Date post: | 18-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | imogene-allen |
View: | 219 times |
Download: | 4 times |
Getting Results
North Penn High SchoolSchool Improvement Journey
How Did We Get Here?
A Look Back: Concerning Trends – 2007-2008 through 2008-2009
• Flat or declining scores in Math for overall population and all subgroups
A Look Back: Concerning Trends – 2007-2008 through 2008-2009
• Declining scores in Reading for all subgroups except African American
PSSA Student Incentives
• Food and Snack – Special Education Breakfast
• Pick-a-Proctor• Final Exam Exemptions • Testing Atmosphere• Administrative Visits to classrooms
Setting the Stage for Change
• School Improvement Team Structure• Extra periods for Math and English• 9th Period • Meetings of Teacher Leaders• Shared Leadership• IU Connection• The Turning Point – Foundational Questions
The Foundational Questions
Is there strong, observable evidence that…• the standards-aligned curriculum and effective instructional
practices are consistently implemented across all classrooms?• school staff regularly uses standards-aligned assessments to
monitor student achievement and adjust instructional practices?
• struggling students are identified early and are supported by an intervention system with procedures for monitoring effectiveness?
• all students have access to standards-aligned curriculum and challenging expectations?
• student needs drive decisions about teacher placement?• professional development is focused, strategic and
implemented with fidelity?
The Foundational Questions (contd.)Is there strong, observable evidence that…• teachers and administrators meet regularly to reflect on the
progress of students learning using multiple data sources and professional practice
• teachers and administrators receive timely, effective support and intervention as needed?
• the school’s resources effectively address the school’s instructional priorities?
• the school’s administrative team leads the implementation of a standards-aligned system?
• each member of the school community promotes, enhances and sustains a shared vision of positive school climate?
• school staff monitor attendance and student engagement and respond with classroom and school-wide interventions when students are chronically absent or disengaged?
The Foundational Questions
• Priority Voting• Prioritized Areas of Concern
Prioritized Areas of Concerns• The school lacked strong observable evidence that effective instructional
practices were implemented across all classrooms. (Foundational Question - #1)
• While there are numerous interventions throughout the school, a clearly defined intervention plan that identified students at risk early, provided appropriate interventions and monitored performance has not been established. (Foundational Question - #3)
• All students were not enrolled in courses that provided a standards based curriculum; student skill deficits in reading are preventing access to standards aligned curriculum. (Foundational Question - #4)
• Lack of school and classroom attendance and student engagement impact negatively on student achievement. (Foundational Question - #12)
Best instructional practices will be identified on a school-wide basis and implemented in all departments.
Action Sequence #1
Action Sequence 1:Effective Instructional Practices• Keystone/PLC Meetings/Getting Results Tuesday– Chemistry Example
• Getting Results Action Plans for PLCs• Effective Practices “Blue Sheet”• School Improvement Team – Classroom Visits
What worked…• Dedicated time to work on action plans• Each PLC committing to a plan• Collaboration in Keystone/PLC
Challenges…• Strong observable evidence in classrooms of
instructional best practicesRoom for Growth…• Some PLCs further along than others• Bridging the gap between theory and classroom
application
Action Sequence 1:Effective Instructional Practices
Implement a screening process to determine at-risk students for reading proficiency and align interventions to student needs.
Action Sequence #2
Action Sequence 2: InterventionsTiered Reading Intervention
• Average gain of 149 lexile points in LA Major A
• Average gain of 276 lexile points in LA Major B
• Average gain of 89 lexile points in LA Major C
• Average gain of 108 lexile points in Read 180
Action Sequence 2: InterventionsLexile Results
• Average gain of 216 lexile points for students concurrently enrolled in Wilson and Read 180
• Average gain of 5.7 grade levels in Word Attack for Wilson students
Four students eligible for PSSA• One student achieved Advanced
status in Reading – previously Below Basic on all PSSA reading• One student achieved Proficient
status in Reading – previously Below Basic or Basic on all PSSA reading
Action Sequence 2: InterventionsWilson Reading Results
Action Sequence 2: InterventionsWhat worked…• Systematic, coordinated approach to intervention• Based on need, not label• Constant review of data and focus on results• Teacher leadership• Creating time within the school day for intervention and meetings
Challenges…• X period not enough• Scheduling• Parents not wanting students in interventions• Identification of additional Wilson students after year began• High school student buy-in with Wilson procedures and activities
Room for Growth…• Expansion of Program to more ESL students• Only beginning to tap into the power of 9th period
To support access to curriculum in all areas, state (SAS) reading standards will be infused into all subjects.
Special Education students will be enrolled in courses that are aligned to state standards.
Action Sequence #3
What worked• Administrative commitment to ongoing P.D. and scheduling• Increasing the number of co-taught classes in Math, English and Science
classes• Inclusion of students with IEPs
• Approximately 77% of students with IEPs at NPHS in itinerant level classes (in regular ed 80% or more of day)
• Frequent IEP meetings when students not meeting with success
Challenges…• Special education teachers with multiple partners• Student perception of the special education teacher• Common planning time for co-teaching partners• Balancing competing demands of special education teachers
Room For Growth• Continue to limit the number of co-teaching partners
Action Sequence 3: Access to CurriculumCo-Teaching
• Professional Development grant focused on extending literacy across content areas.
• Professional Development opportunity at for teachers from the Science, English and History Departments at NPHS
• Utilized Regular and Special Education Teachers
Action Sequence 3: Access to CurriculumReading Apprenticeship
What Worked• Cross-content professional development and monthly PD sessions for R.A.
teachers• Focus on meta-cognition• Extinguishes the notion that Reading only exists in English classes• Opportunities to share across content areas• Students taking control of their own learning
Challenges• TIME! • Teacher buy-in
Next Steps• Set small, manageable school-wide goals to encourage successful
implementation
Action Sequence 3: Access to CurriculumReading Apprenticeship
• Focus on Skill-Based Intervention while providing individualized support for student need (study skills, social/emotional, etc.)
• Supports implementation of IEP accommodations (ex. Test-taking)
What Worked• Consistent expectations from Academic Coaching teachers• Ongoing communication• Utilizing Reading Apprenticeship as a framework for cross-curricular support• Teacher-driven change
Challenges…• Demands in support room – test-taking, skill deficit instruction, extra support• Time Constraints- We see several hundred students per week!
Room for Growth…• Process for students taking tests in Support room• Limiting the number of students scheduled to ensure individualized support
Action Sequence 3: Access to CurriculumAcademic Support
Administrators and faculty will implement instructional strategies that engage and motivate students.
Action Sequence #4
• Mentorship Program– Recruitment of Teachers �
• Asked for teacher volunteers• Students identified teachers they would like to mentor them
– Identification of Students• Particular focus on…
– Minority students�– 4.0 level classes �– Economically Disadvantaged students
• Professional Development for Teachers– Mentoring Program– Cultural Competency – Student Engagement If engaged, students will want to attend�
• Initiative entirely planned and implemented by teachers• Program supported by District Cadres
– High School group set goals
Action Sequence 4: EngagementClosing the Student Achievement Gap & Mentoring
• Chronically disengaged students– Failing multiple classes– Truancy issues– Frequent discipline referrals– Suspected involvement with drugs/alcohol
• Intervention needed• “Meeting of the minds” held• Idea of supplemental emotional support period added to
schedule for second semester for 11 students identified• 1st period every day• Check and Connect curriculum• Graduation project
Action Sequence 4: EngagementGraduation Mentorship
• 7 of 11 original students maintained in home building– 3 placed at Northbridge– 1 placed out of district– Additional student added 3rd marking period
• Post-intervention results (conclusion of 2nd sem.)– Percentage of failed courses reduced by average of 37%• Remediation
– Average of 4 fewer days missed – Average of 5.7 fewer days tardy– Reduced minor disciplinary infractions by average of 2
instances
Action Sequence 4: EngagementGraduation Mentorship Results
Action Sequence 4: EngagementWhat worked…• Students building connections with teachers• Bell to Bell Instruction – “where do I fit?”• Graduation Mentorship – systematic program designed rather than
leaving interventions up to individual case managers
Challenges…• Buy-in of all teachers for Graduation Mentorship• Shifting emphasis from punitive measures to engaging practices
Room for Growth…• Authentic student engagement • Maintaining momentum around Closing the Achievement Gap• Parent and family connections
Professional Development
Professional Development• All time slots were considered Professional Development– Keystone meetings
– PLC meetings– In-service– Early Dismissal– Building time
• PD based on Action Sequences an overall plan• Published calendar for all• Use of wiki to communicate PD days
Professional DevelopmentWhat worked…• Cohesive approach – Year-long plan with buy-in from SIT• Meeting with curriculum and special ed. supervisors to align building and district
goals with professional development• Teacher Choice/Teacher presenters• Time for teachers to meet and share after sessions
Challenges… • Identifying teachers to model best practices• Logistics• Time to process and implement• Translating workshops to multiple disciplines• Balance between teacher-driven time and accountability
Room for Growth…• Keep it real, keep it tangible• Remain focused on Getting Results goals
Where We Are Now…
NPHS PSSA Results - Math
Data not available for ELL or Latino/Hispanic subgroup until 2010. ELL at 40% proficient in 2012; Latino/Hispanic at 66% proficient in 2012.
NPHS PSSA Results - Reading
Data not available for ELL or Latino/Hispanic subgroup until 2010. ELL at 17% proficient in 2012; Latino/Hispanic at 69% proficient in 2012.
NPHS Highlights in Math:• 27% improvement in scores for African American Subgroup over five
years• 33.4% achievement gap in 07-08• 16% achievement gap in 11-12
• 21.2% improvement in scores for IEP subgroup over five years• 32.6% achievement gap in 07-08• 21% achievement gap in 11-12
• 19% improvement in scores for Economically Disadvantaged subgroup over five years• 19.4% achievement gap in 07-08• 10% achievement gap in 11-12
NPHS Highlights in Reading:
• 20.3% improvement in scores for African American Subgroup over five years• 15.6% of that improvement achieved between 2010-2011 and 2011-
2012• 33.4% achievement gap in 07-08• 16% achievement gap in 11-12
• 15.9% improvement in scores for IEP subgroup over five years• 10.6% of that improvement achieved between 2010-2011 and 2011-
2012• 33% achievement gap in 07-08• 21% achievement gap in 11-12
Room for Growth
• Reach more ELL students• Leverage 9th period for more interventions• Continue focus on engaging teaching practices
Lessons Learned
Do…• Create a sense of urgency (but not panic)• Have critical and honest conversations about weaknesses• Think outside the box• Get everyone involved, share leadership and work as a
team• Craft a strategic and focused plan with clearly defined
objectives and targets• Develop a coordinated approach to intervention• Constantly review your data and adjust as needed• Maintain high expectations and access to the curriculum
for all students
Lessons Learned
Don’t…• Lose time grieving over the situation• Allow excuses for scores or subgroups of students• Sugar-coat the results• Create isolated achievement plans for sub-groups• Try to “beat the test” – it’s about instruction, not test
prep• View this as a one-year process to be abandoned once
you make AYP• Try everything on the brainstorm list and hope for the
best
An Opportunity…
Use your results to leverage continuous improvement in your school and make
needed changes you may not have otherwise!
Questions???