaches and/or their assigned evaluator. However, some teachers

reported that they have not yet been observed or provided feedback

this school year. Further, coaches indicated that observations and

feedback are done based on a tiered system of teacher need.

● Some teachers indicated that when they receive feedback, it is

either in person or by email.

● Teachers reported that the feedback they receive on instructional

practices is not consistent. Some teachers reported that feedback is

aligned to the teacher evaluation, strengths, and next steps, or it is

based on whether students are complying with school behavior

expectations. Further, some teachers reported they receive

feedback on the format of their unit and lesson plans. They

indicated, however, that they do not receive feedback on the quality

of the lesson plan. There were inconsistencies in how teachers



reported their fulfillment of the requirement to submit lesson plans;

some teachers reported that they do not consistently make them

available.

● According to district leadership, ACHS is in beginning stages of

implementing the district level assessment and data platform of

Illuminate.

● According to school and district staff, BT assessments are being used

to assess student mastery of the standards in 9th and 10th grade for

ELA and math.

● District leadership indicated it is too early to determine progress for

this academic year based on academic data points; there is not yet

common assessment data available.

The school is not yet providing high-quality instruction.

● 100% of ELA classrooms observed were rated ineffective or partially

ineffective as it pertained to Colorado Academic Standard (CAS)

alignment.

● In 72% of classrooms observed, the site visit team noted that

behavioral expectations were implemented at an effective or

partially effective level. For example, students, when prompted,

were observed seated and following directions or redirects. There

were, however, several observations of students with their phones

out (a violation of school policy), of students sleeping and being

awakened, and of students being redirected when engaging in off-

topic conversation.

● In 81% of classrooms, the site visit team observed opportunities for

students to engage in, or demonstrate, higher-order thinking skills

rated as ineffective or partially ineffective. For example, most

questions posed by teachers focused on recall of facts and

information or were structured to allow only a few students



opportunities to respond. There were, however, some observations

of teachers asking “why” questions for students to justify their

thinking.

● The site visit team observed ineffective or partially ineffective

implementation of assessment strategies in 81% of classrooms.

Several classrooms had explanations for the planned exit ticket

posted on the board. When the end of class was observed, however,

few instances of students completing the planned exit tickets prior

to class dismissal were observed.





3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance.

Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X ] Developing [ ] Not Effective

3.1: Educators’ mindsets and beliefs reflect shared commitments to students’ learning.

• Educators convey shared vision and values about teaching and learning and reference these to guide their instructional decision making.

• Educators convey a shared commitment to the learning of all students in the school.

• Educators convey a belief that students’ learning is their collective responsibility, regardless of students’ personal or home situations.

• Educators convey that it is important not to give up on any students, even if it appears that they do not want to learn.

• Educators convey commitment to, and hold each other accountable for, collaboratively-established improvement goals and tasks.

The school is beginning to establish conditions that support a learning

culture; however, educators’ mindsets and beliefs do not reflect a

shared commitment to student learning.

● Teachers indicated that they believe teachers have high expectations

for students; however, some reported that unproductive student

behavior impacts students’ ability to respond to those expectations.

● Community members indicated that there are high expectations

exhibited by ACHS staff for students. For example, some parents

referenced the Reserve Officers’ Training Corp (ROTC) program as

instilling military values, having a stricter curriculum, and providing

support and guidance for students to make good decisions.

● Students and community members indicated that there is a negative

perception about the school and community. In addition, there was

also a belief by students that school leadership does not believe

students are capable of high levels of achievement.

● School partners indicated that the school exhibits high expectations

for students specifically around attendance and timeliness. Further,

the partners indicated that the school is demonstrating a

commitment to college and that post-secondary opportunities are

regularly a topic of discussion with students.

● When teachers talked about school initiatives and goals, there were

several references to the goals and initiatives being owned by

3.2: The school has established conditions that support educators’ learning culture.

• Communications among all stakeholder groups are constructive, supportive, and respectful.

• Communications between leadership and staff are fluid, frequent, and open.

• School leaders model and convey well-defined beliefs about teaching and learning, and convey value for innovation, learning from mistakes, and risk taking.

• School leaders ensure that staff and team meeting discussions are structured and facilitated to support the staff’s reflective dialogue around data and instruction (e.g., attend to explicit group norms, use protocols).

• School leaders provide guidance to teacher teams (e.g., help to establish meeting routines; model and promote use of discussion protocols; ensure systematic monitoring of student progress; create focus on linking results to instruction) and ensures that teachers utilize tools and time well.

• School leaders participate in formal and informal professional learning, including their own leadership development about how to improve curriculum and instruction in a leadership context (i.e., elementary or secondary; high- or low-poverty; large or small schools).



3.3: Educators collaborate regularly to learn about effective instruction and students’ progress.

• Educators meet frequently during regularly scheduled, uninterrupted times (e.g., staff, department, grade level meeting times) to collaborate, establish improvement goals, and make data-informed instructional decisions.

• Educators‘ collaborative meetings have a clear and persistent focus on improving student learning and achievement.

• Educators describe sharing knowledge and expertise among colleagues as an essential collaborative activity for job success.

• Teachers are willing to talk about their own instructional practice, to actively pursue and accept feedback from colleagues, and to try new teaching strategies.

• The school has created a performance-driven classroom culture in which teachers effectively use data to make decisions about daily instruction and the organization of students.

leadership with words such as “they” and “their” when referencing

how goals were set and plans were developed, indicating there was a

lack of staff input.

● School staff reported that communication is not consistent and that

they sometimes are not aware of important information. For

example, some teachers reported that they do not receive follow-up

communication after a student discipline matter. Also, teachers were

not clear about the purpose for participation in school-related events

such as the focus groups the site visit team conducted.

● Instructional coaches indicated that they have participated in

numerous trainings to support the instructional work at the school

such as Illuminate training, WIDA ACCESS, College Board,

Renaissance (STAR), among others.

Educators collaborate regularly; however, there are inconsistencies in

how educators are using their collaboration time to learn about

effective instruction and students’ progress.

● School leadership indicated that there are early release days once a

month; during this time, departments come together to address

department-specific issues.

● The majority of teachers reported being a member of a PLC team. It

was unclear, however, how this time is consistently being used

across the school. Some teachers reported PLCs as being focused on

daily and unit planning. Some teachers reported using PLC time to

review data and exit tickets. Some teachers reported that

instructional coaches use this time to deliver PD.

● Instructional coaches indicated they attend their assigned PLCs and

take on various roles, such as facilitator, participant, and observer.

● According to instructional coaches, teachers, and school leaders, PLC

leaders have been identified and are being developed through

3.4: The school engages the community and families in support of students’ learning school improvement efforts.

• The school includes parents/guardians in cultivating a culture of high expectations for students’ learning and their consistent support of students’ efforts.

• The school invites family participation in school activities (e.g., volunteering in classrooms or on committees; attendance at performances, sports events, organizational meetings) and regularly solicits their input.

• The school offers workshops and other opportunities for parents/guardians to learn about home practices that support student learning.

• Educators communicate with parents/guardians about instructional programs and students’ progress.



DuFour-based district level professional learning. As well, coaches

and school leaders indicated that there will be professional learning

opportunities at the site for development of PLC leaders.

● According to school leadership and teachers, school leaders are not

regularly and actively engaging in PLCs. School leaders reported that

instructional coaches take the lead on supporting PLCs and provide

updates regarding needs for PLCs and for teachers.

The school has yet to effectively engage the community and families in

support of students’ learning and school improvement efforts.

● Community members indicated that communication is made

through: direct phone dialer messages; the school phone application

that can be downloaded with real-time updates; Facebook; and the

school website. Additionally, parents reported that they are able to

communicate directly with teachers via email. However, students

reported that many parents do not know how to effectively access

the Infinite Campus parent portal.

● Review of documents indicated that letters are sent home to families

to update them with important information from the school. As well,

letters are provided both in English and Spanish.

● Teachers report using multiple methods of communication to discuss

student progress with parents, including letters, phone calls, and

updates to Infinite Campus (an online platform). For example,

teachers reported that they will send an F report to parents and will

not hear back from parents. Also, they will call parents regarding

attendance or behavior and will be blamed by parents. Teachers also

indicated they are expected to make three parent calls a day to

provide positive feedback to parents about students. Additionally,

they indicated they must contact parents about misbehavior to

demonstrate an effort to resolve the behavior before the student is



referred due to behavior. School leadership also indicated that

Infinite Campus is checked for verification that a teacher made

intervention attempts when a student is referred for behavior.

● Teachers and students reported that it is challenging to get parents

to come to the school to be active participants. Students further

reported that often parents are too busy to participate.

• The site visit team observed that the school’s marquee in the front of

the building is used to communicate with the community about

upcoming events. For example, the dates for upcoming parent-

teacher conferences were displayed on the marquee.





4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with, and benefit from, the assistance provided by an external partner.


4.1: The school collaborates effectively with existing external partners.

• The school seeks expertise from external partners, as appropriate (i.e., for professional development, direct support for students).

• The school ensures that roles and responsibilities of existing partners are clear.

• There are designated school personnel to coordinate and manage partnerships.

The school collaborates with existing external partners; however, the

results of these collaborative efforts are not evident in instructional

practice or improved student achievement.

● According to the review of documents, BT was contracted to serve as

an external management partner to support ACHS, as directed in the

summer of 2017 by the State Board of Education, to provide a

comprehensive program of curriculum development, instructional

improvement, student assessment, and multi-level interventions. As a

result, staff would receive a highly structured curricular framework

focused on standards, extensive PD, observations and coaching, and

access to a wide-array of samples lessons and classroom-based

assessments.

● The school is currently engaged with several partners that

predominantly focus on career-and-college-readiness: University of

Colorado’s CU Succeeds program; Metropolitan State University’s

Excel Program that awards $10,000 over four years for the

scholarship winner(s); Colorado State University’s CSU Alliance

Partnership that results in a $4,000 per year scholarship for any

student who graduates from ACHS; Gaining Early Awareness and

Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) that focuses on

college readiness mentoring and experiences; and Youth

Empowerment Support Services (YESS) Mentoring program funded

through the Expelled And At-Risk Student Services (EARRS) grant.

4.2: The school leverages existing partnerships to support of student learning.

• The school maximizes existing partners’ efforts in support of improvement efforts.

• All externally provided professional development is aligned to improvement efforts.

4.3: Leadership is responsive to feedback.

• Leadership seeks feedback on improvement plans.

• Leadership seeks feedback from key stakeholders

• Leadership integrates feedback into future improvement efforts.



● According to teachers and school leaders, when provided, PD

addresses a variety of topics that are not clearly aligned to support

the implementation of BT. Additionally, school leaders reported

challenges with providing consistent professional learning due to

contractual agreements with the district union that prohibits the

school’s ability to use time they had previously planned to use for

professional learning during teacher planning time.

● According to school and district leaders, there is no measurable

evidence to indicate the level of effectiveness on instructional

practice and student learning as a result of the partnership with BT.

Additionally, the data that BT collects during their observation visits

are focused on adherence to instructional actions, not evidence

outcomes of student learning. Most recently, BT identified the

following areas of success for ACHS: objectives; instructional

calendars; formative assessment; and alignment. These areas do not

reflect a focus on instructional practices.

● Further, BT and school leadership indicated that observation trends

and recommendations from site-visits are provided to school leaders

and it is up to school leaders to share the information with their staff.

BT leadership indicated they would like to create structures for

communication with teachers. At this point, however, it is not clear

how the feedback from BT site-visits is shared with school staff.

● BT indicated that they provide recommendations based on their

observation visits in which school leaders are responsible for

addressing and indicated that feedback was accepted by school

leaders.





5. There is likelihood of positive returns on State investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing.


5.1: Leadership monitors the return on investment of specific improvement initiatives and uses that data to inform decision-making.

• Leadership identifies turnaround strategies and implements programs/initiatives designed to improve student performance.

• Leadership assesses the cost and impact (effect on student achievement and number of students served) of each program/initiative to determine its academic return on investment.

• Leadership makes decisions regarding continuation or discontinuation of programs/initiatives based on this analysis.

• Leadership establishes systems and structures to support regular and ongoing monitoring.

Leadership monitors the return on investment; however, leadership has

yet to demonstrate an ability to produce positive returns on State

investment.

● School leadership indicated that the partnership between the school

and BT was established prior to their arrival; they have acted to address

implementation of the revised proposal.

● The school is partnered with BT as an instructional capacity strategy to

implement recommendations from the State regarding needed

turnaround efforts.

● According to the principal and district leadership, weekly meetings are

held between the superintendent and the principal to discuss progress of

implementation and support needed.

● BT conducts regular site visits and provides feedback to the school and

district on implementation efforts. The school, along with the BT district

coordinator, identifies next steps for addressing matters of concern. It is

unclear, however, how the responses to these matters are being

monitored for improvement.

● The school leadership reported that INSPIRE, a pre-collegiate program

focused on supporting Native students with access and financial support

for college, was eliminated to use the funding to reallocate toward PD.

● School leadership indicated that the Expelled and At-Risk Student

Services (EARRS) grant was used to fund the YESS mentoring partnership.

This program supports a mentor/mentee partnership with a reciprocity

5.2: Leadership has demonstrated an ability to produce positive returns on State investment and uses resources effectively.

• Programs and initiatives are designed to support turnaround efforts and have demonstrated results.

• Leadership seeks resources aligned to its improvement efforts and programs/initiatives with high academic return on investment.

• Any additional resources received (i.e., specialized grant funding) are aligned, strategic, and showing evidence of results.

• Leadership treats resources flexibly and implements focused improvement efforts with a focus on early wins.

5.3: Students demonstrate academic progress over time.

• Students demonstrate progress on internal measures linked with the school’s promotion or exit standards.

• The performance of student subgroups on State assessments demonstrates that the school is making progress toward eliminating achievement gaps.

• Students meet proficiency and grade-level targets across subjects and grade levels on norm-referenced benchmark assessments and State assessments.

• Matched cohorts of students who score proficient or advanced (or equivalent) on State assessments maintain or improve performance levels across continuous enrollment years.



• The percentage of all students performing at proficient or advanced (or equivalent) on State assessments increases over time.

• Students demonstrate academic growth as measured by value-added or State growth percentile measures.

• Students demonstrate progress toward attaining expected knowledge and skills as measured by interim assessments.

structure for students who have previously been mentored as freshman

to have the opportunity to serve as mentors for other students during

their junior and senior year. This partnership also provides classes for

students that focus on developing social and academic skills.

● School leadership reported that as of last year, the school was

designated as a Title I school for the first time. It is unclear, however,

how those funds have been allocated to support the school program.

Students have yet to demonstrate academic progress over time.

● The 2018 School Performance Framework (SPF) rating is Priority

Improvement – an increase from the 2017 rating of Turnaround. The

Unified Improvement Plan (UIP) acknowledges that, due to a low

participation rate, the SPF rating decreased in 2017 and identifies a

cause as lack of attendance. ACHS met the 95% participation rate on

their 2018 rating.

● While the 2018 SPF rating of Priority Improvement is a level up from

Turnaround, the school remains on the state accountability clock for the

8th year.

● The CDE School Dashboard indicates that the PSAT scores for ACHS 10th

grade students have declined and then increased over the last three year

in evidence-based reading and writing: 2016-mean scale score 412.7,

408.2 in 2017, and 415.5 in 2018. In math, scores increased and then

declined: 411.8 in 2016, 413.9 in 2017, and 398.2 in 2018. SAT scores for

ACHS 11th grade students in both evidence-based reading and writing

and math have declined from 2017 to 2018. In evidence-based reading

and writing, 446.7 in 2017, and 442.3 in 2018. In math, 2017-431.7 in

2017 and 429.6 in 2018.

● According to the CDE School Dashboard, all PSAT and SAT scores

continue to be well below State expectations. Hispanic students on both



assessments and both contents have continued to score significantly

lower than White students.

● The UIP indicates graduation rates and completion rates are fluctuating

from year-to-year and the 4-year (on time graduation rate) declined

from 2016 to 2017, while dropout rates declined somewhat from 2016

to 2017.

● The UIP indicates that the school did not meet academic achievement or

academic growth goals in 2017; goals were stated, “Every student will

meet State and local expectation for academic achievement and

academic growth.” Results showed that: 9% of 9th grade students met or

exceeded State standards in ELA and 5% in math; and 3% of 10th grade

students met or exceeded the Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test

(PSAT) in English and 7% on the PSAT in math. Further, 9th grade

academic growth was at 44 Median Growth Percentile (MGP) in ELA and

31.5 MGP in math; 10 grade PSAT English academic growth was at 38

MGP and 38 MGP on PSAT math.

● The UIP provides no information regarding interim assessment results;

however, the Pathways Proposal indicates that there was data from the

STAR assessment for math in 2016 with an average percentile ranking of

44.2 in math and goals are established of 50 for 2018 and 60 for 2019.

For reading there was no score for 2016 and goals established of 45 for

2018 and of 50 for 2019. Also, there are median growth percentile scores

for math in 2016 of 49 and goals of 55 for 2018 and of 65 for 2019. There

are no median growth percentile scores for reading in 2016 and goals of

55 for 2018 and 65 for 2019. The site visit team was not provided with

data on internal measures that demonstrates progress toward school

accountability. STAR data (reading and math) was provided for the 2018-

19 school year; however, it was benchmark data and did not give any

indication of progress to date.





6. There is necessity that the school remain in operation to serve students. [ X ] Yes [ ] No

6.1: The school is mission-driven and its mission and vision meet a unique need.

• All stakeholders share an understanding of, and commitment to, the mission and vision.

• School programs reflect the mission and vision.

• The mission and vision guide decisions about teaching and learning.

• The mission and vision meet the needs of an identified student population.

Adams City High School is becoming a mission driven school.

● According to the school’s website and the ACHS handbook, the

ACHS vision statement is: “Our community will collaborate to

foster an environment that builds on student’s home language

and breaks perceived cultural barriers with rigorous

programming that provides learners with the foundation they

need to answer the challenges of today and tomorrow. Adams

City High School engages scholars in activities that light up

their intelligence, ignite their imaginations, sharpen their

critical capacities, develop their consciences and expand their

opportunities to reach their fullest potential to become

college, career and community ready, in every class, every

day.”

● When asked, school staff were not able to articulate a

consistent mission and vision for the school; however, the goal

of ensuring students have access to college was consistently

reported across groups.

● School leadership reported that the mission of the school is to

get to 100% graduation and 95% attendance, and to ensure

students have post-secondary options. The goal of 95%

attendance, however, was referenced in alignment to test

participation rates.

There are no other viable options for the students of ACHS.

● Community members indicated that there are no other

schooling options locally for their students. Review of the

6.2 There are no other viable options for enrolled students that will likely lead to better outcomes.

• There are limited other school options available (e.g., online, charter, district).

• The school serves an isolated and/or remote community.

• Closure would have a significant negative impact on the community.

• Comparison schools do not promote better student outcomes.



district’s website and school leaders indicate that ACHS is

where the majority of their elementary and middles school

students feed into for high school.

● Parents expressed a concern about a recently-approved

charter school that will be opened in the district that is planned

to serve preschool through 12th grade and what implications

the opening of the new school will have for ACHS.

● ACHS serves approximately 1,700 students. The closest

comprehensive high schools are in other districts, making them

non-viable options for students in Adams District 14. Prairie

View High School in Brighton School District No. 27J serves

approximately 1,900 students and is 8.2 miles away. Northfield

High School in Denver Public Schools serves approximately

1,200 students and is 3.4 miles away.

● Students indicated that if there were other options, they would

not choose another school and would stay at ACHS because it

is a family tradition, they grew up in the community with the

students with whom they go to school, and they feel they

could make an impact on their community.

● School staff and parents indicated that attending and

graduating from ACHS is a tradition in their communities and

families, which served as the rationale for many families as to

why ACHS is their first choice. Further, parents talked about

the positive experience of being able to come back and visit

teachers. Some parents did, however, indicate that they

wished teachers would stay and stop leaving ACHS because it is

no longer how it used to be when you could come back to the

school and see your teachers.

State Review Panel Document Review

Feedback Form 2018-19

© 2018 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Document Review Feedback Form - 1

Purpose: To critically evaluate the district/school’s plan (i.e., Unified Improvement Plan) and performance. This report will be used as one element of a body of evidence to inform actions that may be undertaken by the Commissioner of Education and the State Board of Education.

Reviewer Names: Biaze Houston, Nancy Sanger, Starla Pearson, Johan Van Nieuwenhuizen Date: September 18, 2018

District Name/Code: Adams County 14/0030 School Name/Code: Adams City High School/0024

SRP Summary Capacity Level:

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Developing

2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Developing

3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic

performance. Developing

4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with, and benefit from, the assistance provided by an external partner. Developing

5. There is likelihood of positive returns on State investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management

structure and staffing. Not Effective

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. Yes

Based on your professional judgment, will the plan result in dramatic enough change to pull the school/district off the accountability clock if it is implemented as written?

[ X ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure, more information is needed. Specify the additional information required.

Based on your professional judgment, what is your overall level of concern regarding this school/district’s ability to signif icantly improve results?

Level of Concern: [ X] High [ ] Moderate [ ] Low [ ] Cannot determine. Specify the additional information required.




Overall Comments

Adams City High School (ACHS) is located in Commerce City, CO, and is the only comprehensive high school in Adams District 14. The school’s Unified Improvement Plan (UIP) reports a student population of 1,798, with 85.9% who quality for free and reduced-priced lunch, 67.3% English language learners, 10.1% student with disabilities, and 90.4% minority with a predominant Hispanic population. Most of the students will be the first in their families to graduate from high school and attend college. The school hired a new school principal and four of five assistant principals in 2017. The new structure provides grade-level alignment of the leadership team accompanied by a dean and counselor at each grade level. Further, assistant principals have been assigned specific duties and responsibilities to ensure oversight of critical aspects of instruction, behavior, social-emotional needs, and day-to-day operations. Due to the short tenure of the majority new leadership team, it is unclear what level of measurable effectiveness the team has been able to demonstrate. In April 2017, Adams District 14 submitted a Pathways Proposal for an External Management Partnership in an effort to fulfill requirements of SB 163 for accreditation pertaining to schools exceeding five consecutive years of Priority Improvement and Turnaround. Within the Pathways Proposal is the request to engage with Beyond Textbooks (BT) – an Arizona-based organization that provides systematic support and resources in the areas of curriculum, instruction, assessment, and enrichment – and reteach resources to support school improvement. ACHS is explicitly named as one of the three focus sites for BT support. Additionally, the school reports that they have strong programming that supports students’ overall academic and social-emotional growth; i.e., Restorative Justice practices. In addition, ACHS has Counselors, a Restorative Justice Coordinator, Social Workers, School-Based Therapists, Psychologists, Student Success Deans, a College Readiness Dean, as well as a school-based health clinic; these are examples of the many programs focused on supporting the Whole Child at ACHS. While the Pathways Proposal specifically identifies these approaches and interim measurements that will be used to evaluate progress, the UIP lacks details and specificity for how these approaches and the structures being put in place will be monitored to ensure that instructional change is occurring in order to promote student learning. The Pathways Proposal indicates that ACHS teachers and leaders will be provided BT-facilitated professional development that is both streamlined and tailored for specific needs as it relates to implementation of BT. The processes for monitoring effective implementation of learned practices that will take place include classroom observations and administration of Accuplacer and unit assessments. However, it is unclear what other steps will be taken by the leadership team to engage in effective monitoring and adjusting during the implementation of BT; there are no implementation benchmarks identified in the UIP. The area of most concern is the lack of improvement in achievement and growth of students over the past several years, resulting in School Performance Framework (SPF) ratings that have consistently been Turnaround (2010 & 2017) and Priority Improvement (2011-2016).

Areas that should be explored more deeply through an on-site visit:

Questions to consider during the site visit:

Leadership What has been the impact of leadership development through the Turnaround Network? Have the bi-weekly meetings between the principal and superintendent resulted in changes or refinements to the implementation of Beyond Textbooks? To what extent has the change in administrative structure changed results (e.g., Restorative Justice, attendance, Career Technical Education [CTE])?

Engagement What impact has the daily reteach/extension block had on student learning? Has advisory been effective in increasing student engagement? How is student engagement measured? Has there been an increase in students concurrently enrolled? Are more students seeking Career Technical Education (CTE) credit? How impactful are the weekly meetings with district staff?

Instruction What impact has Beyond Textbooks had on planning? Data analysis? Student achievement?




How are the Assistant Principals of curriculum, instruction, and counselors monitoring Beyond Textbooks data cycles in Infinite Campus? What are specific look-fors and how is this information used to support teachers? What is the frequency, time allocation, and structure of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) and how are they supported? How has the re-structured English Language Development (ELD) block supported English language learners? What is the role of math, English language arts (ELA), ELD coaches, and special education coordinator?

Data How are teams using data from Illuminate to plan instruction? To what extent are MTSS teams functioning? Are there data to demonstrate the impact that the daily before- and after-school 30-minute reteach/enrich blocks has had on student learning? Are administrators and coaches conducting weekly observations to monitor implementation of professional development? What does observation data suggest about the implementation of professional development? To what extent do staff members understand the school’s goals? What are the data from Advanced Placement courses? How does the team monitor attendance, grades, and student engagement and how do they respond when data suggest intervention?

Culture and Climate Have restorative practices decreased suspensions and referrals to law enforcement? What has been the result of community engagement activities? What has been the result of home visits? Has the administrative restructure resulted in increased attendance, grades, and engagement? Additionally, does staff deem the administrative restructure and additional leadership staff supportive to meeting their needs to do the work?

District Is there district and/or school-based capacity to support the technological infrastructure of a 1:1 model to support BT? What were the outcomes of contract negotiations as it pertains to identified dates for required professional development? What are the conditions of the contract with Beyond Textbooks? What is the long-term implementation plan for capacity building?




SRP Evaluation Based on Unified Improvement Plan and Other Available Documents

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve

results. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X ] Developing [ ] Not Effective [ ] Unable to Assess

State Review Panel Criteria Look-Fors Evidence

1.1: Leadership acts as a change agent to drive dramatic achievement gains.

● Leadership communicates a relentless commitment to the

school/district turnaround.

● Leadership makes data-driven changes to the academic

program and organization to promote dramatic achievement

gains.

● Leadership conveys clear expectations for performance

for all stakeholders, including leadership, teachers, students,

and partners.

● Leaders distribute leadership responsibilities to appropriate

individuals or groups.

● Evidence of leadership

driving impactful

change. (Major Imp.

Strategies & Action Plan)

● The degree to which

leadership has been

continuous over time

or change(s) in

leadership utilized

to activate change.

(See HR data.)

● The State Board of Education Proposed Written Determination issued

in June 2017 recommends that the Adams 14 School District implement

the Adams 14 Pathways Proposal and an external management

agreement with Beyond Textbooks (BT) to provide a comprehensive

program of curriculum development, instructional improvement,

student assessment, and multi-level interventions. This partnership will

work to serve grades 9-10. It is noted that, due to completion of core

credits and concentration on concurrent enrollment, grades 11-12

would not participate. The Adams 14 Pathways Proposal further

describes the scope and implementation of the agreement.

● The State Board Determination references a change in leadership at

Adams City High School (ACHS) for the 2017-18 school year. The

principal is described as a “high-quality bilingual principal with

turnaround experience.” A June 2017 Chalkbeat article states that the

newly-hired principal was new to the district and had no previous

experience as a principal but had served as an assistant principal.

● The UIP and Pathways Proposal describes a “flooding” model of

support where the leadership team includes a principal and five

assistant principals (AP’s). Each AP will be responsible for a specific

area (i.e., Curriculum, Instruction, Counselors, and Attendance; English

Language Development and Attendance; Restorative Justice, Deans,

and Attendance Policy; Career Technical Education and Attendance;

and, Athletic Director and Attendance). The Pathways Proposal defines

specific responsibilities for each member of the leadership team and

includes the Organizational Chart for the school.

● The district Pathways Proposal and the UIP identify additional key

leadership positions that were established beginning in the 2017-18

school year, such as instructional coaches for math, English language

arts (ELA), and English language development (ELD); a special




education coordinator; an ELD coordinator; and a full-time counselor

for each grade 9-12.

● On the 2018 Teaching and Learning Conditions in Colorado (TLCC)

survey, only 12% of those responding agreed that ACHS is led by an

effective team.

1.2: Leadership establishes clear, targeted and measurable goals designed to promote student performance.

● Leadership communicates clear and focused goals that are

understood by all staff.

● Educators understand their responsibilities for achieving

goals.

● Leadership maintains school-/district-wide focus on achieving

established goals.

● Leadership allocates resources in alignment with goals and

critical needs.

● Leadership has established systems to measure and report

interim results toward goals.

● High, but realistic,

goals are set.

● Benchmarks are

identified throughout

the year.

● Plan and narrative

convey a sense of

urgency.

● Clear roles and

ownership of action

steps are identified.

● The UIP acknowledges the school’s performance rating as Turnaround

and only mentions the partnership with BT in the Action Plan with no

further description of the partnership or how it will function in the

school. Priority Performance Challenges are broad and lack focus; also,

trend statements do not provide trends for three years. The district

Proposal describes the partnership with BT in detail and indicates a

commitment to “…eradicate the trend of underperformance and

accelerate performance at Adams City High School.”

● The UIP provides achievement targets for the 2017-18 school year.

Targets provided were specific with both scale score goals and student

increase percentage goals for Pre-Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT) and

Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and growth goals for ACCESS. As well,

goals were established for student percentage increases in students

enrolled in concurrent enrollment classes earning a C+, as well as

students earning qualifying scores on Advanced Placement exams.

● The UIP identifies interim measures but does not provide a metric for

benchmarks or the frequency of the assessments. The Pathways

Proposal provides annual benchmarks for the STAR interim assessment,

but the UIP indicates that STAR is no longer being administered at

ACHS; therefore, it is unclear whether ACHS is using STAR as an interim

measure.

● The Pathways Proposal states the expected outcome of the BT

partnership to be significant increases in student achievement and that

ACHS will earn an accountability rating of Improvement or

Performance on the 2019 School Performance Framework.

● The Action Plan clearly identifies key personnel for each action step,

but the plan covers only the 2017-18 school year. Action steps are

broad and lack enough detail to determine how they will be effectively

implemented. The Action Plan does not clearly describe how the

partnership with BT will be implemented in the school.




● Implementation benchmarks have not been identified for any of the

major improvement strategies; therefore, it is unclear how the

implementation of action steps will be monitored. However, there is a

plan for implementation monitoring of BT as indicated in the Pathways

Proposal.

1.3: Leadership analyzes data to identify and address high priority challenges, and to adjust implementation of the action plan.

● Leadership communicates data trends and issues, ensures

timely access to data, and models and facilitates data use.

● Leadership openly shares results and holds staff accountable

for results and effective use of data.

● Leadership first concentrates on a limited number of priorities

to achieve early, visible wins.

● There is regular progress monitoring of performance and

implementation data and, as appropriate, results lead to

elimination of tactics that do not work.

● Benchmarks are used to assess progress toward goals; goals

are adjusted as progress is made.

● Data on progress toward goals drives organizational and

instructional decision making.

● Evidence that goals

are based on data re:

past performance. (See

data analysis/narrative)

● Focus on a limited

number of changes.

(See Priority Perf.

Challenges.)

● Resources are

allocated for new

programs or identified

action steps.

● Structures for sharing

and using data are

present. (See Action

Plan.)

● The Pathways Proposal describes data that were used to determine the

priority performance challenges, root causes, and major improvement

strategies to be identified in the UIP – such as attendance, credit

audits, and grades for all grade levels; teacher performance data;

behavior/discipline data; culture and climate data of building and staff;

and parent climate, activities, and communication and involvement.

● Priority performance challenges identified in the UIP include math,

ELD, college readiness, ELA, and student engagement. Related root

causes include inconsistent outcomes and expectations for

Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), inconsistent support of

teachers and the use of research-based instructional strategies, lack of

progress monitoring on grade-level standards and implementation of

BT with fidelity, and lack of accountability systems.

● The UIP states one year of achievement and growth data. There is no

trend data provided. PSAT 9 assessments are new and there is one year

of data available. According to the School Dashboard on the CDE

website, the school performed well below the expected targets in

Evidence Based Reading and Writing (EBRW) and Mathematics.

● The UIP mentions that the school will continue the implementation

of the new formative assessments to support the new data cycle and

to be intentional with the major improvement strategy around data-

driven instruction.

● The Pathways Proposal indicates that the AP assigned to Curriculum,

Instruction, and Assessment, together with the counselors, will be

responsible for monitoring the data-driven instructional cycles and

progress monitoring using data in the school’s management system,

Infinite Campus. They will use the data to assign students to daily 30-

minute reteach or enrichment blocks, and before- or after-school

tutoring sessions (Note: The exact time allocation is unclear; there is

a time allocation of 45 minutes identified later in the proposal).




1.4: Leadership establishes high expectations for student learning and behavior.

● The school/district holds high expectations for academic

learning.

● Educators set high expectations for learning and clearly

convey these to students.

● Educators convey that students are responsible for raising

their performance and encourage their participation in

learning.

● The school/district provides a safe environment to support

students’ learning and, in the case of a virtual school, ensures

that students’ interactions between and among themselves

and school staff are respectful and supportive.

● Leadership ensures that the school’s physical environment is

clean, orderly, and safe.

● Elements of climate

and culture are

identified and

addressed in the

plan(s). (See Data

Narrative, Root Cause

Analysis, Action Plan,

TELL data.)

● The UIP identifies Culture and Climate as one root cause and states,

“The school does not consistently function as an effective learning

community and does not fully support a climate conducive to

performance excellence for students and staff.” Culture and Climate

are identified as a major improvement strategy with the description

that the school will continue to engage in culturally responsive and

equity-based practices. The action steps identify community

engagement activities, culturally responsive behavioral interventions

and supports, and home visits to implement the strategy. It is unclear,

however, what specific actions will be made to address

implementation of the identified strategies.

● The UIP describes programming to improve student culture, including

Restorative Practices, Positive Behavior Intervention System (PBIS), as

well as four full-time counselors, two social workers, two school-based

therapists, three deans, and a school-based health clinic.

● The UIP notes student attendance as a cause for lower participation on

the Colorado Measure of Academic Success (CMAS), which contributed

to a decline in performance. The new administrative structure includes

attendance as a key component of each assistant principal’s (AP’s) role;

however, the UIP does not include attendance data and does not

indicate specific attendance goals. Further, the actions related to

improving attendance in the UIP only include ‘discussion with students’

as a strategy for improving attendance. However, the Pathways

Proposal indicates the AP over attendance will be revisiting,

restructuring, and monitoring implementation of the district’s

attendance policy. Further, each AP, dean, and counselor will use the

district’s dashboard to monitor attendance on a weekly basis and the

MTSS team will use the data and menu of research-based strategies to

support students and parents identified at different levels of risk based

on attendance. Additionally, targets are indicated in the Pathways

Proposal for attendance with goals for 90% in 2018 and 94% in 2019,

and truancy rates to decrease to 6% in 2018 and 3% in 2019.

● The UIP also describes a focus on college-and-career-readiness and the

district Pathways Proposal describes a variety of career and technology

options, which are primarily available to 11th and 12th grade students,




as well as concurrent enrollment options; it states that many students

will graduate with an immediately employable skill. Additionally, the

UIP indicates 11 Advanced Placement classes are available to students.

2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X ] Developing [ ] Not Effective [ ] Unable to Assess


2.1: The district leads intentional, strategic efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the academic program and the sustainability of the organization.

● The district/superintendent ensures ongoing leadership

development for emerging and current school leaders

with a focus on building leadership capacity to lead

turnaround efforts and sustain improvement.

● The district/superintendent provides adequate

oversight in schools’ work to deliver the curriculum,

monitors instruction on a regular basis, and provides

adequate support and feedback to principals to

improve instruction.

● The district provides adequate systems by which to

capture and store data, report it to schools, and make it

accessible for instructional staff to utilize.

● Evidence of district

involvement. (See Data

Narrative, Action Plan.)

● As previously stated, according to the UIP and Pathways Proposal,

the district entered into a partnership with an external management

partner, BT, to implement an instructional framework to support

grades 9-10.

● The Pathways Proposal makes clear that the district intends to provide

leadership and oversight in the implementation of the BT partnership.

It indicates that a Secondary Education Director will provide direct

supervision of the leadership team at ACHS and work collaboratively

with the BT liaison who will be monitoring implementation.

● The Pathways Proposal indicates that the Superintendent will engage in

regular implementation monitoring meetings with various partners and

stakeholders. The Superintendent will meet bi-weekly with the principal

to discuss the successes and challenges with the implementation of the

BT platform; weekly for the first six months and monthly thereafter with

the CDE liaison; monthly with the CDE liaison and BT CEO/Director;

monthly with the local Board of Education; annually with the State

Board of Education; weekly with the district BT liaison; and every three

weeks with the BT liaison and BT CEO Director.

2.2: Leadership has a strong focus on recruiting and retaining talent; creates and implements systems to select, develop, and retain effective teachers and staff who can drive dramatic student gains; evaluates all staff; and dismisses

● Leadership has created and/or implemented an

organizational and staffing structure that will drive

dramatic student gains.

● Leadership recruits and hires teachers with

commitment to, and competence in, the school’s

philosophy, design, and instructional framework (e.g.,

trained and experienced with curriculum, certified/

licensed to teach, qualified in subject area).

● Trained mentors provide beginning teachers with

sustained, job-embedded induction.

● Leadership ensures the evaluation of all staff and

dismisses those who do not meet standards and

● Indication of strategic

staff changes,

particularly at the

supervisory level, to

support dramatic

improvement efforts.

(See HR data.)

● Evidence of

professional

development activities

aligned to priorities.

(See Data Narrative,

Action Plan, TELL data.)

● Both the Pathways Proposal and the UIP describe specific professional

development activities to take place during the 2017-18 school year and

to be provided by BT. The Pathways Proposal indicates that professional

development will focus on the curriculum calendar, instructional

support, common assessments, and reteaching/enrichment. In addition,

the UIP describes a plan to use professional development to strengthen

the data inquiry cycle and a plan for professional learning communities

to implement backwards design. It is unclear, however, how the learning

will be monitored for use and implementation beyond classroom

observations.




those who do not meet professional standards and expectations.

expectations.

● Leadership provides teachers with active, intense, and

sustained professional development (PD), including

guidance on data analysis and instructional practice,

aligned to school improvement efforts.

o PD is informed by ongoing analysis of student

performance, instructional data, and educators’

learning needs.

o PD requires teachers to demonstrate their learned

competency in a tangible and accessible way.

o PD engages teachers in active learning (e.g., leading

instruction, discussing with colleagues, observing

others, developing assessments), and provides

follow-up sessions and ongoing support for

teachers’ continued learning.

● The quality of professional development delivery is

regularly monitored, evaluated, and improved.

● In responding to the 2018 TLCC survey, ACHS teachers identified their

greatest needs for professional development in the areas of

differentiating instruction and social-emotional learning. Only 39%

agreed that the professional learning they were receiving had a positive

effect on teaching and learning in their classrooms.

● In responding to the 2018 TLCC survey, 88% of new teachers at ACHS

(approximately 33% of total respondents) agreed that they meet with

mentor teachers to a great or moderate extent weekly; only 20% felt

that they received adequate support as a new teacher.

● The Pathways Proposal lists one of the district’s goals in the Turnaround

Plan as follows: “Develop, retain and sustain highly qualified school

leaders and teachers.” The plan also indicates that the principal/teacher

induction program and the mentor/mentee program has been

restructured.

● 12% of ACHS respondents to the 2018 TLCC survey agreed that the

effectiveness of professional development is assessed regularly;

18% agreed that they receive adequate professional development

to effectively use data.

● A Major Improvement Strategy action step in the UIP indicates that

administrators and coaches conduct weekly classroom observations to

monitor the implementation of professional development.

2.3: Leadership ensures that the school/district has sound financial and operational systems and processes

● Leadership ensures that the organizational structure

supports essential functions; roles and responsibilities

of all staff are clear.

● Leadership has established effective means of

communicating with staff.

● Leadership ensures that the school/district meets all

compliance requirements and deadlines set by the

State, including the submission of school improvement

plans, financial statements, school audit, calendar, and

student attendance.

● Leadership effectively manages the budget and cash

flow, and there is a plan for long-term financial

sustainability.

● Leadership effectively manages operations (e.g., food

services, transportation, school facilities).

● Evidence of school

communication with

staff. (See Data

Narrative, Target Setting,

Action Plan, TELL data.)

● Record of compliance.

● The ACHS organizational chart as outlined in the Pathways Proposal lists

the roles and responsibilities for each member of the leadership team

and assigns specific duties for supervising instructional coaches,

attending PLCs, monitoring data, and overseeing curriculum and

instruction, including with BT.

● The Pathways Proposal states that each AP will be responsible for a

specific area (i.e., Curriculum, Instruction, Counselors, and Attendance;

English Language Development and Attendance; Restorative Justice,

Deans, and Attendance Policy; Career Technical Education and

Attendance; and, Athletic Director and Attendance).

● The Pathways Proposal also states that the AP assigned to attendance

will be charged with revisiting, restructuring, and monitoring

implementation of the district’s attendance policy in collaboration with

assistant principals, counselors, and deans assigned to each grade level.




Each assistant principal, dean, and counselor will use the district’s

dashboard to monitor attendance for their assigned grade level on a

weekly basis.

2.4: Leadership provides effective instructional leadership.

● Leaders ensure that the school implements a coherent,

comprehensive, and aligned curriculum.

o Leaders ensure that curriculum, instruction, and

assessments are aligned with state standards, each

other, and coordinated within/across grade levels.

o Leaders ensure that instructional materials are

selected and/or developed in accordance with a

school-wide instructional framework and aligned

with established curriculum standards.

o Leaders ensure the curriculum is periodically

reviewed and revisions are made accordingly.

● Leaders provide meaningful feedback on teachers’

instructional planning and practice.

o Leaders regularly provide meaningful feedback on

instructional planning.

o Leaders regularly observe instruction and provide

meaningful, timely feedback that helps teachers

improve their practice.

● Leaders provide conditions that support a school-wide

data culture.

o Teachers have easy access to varied, current, and

accurate student and instructional data.

o Teachers are provided time to collect, enter, analyze,

represent student data & use tools to act on results.

● Leaders ensure that all teachers receive PD in data use

(e.g., how to access, read, and interpret a range of

data reports; frame questions for inquiry; analyze

data, assessment literacy; use data tools and

resources).

● Instructional needs

and associated

curricula and

assessments are

identified as a

mechanism to address

performance needs.

(See Action Plan.)

● Organizational

routines are

established that

include ongoing data

analysis to improve

student learning.

(Evidence of interim

measures and how

they will be used to

monitor results.) (See

Data Narrative, Target

Setting, Action Plan, TELL

data.)

● Standards and Instructional Planning are identified as a Major

Improvement Strategy in the UIP. The Pathways Proposal indicates that

a major focus of the BT partnership will be rigorous curriculum and

instruction and progress monitoring of standards mastery. It states that

the district has not consistently implemented curriculum that is aligned

to Colorado Academic Standards and does not yet ensure rigorous,

effective instructional planning.

● Both the Pathways Proposal and the UIP indicate that classroom

walkthroughs will be conducted, including three per semester by the BT

liaison and monthly by the secondary school director. On the 2018 TLCC

survey, 27% of teachers agreed that they receive useful informal

feedback to improve their instruction.

● On the 2018 TLCC survey, 88% of teachers agreed that they use

formative assessment data to improve student learning. The UIP

identifies professional learning communities (PLC) as using a data

inquiry cycle to drive researched-based instructional practices, but also

identifies the PLC system as a root cause of performance issues and

describes “…inconsistent outcomes and expectations for Professional

Learning Communities using the data inquiry cycle to drive research

based instructional practices.” Both the Pathways Proposal and the UIP

identify professional development to be provided to teachers and

administrators to strengthen the Data Inquiry Cycle, as well as

administrator data analysis.

2.5: The school/ district provides high-quality instruction.

n/a ● Not possible to assess

from Document

Review alone.




3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan

effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action

to improve student academic performance.

Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X] Developing [ ] Not Effective [ ] Unable to Assess


3.1: Educators’ mindsets and beliefs reflect shared commitments to students’ learning.

n/a ● Not possible to assess

from Document

Review alone.

3.2: The school/ district has established conditions that support educators’ learning culture.

● Communications among all stakeholder groups are

constructive, supportive, and respectful.

● Communications between leadership and staff are

fluid, frequent, and open.

● Leaders model and convey well-defined beliefs about

teaching and learning, and convey value for

innovation, learning from mistakes, and risk-taking.

● Leaders ensure that staff and team meeting

discussions are structured and facilitated to support

the staff’s reflective dialogue around data and

instruction (e.g., attend to explicit group norms, use

protocols).

● Leaders provide guidance to teacher teams (e.g., help

to establish meeting routines; model and promote use

of discussion protocols; ensure systematic monitoring

of student progress; create focus on linking results to

instruction) and ensures that teachers utilize tools and

time well.

● Leaders participate in formal and informal

professional learning, including their own leadership

development about how to improve curriculum and

instruction in a leadership context (i.e., elementary or

secondary; high- or low-poverty; large/small schools).

● Evidence of

development for

leaders. (See Action

Plan.)

● Structures for

collaborative activities

are present. (See Action

Plan, TELL data.)

● Roles are dedicated to

supporting teams of

teachers. (See Action

Plan, TELL data.)

● Communication

structures are

referenced. (See Data

Narrative, Action Plan,

TELL data.)

● The Pathway Proposal states that the district provides bi-weekly

principals’ meetings with district leadership, district professional

development and observation of instructional practices with district

consultants, as well as district principal PLC time for planning and

collaboration. It is unclear, however, if this is systemic across the district

or only for schools that are part of district turnaround strategy

initiatives.

● As previously stated, the ACHS organizational chart as outlined in the

Pathways Proposal lists the roles and responsibilities for each member

of the leadership team and assigns specific duties for supervising

instructional coaches, attending PLCs, monitoring data, and overseeing

curriculum and instruction, including with BT.

● The impact of the instructional coaches is somewhat limited according

to the TLCC survey results. Thirty-nine percent (39%) of teachers agree

that professional learning that includes instructional coaching, PLCs,

and training has a positive impact on teaching and learning in the

classroom. Teachers also indicated that not everyone receives support

and coaching (24%).

● According to the TLCC survey, only twenty-seven percent (27%) of the

teachers agree that they are provided with feedback to improve their

instruction.

3.3: Educators collaborate regularly to learn about effective instruction and students’

● Educators meet frequently during regularly scheduled,

uninterrupted times (e.g., staff, department, grade

level meeting times) to collaborate, establish

improvement goals, and make data-informed

● Collaborative meeting

times and their

purposes are

referenced. (See Data

Narrative, Action Plan,

● Twenty-three percent (23%) of ACHS respondents to the 2018 TLCC

survey agreed that there is a process for collaborative problem solving

at the school; sixty-five percent (65%) agreed that staff “consistently

seek new and improved ways of providing instruction.” Forty percent




progress. instructional decisions.

● Educators‘ collaborative meetings have a clear and

persistent focus on improving student learning and

achievement.

● Educators describe sharing knowledge and expertise

among colleagues as essential collaborative activity

for job success.

● Teachers are willing to talk about their own

instructional practice, to actively pursue and accept

feedback from colleagues, and to try new teaching

strategies.

● The school has created a performance-driven

classroom culture in which teachers effectively use

data to make decisions about daily instruction and the

organization of students.

TELL data.) (40%) of respondents agreed that the school provided opportunities for

them to learn from other teachers.

● Both the Pathways Proposal and the UIP refer often to the PLC

structure; however, the UIP cites as a root cause the “…inconsistent

outcomes and expectations for Professional Learning Communities.”

The Action Plan lists an action step toward implementing the Major

Improvement Strategy-Professional Development as PLCs using

backwards design, but there is no further explanation of specifics for

what and how it will be implemented.

● The Pathways Proposal indicates that one professional development

session to be delivered in Spring 2018 was “Utilizing PLC to build

Assessment and Data Literacy among teachers and leaders.” The

Proposal further explains the BT instructional cycle that includes

teachers meeting in a PLC to review data from each instructional cycle’s

common formative assessments and plan for enrichment and reteach

sections.

3.4: The school/ district engages the community and families in support of students’ learning school improvement efforts.

● The school includes parents/guardians in cultivating a

culture of high expectations for students’ learning and

their consistent support of students’ efforts.

● The school/district invites family participation in

school activities (e.g., volunteering in classrooms or

on committees; attendance at performances, sports

events, and organizational meetings) and regularly

solicits their input.

● The school/district offers workshops and other

opportunities for parents/guardians to learn about

home practices that support student learning.

● Educators communicate with parents/guardians

about instructional programs and students’ progress.

● Strategies for

community and family

involvement are

incorporated

throughout the plan.

● Parent Involvement

Plan is present (for

Title I Schools only)

and details strategies

for involving families

to advance student

learning.

● The UIP includes an action step toward implementation of the Major

Improvement Strategy-Culture and Climate as providing training to staff

to encourage them to conduct home visits to support student

achievement.

● Additionally, the UIP identifies an action of increasing community

engagement activities; however, it is unclear what types of activities

will be created to engage the community.

● Thirty-eight percent (38%) of respondents to the 2018 TLCC survey

agreed that the community is supportive of the school and eleven

percent (11%) agreed that the school’s efforts to engage families are

successful.

● According to the ACHS website, various events are held to support

parent involvement, such as Parent Information Nights and Senior

Parent Night. Also, communications are sent home to families to

provide important information, such as a letter about the recent School

Performance Framework rating and a principal’s message letter. Also,

upcoming events are posted on the website and there is a school

Facebook page and district mobile app.




4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively

with, and benefit from, the assistance provided by an external

partner.

Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ X ] Developing [ ] Not Effective [ ] Unable to Assess


4.1: The school/ district collaborates effectively with existing external partners.

● The school/district seeks expertise from external

partners, as appropriate (i.e., for professional

development, direct support for students).

● The school/district ensures that roles and

responsibilities of existing partners are clear.

● There are designated personnel to coordinate

and manage partnerships.

● Articulation of

roles/responsibilities

with external entities

(e.g., district level

staff, BOCES staff,

vendors, CDE) is

evident. (See Action

Plan.)

● The Pathway Proposal clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities of BT,

the district, and the school in the partnership agreement. In addition, the

school organizational chart assigns on assistant principal to act as the

contact for the BT liaison. The Proposal states, “The school will receive

support with curriculum, instruction, assessment, and enrichment/

reteach support in a manner that will be frequent, intense, and

targeted.”

● The UIP identifies concurrent enrollment partners such as CU (University

of Colorado) Succeeds, Community College of Denver, Adams

Community College, and Metro State University.

4.2: The school/ district leverages existing partnerships to support student learning.

● The school/district maximizes existing partners’

efforts in support of improvement efforts.

● All externally provided professional development is

aligned to improvement efforts.

● Activities of external

entities align with

major improvement

strategies and

performance needs of

the school/district (not

just a list of services

the entity provides).

(See Action Plan.)

● The Pathways Proposal indicates that professional development will be

provided to teachers and school and district leaders throughout the year

to support in the implementation of BT. Professional learning will include

both “for-everybody” sessions, as well as customized offerings designed

to progress monitor implementation. Also, classroom walkthroughs will

be conducted to observe for implementation.

4.3: Leadership is responsive to feedback.

● Leadership seeks feedback on improvement plans.

● Leadership seeks feedback from key stakeholders

● Leadership integrates feedback into future

improvement efforts.

● Feedback from CDE on

UIP is integrated into

subsequent UIPs

(i.e., feedback is not

repeated for multiple

years). (See CDE

feedback, previous UIPs,

updated UIPs, TELL data.)

● Review of the 2017 feedback on the 2016-17 UIP indicates that feedback

from CDE was not integrated into the 2017-18 UIP; many of the same

issues continue – for example, major improvement strategies continue to

be only repeat root causes, trend statements refer to only one year of

data, and the action steps continue to lack sufficient detail.




5. There is likelihood of positive returns on State investments of

assistance and support to improve the performance within the

current management structure and staffing.

Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ ] Developing [ X ] Not Effective [ ] Unable to Assess


5.1: Leadership monitors the return on investment of specific improvement initiatives and uses that data to inform decision-making.

● Leadership identifies turnaround strategies and

implements programs/initiatives designed to improve

student performance.

● Leadership assesses the cost and impact (effect on

student achievement and number of students served)

of each program/initiative to determine its academic

return on investment.

● Leadership makes decisions regarding continuation or

discontinuation of programs/initiatives based on this

analysis.

● Leadership establishes systems and structures to

support regular and ongoing monitoring.

● Additional resources

provided through

specialized grant

funding are aligned,

strategic and show

evidence of positive

results. (for districts/

schools that have

received additional

funds.) (See Action

Plan.)

● The Action Plan lists only General Funds as resources for all action

steps except those involving BT, which are listed as District Funds. The

UIP does not indicate additional grant funds.

● The Proposal indicates frequent opportunities in which school and

district leadership will be involved in monitoring the implementation

of BT.

● The UIP lacks implementation benchmarks; therefore, it is unclear how

school leadership will monitor for effective and responsive

implementation.

5.2: Leadership has demonstrated an ability to produce positive returns on State investment and uses resources effectively.

● Programs and initiatives are designed to support

turnaround efforts and have demonstrated results.

● Leadership seeks resources aligned to its

improvement efforts and programs/initiatives with

high academic return on investment.

● Any additional resources received (i.e., specialized

grant funding) are aligned, strategic, and showing

evidence of results.

● Leadership treats resources flexibly and implements

focused improvement efforts with a focus on early

wins.

● Evidence of the results

of previous initiatives.


Target Setting, data

dashboard, TELL data.)

● The district website has a link to Financial Transparency for each school

site; however, the most recent information is from 2016 and the

document does not display useful or understandable financial

information that indicates how funds are used or monitored.

5.3: Students demonstrate academic progress over time.

● Students demonstrate progress on internal measures

linked with the school/district’s promotion or exit

standards.

● The performance of student subgroups on State

assessments demonstrates that the school/district is

making progress toward eliminating achievement

gaps.

● Students meet proficiency and grade-level targets

across subjects and grade levels on norm-referenced

benchmark assessments and State assessments.

● Matched cohorts of students who score proficient or

● Achievement and

growth data trend up.


Target Setting, data

dashboard.)

● Results of interim

assessments show

progress. (See Data

Narrative, Target

Setting.)

● The CDE School Dashboard indicates that the PSAT scores for ACHS

10th grade students have declined and then increased over the last

three years in Evidence-Based Reading and Writing: 2016-mean scale

score 412.7, 2017-408.2, and 2018-415.5. In Math, scores increased

and then declined: 2016-411.8, 2017-413.9, 2018-398.2. SAT scores for

ACHS 11th grade students in both Evidence-Based Reading and Writing

and Math have declined from 2017 to 2018. In Evidence-Based Reading

and Writing, 2017-446.7, 2018-442.3. In Math, 2017-431.7, 2018-429.6.

● According to the CDE School Dashboard, all PSAT and SAT scores

continue to be well below State expectations. Hispanic students have




advanced (or equivalent) on State assessments

maintain or improve performance levels across

continuous enrollment years.

● The percentage of all students performing at

proficient or advanced (or equivalent) on State

assessments increases over time.

● Students demonstrate academic growth as measured

by value-added or State growth percentile measures.

● Students demonstrate progress toward attaining

expected knowledge and skills as measured by

interim assessments.

continued to score significantly lower than White students on both

assessments and both content areas.

● The CDE School Dashboard indicates median growth percentiles for

SAT in all content areas have continued to be below State expectations

but showed some slight growth in 2018 for All Students in Evidence-

Based Reading and Writing.

● The UIP indicates graduation rates and completion rates are fluctuating

from year-to-year and the 4-year (on time graduation rate) declined

from 2016 to 2017, while dropout rates declined somewhat in 2016-17.

● The UIP indicates that the school did not meet academic achievement

or academic growth goals in 2017; goals were stated as, “Every student

will meet State and local expectation for academic achievement and

academic growth.” Results showed that 9% of 9th grade students met

or exceeded State standards in ELA and 5% in math; 3% of 10th grade

students met or exceeded PSAT English and 7% on PSAT math. Further,

9th grade student academic growth was at 44 median growth

percentile (MGP) in ELA and 31.5 MGP in math; 10 grade PSAT English

academic growth was at 38 MGP and 38 MGP on PSAT math.

● The UIP acknowledges a SPF rating decrease due to a low participation

rate and identifies a cause as “attendance.” The corresponding actions

indicate that the school will hold discussions on the importance of

attendance and discussions on the significance of individual

performance on mandated assessments and the impact the

assessments have on education.

● The UIP provides no information regarding interim assessment results;

however, the Pathways Proposal indicates that there was data from

the STAR assessment for Math in 2016 with an average percentile

ranking of 44.2 in Math; goals are established of 50 for 2018 and 60 for

2019. For Reading there was no score for 2016 and goals of 45 for 2018

and of 50 for 2019 were established. Also, there are median growth

percentile scores for Math in 2016 of 49 and goals of 55 for 2018 and

of 65 for 2019. There are no median growth percentile scores for

Reading in 2016 and goals of 55 for 2018 and 65 for 2019.




6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to

serve students. [ X ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Unable to Assess


6.1: The school/ district is mission-driven and its mission and vision meet a unique need.

● All stakeholders share an understanding of, and

commitment to, the mission and vision.

● School/district programs reflect the mission and vision.

● The mission and vision guide decisions about teaching

and learning.

● The mission and vision meet the needs of an identified

student population.

● Population of students

served is clearly

identified. (See Data

Narrative.)

● Mission/vision are

evident in plan or

publicly available

information. (See

website, Data Narrative.)

● The data narrative of the UIP describes the student population as

1,798, with 85.9% who quality for free and reduced-priced lunch,

67.3% English language learners, 10.1% student with disabilities, and

90.4% minority with a predominant Hispanic population.

● The enrollment data on the School Dashboard on the website indicates

that enrollment has been increasing slightly over the last 5 years from

1,749 to 1,798. The free and reduced-priced lunch eligible student

population increased significantly from 67.1% in 2014-2015 to 85.9% in

2017-2018.

● The UIP does not include a mission/vision statement, but the ACHS

vision statement is included on the school website. It is: “Our

community will collaborate to foster an environment that builds on

student’s home language and breaks perceived cultural barriers with

rigorous programming that provides learners with the foundation they

need to answer the challenges of today and tomorrow. Adams City

High School engages scholars in activities that light up their

intelligence, ignite their imaginations, sharpen their critical capacities,

develop their consciences and expand their opportunities to reach their

fullest potential to become college, career and community ready, in

every class, every day.”

6.2: There are no other viable options for enrolled students that will likely lead to better outcomes.

● There are limited other school/district options available

(e.g., online, charter, district).

● The school serves an isolated and/or remote community.

● Closure would have a significant negative impact on the

community.

● Comparison schools do not promote better student

outcomes.

● Number of other

available district,

online, or charter

options and their

performance. (See data

dashboard, Websites.)

● Performance of

neighboring districts.

(See data dashboard,

Websites.)

● Performance of

comparison schools.

(See data dashboard,

● While an article in Chalkbeat on 6/21/18 reported a KIPP charter school

proposal for a P-12 school located in Adams 14, the school is not set to

open until 2019 and does not currently serve as another high school

option. Lester Arnold High School is the only other high school in the

district, but this school serves a much smaller student population of

239 students, according to the district Background Information report

from 2016.

● School closure is not a viable option because the district does not have

the capacity to serve ACHS students in the remaining schools.

According to the Adams 14 District site, ACHS is the only

comprehensive high school in the district. There is one other high




Websites.) school that is non-traditional and serves less than 250 students and the

remaining schools, which are not high school leveled, are

approximately 6% above capacity.

● There are no other viable high school options within the Adams 14

district given the size of Lester Arnold. There are six other high schools

located within 10 miles of Adams City High School in two other school

districts. Four are performing at or above State expectations; however,

it is unlikely that any would be able to effectively serve all students

from ACHS.

Date post:	30-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times