Westbrook Walnut Grove Schools #2898 WWG District Strategic Plan to Support Teaching and Learning Aligned with the World’s Best Workforce. 2014-2015 SUPERINTENDENT: Loy Woelber The 2014-2015 District Strategic Plan to Support Teaching and Learning aligned with the World’s Best Workforce was approved by the District 2898 School Board on October 20, 2014. It is prepared by the District Advisory Committee and School Site Teams to inform residents about developments in curriculum, instructional practices and student learning throughout the district. This plan is reviewed and approved by the School Board. A copy of this is available on the district website at www.wwgschools.org This plan contains the following information and more from the 2013-2014 school year. ● Advisory/Staff Development Committee ● District 2898 School Board Members ● Mission/Vision / Belief Statements ● State and Local Testing ● Average ACT Scores: Five Year Trends ● Student Achievement Goals ● Literacy Plan ● Achievement and Integration plan ● District teacher mentoring plan ● FLY Consortium Plan and report ● Professional Growth Plan for Teachers ● Revenue Allocated Go Chargers! Thank you for the following staff for their dedicated service on the District #2898 Staff Development Committee/Curriculum and Instruction Advisory Council during the 2013-2014 School Year:
Transcript
Westbrook Walnut Grove Schools #2898 WWG District Strategic Plan to Support Teaching
and Learning Aligned with the World’s Best Workforce. 2014-2015
SUPERINTENDENT: Loy Woelber The 2014-2015 District Strategic Plan to Support Teaching and Learning aligned with the World’s Best Workforce was approved by the District 2898 School Board on October 20, 2014. It is prepared by the District Advisory Committee and School Site Teams to inform residents about developments in curriculum, instructional practices and student learning throughout the district. This plan is reviewed and approved by the School Board. A copy of this is available on the district website at www.wwgschools.org This plan contains the following information and more from the 2013-2014 school year.
Advisory/Staff Development Committee
District 2898 School Board Members
Mission/Vision / Belief Statements
State and Local Testing
Average ACT Scores: Five Year Trends
Student Achievement Goals
Literacy Plan
Achievement and Integration plan
District teacher mentoring plan
FLY Consortium Plan and report
Professional Growth Plan for Teachers
Revenue Allocated
Go Chargers!
Thank you for the following staff for their dedicated service on the District #2898 Staff Development
Committee/Curriculum and Instruction Advisory Council during the 2013-2014 School Year:
Shannon Beck: Elementary Special Education Teacher
Courtney Locke: Technology Integrationist
Jim Blahnik: Parent / Paraprofessional / Driver
Tcheu Yang: Parent/Community leader / interpreter
Ginny Barron: parent / community member
Xiong Yang: community leader / parent
Jan Johnson: Community member
Renea Krentz: Community member
Shannon Helgeson: Teacher / parent / advisor
Westbrook Walnut Grove Public Schools Board of Education:
Marvin Kleven: Chairperson
Tim Helmer: Vice Chairperson
Ginny Barron: Clerk
Bruce Jorgenson: Director
Maydra Maas: Director
Kerry Knakmuhs: Director
Greg Madson: Director
The Westbrook Walnut Grove Board encourages:
A partnership between students, parents, educators, and the community based on a commitment for success and achievement.
Students who graduate with the ability to learn an enthusiasm, respect, and self-discipline to learn.
Utilization of resources outside of the geographic boundaries of the Westbrook Walnut Grove School District
Recognition of individual differences.
Beliefs/Philosophy
VISION STATEMENT:
The Westbrook Walnut Grove School District has established a set of district wide goals which provide broad direction for the educational process in the public schools of this district. They are:
The main purpose of the Walnut Grove Public School is to provide students with the living and learning skills they will need to act as responsible citizens in a democratic society.
We agree that each student needs to develop mentally, physically and emotionally to the best of his or her ability.
We agree that students need to develop styles of living that promote harmony with others while maintaining their unique individual qualities.
We agree that the school curriculum must remain flexible to meet the changing needs of students.
We agree that there should be a balance between the emphasis placed on competition and cooperation in the school.
We agree that community involvement in student learning, school programs, and activities should be actively encouraged for the benefit of both student and community
We agree that there should be open effective communication between administrative staff, students, and the community to promote positive improvements in our school. The school is
always accountable to the citizens of Walnut Grove and Westbrook area.
We agree that all parties concerned - students, teachers, and community - must continually work to do their best to insure a quality education for the students in the Westbrook Walnut Grove
Public School.
We reviewed a vision that we worked on in 2008 that states: “We want to be a district that every student wants to be a part of and every teacher wants to teach in and every citizen wants to be a
part of. We want to provide a positive academic, technological and co-curricular environment that produces adaptable, professional, and literate citizens of the world.” This statement along with our original 1990 WWG Charger Vision of “providing students with the living and learning skills they will need to act as responsible citizens in a democratic society
20142015 Westbrook Walnut Grove Elementary Goals WWG SMART GOAL I* LEP students in grades 36 at will increase their Percentage Rate of Proficiency on the MCA Math test from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015 by 5%. WWG SMART GOAL II* LEP students in grades 36 at will increase their Percentage Rate of Proficiency on the MCA Reading test from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015 by 5%. WWG SMART GOAL III* All students in grades 36 at will increase their Percentage Rate of Proficiency on the MCA Math test from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015 by 5%. WWG SMART GOAL IV* All students in grades 36 at will increase their Percentage Rate of Proficiency on the MCA Reading test from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015 by 5%. WWG SMART GOAL V* SPED students in grades 36 at will increase their Percentage Rate of Proficiency on the MCA Math test from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015 by 5%. WWG SMART GOAL VI* SPED students in grades 36 at will increase their Percentage Rate of Proficiency on the MCA Reading test from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015 by 5%.
District 2898, Westbrook-Walnut Grove Public schools
Local Literacy plan
Approved June 16, 2014 by WestbrookWalnut Grove Board of Education
The purpose of this literacy plan is to ensure that ALL students will achieve gradelevel proficiency and read well by Grade 3.
Literacy Plan Summary: Our district is currently using HoughtonMifflin Harcourt Journeys, a balanced literacy, basal, literaturebased program to teach reading in kindergarten through grade 3. Included in this program are components for guided reading, read aloud, shared reading and independent reading. To enhance this curriculum, our district has an elementary library with a variety of fiction and nonfiction reading materials, covering a wide range of reading levels. Each classroom also has their own reading center where students can enjoy books and other resources selected by their classroom teacher. All K3 students receive classroom reading instruction for a minimum of 90 minutes each day. Relevant technology engages students in meaningful learning activities. A variety of technologies have been integrated into the curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of the district’s diverse learners. Using the applications on the iPad individual students can use a variety of learning activities to foster their individual learning. The district also uses Accelerated Reader (AR), which is a computerized program that tests basic reading comprehension. Students select books from their reading level, read independently or with a buddy and take an independent comprehension test on the computer. Each book is worth a certain number of points based on its length and reading level. All students in grades K3 are given the AIMSweb screening/benchmarking assessment three times throughout the course of the year in fall, winter, and spring. Using this data, along with classroom assessments, struggling and atrisk students are identified and referred for interventions. Specific interventions are based on further assessments, and the interventions are implemented through the collaborative efforts of the classroom teacher and other specialists. Each student’s progress is monitored weekly and if the intervention selected is not working, another intervention is selected and implemented. Students are encouraged to attend the After School Academy which focuses on reading standards. Students not responding to these interventions are referred for special education services. Parents are kept informed of their child’s progress. The goal of the WestbrookWalnut Grove district is to ensure that all learners successfully achieve the Minnesota K12 Academic Standards in English Language Arts (2010) for their grade level. The standards are aligned with the district’s curriculum, which is in place to ensure that the standards are taught within the time available. Specific information is included in the K3 Literacy Plan that follows this summary. For those who are interested in learning more about WestbrookWalnut Grove literacy program, please contact: Paul Olson at 5078592141. Literacy Plan Goals and Objectives:
Overarching Goal: All students will read at gradelevel by Grade 3 as determined by the Reading Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCAs). Objectives: Each year educators will review and disaggregate reading data at grade levels K, 1, 2, & 3. Proficiency, growth and trend data will be analyzed and used to set specific learning targets for each child and for each cohort of students. PreK data will be accessed and utilized, when available. The Leadership Team reviews, annually, the effectiveness of current pedagogical practices including core instruction, differentiation, remediation and intervention. Curriculum resources will be aligned to the most current standards. Standards will be prioritized and pacing guides developed. Formative assessments will be used to modify instruction and to identify students who are not on pace to meet proficiency. Students not on track will follow the local intervention plan. Professional Learning Communities will be implemented to analyze the effectiveness of current literacy practices. Special attention will be paid to closing the achievement gaps. Best practices will be shared. Extended day and/or extended year programs will be utilized to provide targeted assistance to help struggling and atrisk students achieve gradelevel proficiency. Students who fall below the target score are identified and put into small intervention groups based on needs and grade level. Groups meet on a daily basis and are reassessed weekly to monitor progress.
WRITE A SMART GOAL BASED ON THE THIRD GRADE GRAPH. Our goal is to create higher test scores through working on our students reading fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary weaknesses. Process of Assessment The RTI coordinator and Title I paraprofessionals will administer the screening and diagnostic assessments listed below AIMSweb is used as a screening/benchmark assessment. The target scores for each grade level are listed in the following charts:
Kindergarten AIMSweb Assessments
Fall Assessment Name [Target Score]
Winter Assessment Name [Target Score]
Spring Assessment Name [Target Score]
Letter Naming Fluency [16] Letter Naming Fluency [39] Letter Naming Fluency [48]
Letter Sound Fluency [4] Letter Sound Fluency [23] Letter Sound Fluency [36]
Nonsense Word Fluency [29] Nonsense Word Fluency [49] Nonsense Word Fluency [62]
Reading – CBM [22] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Reading – CBM [52] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Second Grade AIMSweb
Assessments
Fall Assessment Name [Target Score]
Winter Assessment Name [Target Score]
Spring Assessment Name [Target Score]
Reading – CBM [43] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Reading – CBM [72] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Reading – CBM [90] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Third Grade AIMSweb
Assessments
Fall Assessment Name [Target Score]
Winter Assessment Name [Target Score]
Spring Assessment Name [Target Score]
Reading – CBM [70] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Reading – CBM [91] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Reading – CBM [109] (Oral Reading Fluency)
Reading –Maze [12] (Comprehension)
Reading –Maze [15] (Comprehension)
Reading –Maze [16] (Comprehension)
Students who do not meet the target score as listed above will be referred to the RTI team to undergo further interventions. Based on these diagnostic assessments (NWEA, STAR reading, Moby Max and Aimsweb), instruction and interventions will be matched to the student’s needs in one or more of the five pillars of reading (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). Following the assessments, parents will receive a letter during scheduled conferences informing them of the results, supports, interventions and further diagnostic assessments that will be used to help their child meet the reading goals for their grade level. Parents will be invited in to visit about their child’s educational needs and asked if they have any questions. Progress monitoring data will be collected weekly and analyzed on a monthly basis. The following process will be used:
A. Examine the student chart after 46 data points have been plotted and a trend line has
been generated. B. Change the intervention or choose a new intervention if a student has 4 data points
clearly and consistently below the aim line. C. Continue the intervention until the student meets the gradelevel benchmark if the
student has 4 data points on or above the aim line. D. Refer the student to the child study team if the student has 4 data points below the goal
line for the second intervention. E. Discontinue the intervention when the student has met the grade level benchmark. Exit
criteria: 34 data points above the aim line with one data point at or above the next benchmark target.
F. Continue progress monitoring at least three times following the discontinuation of intervention to assure that progress has been maintained.
Entrance criteria are based on a triangulation of assessment data with classroom teacher input. When the student scores three to four data points above the aim/goal line with one data point at or above the next benchmark target, the student will be exited from the supplemental intervention services. Parent Communication and Involvement: The district has developed a parent communication letter that will share the stateidentified gradelevel standards and how their child is progressing toward meeting these standards. The letter will include the core literacy instructional practices and the intervention supports that are used with students who are not on track to achieve benchmark targets that reflect gradelevel content standards. Parent Communication plan
1. At kindergarten round up (fall packet) there will be an explanation of the core literacy instructional practices and the multilevel systems of support as implemented in the district.
2. Assessment results will be provided to parents upon request. 3. Parents of students who need supplemental instruction will be informed by the district that
their student is receiving these services and invited in for a conference with the student’s teacher.
4. An additional explanation of the literacy program and supports will occur in September or November during fall parent/teacher conferences.
5. Parents of students receiving interventions will receive monthly progress reports (upon request).
The following are resources and tools, based on the five pillars of reading, for parents, caregivers, and/or community members to use in support of literacy practices at home: Phonemic awareness: www.starfall.com, www.pbskids.org Phonics: classroom phonics readers, Fluency: AR reading books, Vocabulary: www.spellingcity.com, www.MobyMax.com Comprehension: www.studyisland.com, www.mobymax.com Multi-Tiered Systems of Support:
A Model of School Supports and the Problem Solving Process
The first level of support occurs in the classroom with 90 minutes of core instruction delivered by the classroom teacher using the district’s reading curriculum that is aligned with the 2010 English Language Arts Standards. Researchbased reading instruction will address the 5 strands of reading (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). Teachers differentiate instruction in small groups, according the needs of their diverse learners. Based on screening and diagnostic assessments, the second level of support identifies students not meeting gradelevel targets who are, then, provided supplemental reading interventions according to their skill deficit(s). This level of support will be provided by the RTI team daily. Students not responding well to the interventions provided at the second level are referred to and receive the most intensive and individualized level of support outside of the 90 minutes of core instruction. Students receiving Special Education services are not included at this level. The Multitiered systems of support can be traced to the work on databased decision making by Deno and Mirkin (1977) and the US Department of Education’s report A Nation at Risk (1983). The framework is a systematic use of assessment data to efficiently allocate resources to improve learning for all students (Burns and VanDerHeyden, 2006). A metaanalysis of research found that multitiered systems of support led to improved outcomes such as fewer children referred to and placed into special education programs. Additionally, results included higher achievement scores and reduced behavioral difficulties among all students (Burns, Appleton, and Stehouwer, 2005). Children atrisk for reading failure demonstrated improved reading skills (Marston, Muyskens, Lau, Canter, 2003; Tilly, 2003).
Scientifically-Based Reading Instruction: The scientificallybased reading curriculum WestbrookWalnut Grove uses is HoughtonMifflin Harcourt Journeys which has been aligned by the classroom teachers to meet the Minnesota Academic Standards. Small group instruction is used to differentiate for our diver learners.
Professional Development:
The WestbrookWalnut Grove District has 6 days available for Professional Development. Based on student performance data, the district has determined RTI will be the Reading/Literacy Professional Development focus for the 20142015 school year. Professional Development is provided through:)
GradeLevel Common Planning Time Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) Regional Professional Development Basal Training from Company Representative Outside Resources/Consultants Literacy Team
The section should be specific to literacy and instructional strategies and include: Regular opportunities for collaboration amongst teachers (across and within grades, subjects,
disciplines) Ongoing jobembedded professional development should be reflected in this section Specify what best practice PD will be provided to veteran and novice teachers
Annually staff is given the opportunity to analyze data and develop specific goals. Results will be shared with the district staff development team, who will then create SMART student goals and offer Professional Development opportunities designed to address the needs identified by the data. English Learners and Other Diverse Populations: The district currently assesses all English Learners using the WorldClass Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) assessments (WAPT and ACCESS). WAPT stands for the WIDAACCESS Placement Test. It is an English language proficiency "screener" test given to all students who may be designated as English Learners, typically administered only to new students. It assists educators with programmatic placement decisions such as identification and placement of ELs. The WAPT is one component of WIDA's comprehensive assessment system. Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English StatetoState for English Learners (ACCESS for ELs) is a secure, largescale English language proficiency assessment given to Kindergarten through 12th graders who have been identified as English Learners (ELs). It is given annually in Minnesota beginning in the 20122013 school year to monitor students' progress in acquiring academic English. WAPT and ACCESS for ELs test items are written from the model performance indicators of WIDA's five English Language Proficiency (ELP) standards: • Social & Instructional Language • Language of Language Arts • Language of Mathematics • Language of Science • Language of Social Studies Test forms are divided into five gradelevel clusters: • Kindergarten • Grades 12
• Grades 35 • Grades 68 • Grades 912 Each form of the WAPT test assesses the four language domains of Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing. Within each gradelevel cluster (except Kindergarten), ACCESS for ELs consists of three forms: Tier A (beginning), Tier B (intermediate), and Tier C (advanced). This keeps the test shorter and more appropriately targets each student’s range of language skills.
Based on the WAPT and ACCESS assessments, students who qualify for ESL support will receive the intervention of focused language skill development from a licensed ESL teacher, in addition to the core instruction. This district’s K3 has 28 English Learners and 4 students that are nonwhite. Based on these demographics, resources will be allocated and professional development will be determined by the Leadership Team annually. Instructional materials will be analyzed for its culturally appropriate content and purchased during the district’s curriculum cycle for core subjects. EL curriculum materials and interventions, used to develop language skills, will be updated asneeded or developed onsite. Training / Coaching / Resources available for all school staff:
Title III Activities: Integration Activities: ESL teachers take on trainer/coaching roles with regular education teachers Outside expert comes in to train staff Sending lead teachers to appropriate trainings
The WAPT and ACCESS assessments are used with EL students. These assessments are used in conjunction with the previously mentioned assessments administered to the entire student body: AIMSweb, NWEA, and MCAs. The disaggregated data compiled from each of those assessments will be used to improve programs, strengthen core instruction, and accelerate the acquisition of oral language and literacy
skills of ELs. The Leadership Team is responsible for accessing, analyzing, interpreting, and applying the disaggregated data. Communication system for annual reporting: School principal will send documents to the state. Stakeholder feedback:
1. Was the information easy to find?
2. Is this document useful?
3. Were the reading strategy links in working with your child?
4. Did you feel supported by the school district to help your child read well by 3rd grade?
Murray County Central #2169 (adjoining district) Luther Onken
Red Rock Central #2884 (adjoining district) Bruce Olson
Tracy Area #2904 (adjoining district) Chad Anderson
Wabasso #640 (adjoining district) Wade McKittrick
Westbrook Walnut Grove #2898 (racially isolated district) Loy Woelber
DISTRICT SPECIFIC ACHIEVEMENT AND INTEGRATION GOAL:
1. Reduce achievement gap in reading
DISTRICT SMART GOALS:
1. The percentage of students who are proficient in reading will increase from 41.6% to 60.6%.
DISTRICT STRATEGIES FOR ACCOMPLISHING GOALS:
Research based interventions that include formative assessment practices to reduce
achievement disparities by economic levels as measured by student progress and growth
on State reading assessments and aligned with World’s Best Workforce.
1. Summer learning camps that will build reading skills in grades 58. Camps would involve licensed staff members doing a 24 day camp of their interest as it ties to reading across the curriculum. Licensed staff would sign up for a date and location of WG or WB. Bussing would be provided. Students would also have to sign up and have a limited number per institute. (attendees tracked with MCA and NWEA reading data) 2. After school reading club in Westbrook from 3:45 – 5:45 p.m. every day for grades 79. A school employee would facilitate sessions in the library / computer lab that focus on reading with the use of independent reading requirements and accelerated reader. Lexile levels would be utilized to help with maximum effectiveness. (attendees tracked with MCA and NWEA reading data) 3. After school reading club in Walnut Grove from 3:30 – 5:30 p.m. two days a week with a highly qualified employee for grades 46. Staff member will supervise and assist students in the Walnut Grove library with reading skills by using accelerated reader and other research based curriculum. (attendees tracked with MCA and NWEA reading data) 4. Implementing summer library and computer time hours in Walnut Grove with a supervisors A. Benson and C. Locke focusing on “PAWS TO READ” rewards program and accelerated reader. (attendees tracked with MCA, NWEA and STAR reading pre and post test data) 5. Hiring a .5 reading specialist at the 48 middle level to pull out students struggling with reading / writing that don’t qualify for SPED or Title services. (Students tracked with MCA and NWEA reading data) 6. Summer school for the 4th6th grade students that “does not meet” and “partially meets” reading standards. (Students tracked with MCA and NWEA reading data) DISTRICT EVALUATION PLAN:
1. Proficiency growth on MCA’s will be kept for all students participating in all the programming
listed above for analysis of effectiveness. NWEA testing will also take place on grades 3-8.
2. Attendance records will be maintained for summer reading camps and school year after
school reading sessions. Data will be used to determine program effectiveness for targeted
students in conjunction with MCA and NWEA data review.
INDICATORS OF SUCCESS:
Proficiency Increases in Reading
Student Group Baseli
ne
2013
2015
Targe
t
2016
Targe
t
2017
Targe
t
Increa
se
Target
All Students 41.6% 48.6
%
55.6
%
60.6 19%
Free/reduced Students 29.6% 40.6
%
47.6
%
54.6
%
25%
Non-Free reduced Students 53.9% 58.9
%
63.9
%
67.9
%
14%
Gap Decrease in Reading Proficiency
Student Group Baseli
ne
2013
2015
Targe
t
2016
Targe
t
2017
Targe
t
Decre
ase
Target
All Students 41.6% 48.6
%
55.6
%
60.6
%
FRP Students 29.6% 40.6
%
47.6
%
54.6
%
Non FRP Students 53.9% 58.9
%
63.9
%
67.9
%
Achievement Gap 24.3% 18.3
%
16.3
%
13.3
%
11%
SUMMARY OF COLLABORATIVE GOALS: 1) Increase Racial and Economic Integration among Students 2) Increase College and Career Readiness of Underrepresented Students COLLABORATIVE SMART GOALS: 1) 50% of Southwest Integration Collaborative students taking the ACT exam will participate in inter-district ACT preparation courses as measured by course attendance and ACT exam rosters during the 2016-2017 school year. 2) Southwest Integration Collaborative students participating in the ACT prep course will increase the district average ACT composite score by 1 point over 2012-2013 scores with underrepresented sub groups attaining the same average increase by the end of the three year plan cycle. STRATEGIES FOR ACCOMPLISHING GOALS: Increase racial and economic integration among students 1) COLLEGE CAREER READINESS FOR UNDERSERVED STUDENTS: Two inter-district ACT preparation courses per year will held at Marshall High School in the areas of Math, English, Math, Reading, and Science for all collaborative students intending on taking the ACT exam. 2) RESEARCH BASED INTERVENTIONS: Environmental Science Camp – Environmental Science Camp will be offered for three days in April. The fifth graders of our Collaborative have the opportunity to travel to northern Minnesota where they stay together stay at a camp facility on Lake Carlos. This camp brings students from many cultures together and engages them in hands on learning. Environmental Science camp has structured, objective based lessons that align with Minnesota standards (see submitted handout). Transportation and all camp costs are provided to all students. Staff and parents are involved in the programming and supervision during this camp. This strategy fulfills the requirement to receive incentive revenue. Increase college and career readiness of underrepresented students 1) COLLEGE CAREER READINESS FOR UNDERSERVED STUDENTS Two inter-district ACT preparation courses per year will held at Marshall High School in the areas of Math, English, Math, Reading, and Science for all collaborative students intending on taking the ACT exam. 2) COLLEGE CAREER READINESS FOR UNDERSERVED STUDENTS: To increase awareness and encourage participation, Southwest Integration Collaborative schools will show the MDE Dual Enrollment video to all 10th and 11th grade students’ prior registration each year of the plan cycle.
EVALUATION PLAN: 1) Each member district will establish baseline data and annually track participation as well as effect on ACT scores. 2) Each member district will maintain disaggregated data to determine the impact of the prep coursework amongst participating and non-participating students. 3) Each member district will maintain participation data that will track the number of
underrepresented students participating in prep coursework as well as the number of underrepresented student taking that ACT.
4) Each member will maintain longitudinal ACT result data that will be annually reported to the Collaborative Coordinator. INDICATORS OF SUCCESS: 1) Annual increase in the percentage of students participating in ACT preparation courses. 2) Annual progression increase towards the goal of 50% of collaborative student taking the ACT exam participating in inter-district ACT prep courses. 3) Annual progression towards achieving an increase of district average ACT composite scores by 1 point over 2012-2013 scores with underrepresented sub groups attaining the same average increase by the end of the three year plan cycle. 4) Annual increase, throughout the plan cycle, of enrollment in college preparation courses within individual district high schools. Creating Efficiencies and Eliminating Duplicative Programs: Members of the Southwest Integration Collaborative share in the responsibility of the costs to operate the inter district integration and achievement collaborative as approved by the joint powers committee. Each member district receives 100% of integration and achievement funding and remits payment to the Collaborative Fiscal Host (Westbrook-Walnut Grove) for invoiced expenses incurred by the collaborative. Collaborative expenses are determined based upon student count ratios. The strategies identified in the collaborative plan have created efficiencies amongst collaborative member by creating one central opportunity for all schools to attend in order to prepare their students for the ACT, eliminated the need for individual schools to pay for separate instructors and materials, and allows for the use of experiences and highly qualified staff throughout the districts to provide the highest quality experience possible for students. Community Input: The collaborative plan is developed by the multi-district planning committee and is reflective of individual district’s integration and achievement goals. Each district of the Southwest Collaborative, as part of their community reporting and feedback meetings, will provide the
collaborative plan and assessment results to their communities in order to provide transparency of process, information, and also to seek further input for future plans and budgets.
Professional Growth, Reflection, and
Evaluation
Plan
WestbrookWalnut Grove Public Schools Professional Growth, Reflection, and Evaluation Plan
Overview
WestbrookWalnut Grove Schools supports an ongoing program of professional growth, reflection, and evaluation. To this end, the administration and staff of WestbrookWalnut Grove Public
Schools have developed a systematic program of teacher growth, reflection, and evaluation. To be in compliance, a Professional Growth, Reflection, and Evaluation (PGRE) Checklist must be
completed annually.
Purpose of the WestbrookWalnut Grove PGRE Plan 1. To improve the quality of learning experiences for students.
2. To facilitate communication and cooperation between staff and administrators.
3. To provide specific assistance and feedback for staff to promote professional growth. 4. To provide a continuous written record of professional staff performance and service as an
acknowledgment of effective job performance. 5. To aid the teacher in gaining insights as to strengths and weaknesses and to provide a vehicle
for continued improvement in job performance.
Overall layout of the WestbrookWalnut Grove PGRE Plan As per Minnesota Statute §122A.40,122A.41 and MN Rule 8710.2000, the WWG Evaluation Plan will be composed of three components: Teacher Practice, Student Learning and Achievement, and Student Engagement. There is also an Individual Growth Strategy (IGS) based on these same
three components. The IGS is a teacher designed and determined growth plan.
All teachers should strive for continual improvement; however, a teacher with a final summative performance rating of “Unsatisfactory” or with two or more “Unsatisfactory” ratings in a single domain must be supported through a teacher improvement process. This support will happen
through a rigorous Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP). A TIP is a principal led and collaboratively designed mandatory growth plan. Further, a teacher with a final summative performance rating of “Development Needed” should also be supported through the teacher improvement process. Teachers with a final summative performance rating of “Effective” or “Exemplary” are also encouraged to use the plan, especially if one or more specific area shows a low rating.
A teacher’s final performance rating will be based on evidence from all three model components. Numerically weighted, the three components will then be used to determine a final summative
performance rating. Evidence will be collected during all years of the threeyear professional review cycle.
COMPONENT ONE: TEACHER PRACTICE
Defined: The teacher practice component includes teacher activities that impact student outcomes. These activities are defined by four domains: Planning, Instruction, Environment,
and Professionalism.
Measured: Using Minnesota Performance Standards, Minnesota Statutes §122A.40 & §122A.41, and evidence gathered
Component Weight: 55% of a teacher’s evaluation will be based on Teacher Practice
measures.
Component Requirements:
Part A: Summative Evaluation
Part B: SelfAssessment and Peer Support Part C: Teacher Portfolio Optional
COMPONENT ONE: TEACHER PRACTICE
Part A: Summative Evaluation The Summative Evaluation includes feedback for further growth and development through a final performance rating. The following performance ratings are used for the Summative
Evaluation:
Performance Rating: Exemplary
Evidence of exceptional performance exists. The teacher exceeds performance standards and shows leadership, initiative, and the ability to model and mentor colleagues.
Performance Rating: Effective
Evidence of strong performance at a rigorous level exists. The teacher integrates knowledge, is collaborative, and consistently meets performance standards.
Performance Rating: Development Needed
Limited evidence of satisfactory performance exists. Development is needed in some performance areas. Improvement is expected.
Performance Rating: Unsatisfactory
Evidence exists that performance is consistently below standards. Assistance and significant improvement is required.
The following domains (see Appendix 2 for detailed rubric of ratings) will be summatively
The evaluator must take at least one refresher course every license period. The Summative Evaluation will be scheduled in advance.
The Summative Evaluation will be uniform in the district and will use the evaluation form (Appendix 1).
COMPONENT ONE: TEACHER PRACTICE Part B: SelfAssessment and Peer Support
SelfAssessment: In the spring of every year of the threeyear professional review cycle, a teacher will
complete a selfassessment based on focused, small group discussion and selfreflection.
This selfassessment will be shared within a PLC small group as a prompt for a reflective, coaching conversation about the teacher’s current practice, student outcomes, and growth
over time. Following this conversation, the PLC small group will comment on the selfassessment and share these comments with the teacher
Peer Support:
The selfassessment form (Appendix 2) includes all areas evaluated in the summative review. Using this selfassessment, the teacher may invite peer support to observe the
classroom and focus on an area of interest decided by the teacher. Areas of interest could include teacher use of space, questionresponse time, effective questioning, handling of
noninstructional procedures, student engagement, learning goals, etc. Tuning Protocol:
The Tuning Protocol (Appendix 3) must be completed within a PLC small group every year. The Tuning Protocol is a process that allows for reflection and feedback about a project,
assignment, lesson, test, or other academic work. A teacher will present a work that he/she is looking to improve upon, and the participants will produce thoughtful, meaningful feedback.
This process provides a learning opportunity for all involved.
COMPONENT ONE: TEACHER PRACTICE Part C: Teacher Portfolio Optional
A teacher possesses the individual right to submit a portfolio to the summative evaluator as a source of evidence. A summative evaluator must consider portfolio evidence, if submitted,
when determining component ratings and for a summative evaluation.
The portfolio must demonstrate evidence of reflection and professional growth consistent with teacher relicensure requirements listed in Minnesota Statutes §122A.18, subdivision 4, paragraph (b). It also must include a teacher’s own performance assessment (see below)
based on student work and examples of the teacher’s work, which may include video among other activities.
The portfolio must include a reflective statement of professional accomplishment and the
teacher’s own assessment of professional growth showing evidence of the following. • Support for student learning
• Use of best practices techniques and their applications to student learning • Collaborative work with colleagues • Continual professional development
The teacher portfolio is a collection of evidence and artifacts demonstrating teacher practice, student engagement, and student learning and achievement. Some evidence of practice cannot be collected through points of contact or other activities, so a portfolio is also a teacher’s opportunity to share that evidence with the assigned summative evaluator.
A teacher choosing to submit a portfolio must align the evidence collected with the
Performance Standards for Teacher Practice and/or the IGS. There are countless types of evidence and artifacts that are appropriate for a teacher’s portfolio. Examples can be found in the Minnesota Department of Education’s “The Teacher Development, Evaluation, and Peer Support Model” page 23 in manual found on the Education Department Website. COMPONENT TWO: STUDENT LEARNING AND ACHIEVEMENT
Defined: Effective teaching practices affect student learning and achievement. A great teacher continually assesses student achievement against standards and uses results to modify his/her practice, to intervene when students struggle, and to differentiate instruction.
Measured: Using Minnesota Statutes (see below) and gathered evidence
Component Weight: Minnesota Statutes §122A.40 and §122A.41 require that a minimum of
35% of a teacher’s evaluation be based on student growth measures.
25% of the Student Learning and Achievement component will be left to the teacher,(see below) in collaboration with their PLC small group.
The remaining 10% of the Student Learning and Achievement component will be an agreed upon SiteBased Goal (Elementary, Junior High, Senior High).
Component Requirements:
Every teacher will establish an annual student achievement goal for their students based on the established power standards of the course. This goal will be created and evaluated using
(Appendix 4). Each teacher will establish a 10 point rubric for their student achievement goal evaluation
(1098 Exemplary, 765 Effective, 432 Development Needed, 1 Unsatisfactory). Each teacher, in collaboration with his or her PLC small group, will review and adjust if necessary the student achievement goal, again based on the established power standards of the
course. The sitebased goal will be developed and agreed upon by the site staff at the beginning of each
academic year. All teachers will share in the evaluation score of the sitebased goal based on a collaborative
rubric. Goals can only be changed annually.
These goals need to be filed, and every three years the scores will be averaged for each teacher’s overall summative assessment.
COMPONENT THREE: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
Defined: Student Engagement is an organizing framework for examining a student’s commitment to and involvement in learning, which includes academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective dimensions. It is influenced by the context of family, peers, community, and
school. Within the classroom, a teacher can influence student engagement through relationships with students and the relevance and rigor of instruction.
Measured: Using Minnesota Performance Standards and Minnesota Statute §122A.40
Subd.8.9
Component Weight: 10% of a teacher’s evaluation will be based on completing Student Engagement measures.
Component Requirements:
Each teacher will develop and administer a survey for at least one class. A minimum of two points of data must be collected annually.
Results will be used by the teacher to selfassess, reflect, and set new individual goals in the Teacher Analysis of Student Survey Data form (Appendix 5).
PLC groups will be responsible for data sharing, evaluation, and verifying completion.
INDIVIDUAL GROWTH STRATEGY
Professional educators continue to learn throughout their teaching careers. Annually, the teacher will create at least one Individual Growth Strategy (IGS) goal for the following year. IGS goals are based on the teacher’s individual areas for growth and should support district, school, and/or professional learning community priorities, goals, and activities. This goal is different from, but can be in conjunction with, his/her previous student achievement goal.
At completion of the SelfAssessment rubric (Appendix 2), the teacher will create an IGS goal using the IGS Goal Form (Appendix 6). The teacher will then submit the IGS goal for review to his/her small group PLC, and adjust if necessary. The IGS goal progress will be reviewed at the end of the academic year within the small group PLC. The goal will also be shared
with the summative evaluator and will be filed.
TEACHER IMPROVEMENT PROCESS The purpose of this process is to provide organizational support and assistance to teachers with a final summative performance rating of “Unsatisfactory”. There are constitutional, statutory, and contractual protections including the grievance procedure to prevent any misuse of this process. The district is responsible for determining whether a teacher's
conduct is such that he/she should be subject to discipline or placed in this process. WWG EDMN shall not have any role in that decision, but retains its right to grieve any discipline of a
teacher. Situations might arise which involve some conduct by a teacher which would warrant discipline and some which would be best addressed by this process. The teacher will remain in this process until their performance is judged by the district to be satisfactory in all domains of the District 2898 Standards of Performance, or until the district concludes that the teacher has had sufficient time and resources to improve to a satisfactory level, has not done
so, and is now subject to employee discipline.
Initial Contact The principal makes formal contact with the teacher related to unsatisfactory teaching
performance specifying in writing the following: 1. Explanation of concerns identifying the standards and domains.
2. Explanation of evidence supporting such concerns. 3. Right to have WWG EDMN teacher rights person present at the meeting.
4. A time and date of a collaboration meeting will be established as determined by the principal.
Collaboration Meeting The purpose of the collaboration meeting is for the teacher and principal to collaborate and attempt to resolve the concerns and/or problems. The following specific outcomes of the
collaboration will be documented in writing: 1. A plan will be developed generating suggestions for improvement (workshops, collegial
observation, peer coaching, principal observations, time management, etc.) 2. A method will be identified for how and what data will be collected to document resolution
of the problems. 3. A time frame will be established for resolving the problems.
Follow up Meeting
At the end of the time frame, there will be a meeting. The principal will review progress the teacher has made, make one of the following decisions, and document it in writing for the
teacher. A copy will be placed in the personnel file. 1. The teacher is performing at a satisfactory level.
2. The teacher remains on the TIP, and the principal adds a goal within the relevant domain to the teacher’s IGS.
3. The teacher is performing below standard and requires assistance to be performing at standard. The principal will make a written recommendation for teacher assistance to the
Superintendent. 4. The teacher’s performance is judged to be severely below standard, and the progressive discipline article of the contract will apply. The teacher will then be subject to disciplinary
action.
Responsibilities of the Teacher Receiving Assistance The Teacher must:
1. Be open and flexible in implementing different and/or refined strategies to improve his/her performance.
2. Engage in professional selfassessment in a thoughtful manner by reflecting on his/her teaching experiences.
3. Ascertain what is effective practice and what practices need improvement. 4. Through selfreflection and focus on professional learning and growth.
5. Ask for clarifications from the PLC, the Superintendent, WWG EDMN representative, and direct supervisor.
6. Be responsible for maintaining his/her own anecdotal notes during the phase (if desired).
7. Be responsible in meeting deadlines, appointments, scheduled observations and other timelines.
8. The teacher has rights to have a member rights representative at each conference and is responsible for arranging such representation if desired. The Teacher Rights Representative role is: a. Observe the process, b. Protect the teacher’s rights within the process, c. Remind the teacher of their responsibility within the process and to remain neutral and objective.
9. Participate fully in the TIP process without compensation.
Role of the Principal during the Professional Assistance The role of the principal is to monitor the teacher’s behaviors for improvement. This will be
done through structured observations using the process defined for teachers in the probationary process. At least one observation will occur at the end of the assistance phase.
The Superintendent may monitor the teacher’s behaviors for improvement as well. The principal will complete a cumulative evaluation in writing and submit it to the Superintendent
at the end of the assistance phase with a copy to the teacher.
Cumulative Evaluation Report to the Superintendent The Cumulative Evaluation will recommend one of three actions:
1. The concern is resolved; the teacher is effective and is returned to the Professional Growth, Reflection, and Evaluation Plan.
2. The teacher is making progress toward effectiveness and remains in the assistance phase with the team’s determined revised goals and time lines. A Notice of Deficiency may be provided to the teacher by the district at this time as determined by the Superintendent.
3. The concern is not resolved, the teacher has made little or no progress toward effectiveness, and the teacher is subject to disciplinary action as administration deems
appropriate.
Professional Growth, Reflection, and Evaluation Checklist
DATE DATE COMPLETED
COMPONENT REFERENCE PAGE
August Help set a site based goal and rubric
Page 6
August Develop an IGS goal Page 8
August Complete an IGS goal description form.
Page 29
August Set up a student achievement goal
Page 6
September Submit student achievement goal to PLC
for approval
Page 27
October Participate in the tuning protocol as a presenter
Page 2526
October Invite and schedule a peer support observation.
(Optional)
Page 4
November Create a student engagement survey
Page 7
February Analyze IGS goal Page 30
February Analyze student achievement
Page 27
March Analyze site base goals Page 6
March Analyze student engagement survey
Page 28
May Complete self assessment form
Page 14
May Meet with principal for summative evaluation
overview
Page 12
May Summit optional portfolio Page 5
APPENDIX 1
Summative Evaluation Plan Elementary/Secondary
Independent School District No. 2898 Evaluation Score Range:
8 10 Exemplary 5 7 Effective
2 4 Development Needed 1 Unsatisfactory
N/A Non Applicable Unable to Evaluate ********************************************************************************************* Teacher __________________________ Date___________________
Subject & Grade____________________ Concepts____________________ Number of years in District ____________ Years of prior experience______
Evaluator__________________________
Domain 1: Planning Indicator A: Aligns learning targets with standards and student data to inform planning
i. ______ Units and lessons are planned effectively ii. _____ Selects learning targets
iii. _____ Applies content knowledge and understanding of how students learn
iv. _____ Uses student data to inform and modify planning Indicator B: Uses content and student knowledge to design coherent instruction
i. ____ Designs coherent instruction ii. ____Creates interdisciplinary and extended learning experiences
iii. ____Uses available resources and technology iv. ____Designs culturally relevant instructional strategies Indicator C: Plans for assessment and differentiation i. ____Plans formative and summative assessments
ii. ____Plans for socioeconomic differentiation
Domain 2: Environment Indicator A: Creates a classroom culture of respect, trust, safety, and high expectations
i. ___Creates a safe learning environment ii. ___Establishes a culture of learning iii. ___Creates a culture of persistence
Indicator B: Establishes and maintains clear expectations for classroom behavior i. ____Establishes and maintains classroom routines and procedures
ii. ___ Efficient handling of attendance reporting, bulletins, and announcements iii. ____Monitors and provides feedback on student behavior
i. ___ Demonstrates content knowledge and vocabulary effectively to promote learning ii. ___ Communicates learning targets and content
Indicator B: Leads activities and discussions that promote high cognitive engagement i. ____Uses instructional strategies to engage students
ii. ___Uses a variety questioning and discussion techniques utilized to promote learning iii. ___Uses appropriate pacing
Indicator C: Uses varied assessment techniques to advance student learning i. ____ Uses formative assessments to inform instruction
ii. ___ Provides feedback to advance learning iii. ___ Promotes student selfassessment
iv.____ Uses aligned, adequate, and timely summative assignment
Domain 4: Professionalism
Indicator A: Reflects on teaching practice i. ___ Uses selfreflection to analyze ways to improve instruction
ii. ___ Uses feedback to improve instruction Indicator B: Engages in professional development
i. ___ Participates in professional development and goal setting ii. ___ Collaborates with colleagues
iii. ___ Contributes to school and district culture for learning Indicator C: Maintains professional responsibilities and communicates with families
i. ___ Adheres to standards of ethical conduct ii. ___ Maintains accurate and timely records and grades iii. ___Completes required tasks in an efficient manner
iv. ___Communicates with families v. ____Understands the cultural backgrounds of students
contributes to student use and acquisition of content and
vocabulary while enriching the
lesson.
1098
Teacher uses accurate
contentspecific vocabulary to increase students
understanding and
engagement.
765
Teacher uses contentspecific vocabulary that is accurate; however, students are rarely encouraged to use contentspecific vocabulary.
432
Students do not use contentspecific vocabulary or are not encouraged to use contentspecific
vocabulary by the teacher.
1
Communicates learning targets
Students can articulate the
learning targets and understand
directions; students are capable of developing
directions and procedures when appropriate to the
activity.
1098
Students can articulate the
learning targets and understand
directions.
765
For most students, learning targets and explanations are clear and contain appropriate levels of detail; some students are confused.
432
Learning targets and/or explanations of the content are unclear, inappropriate, or missing; expectations or directions are unclear.
1
NOTES:
Indicator B: Leads activities and discussions that promote high cognitive engagement
Exemplary Effective Development Needed
Unsatisfactory
Uses instructional strategies to engage
students in learning
Students initiate experiences to
increase relevance and cognition. In
addition to differentiated and group work, the lesson provides
appropriate options for student initiative
and choice.
1098
Students demonstrate the use of higher order thinking through the use
of varied instruction.
765
Students may be behaviorally engaged, but are inconsistently engaged in learning experiences. Higher
order thinking demand is infrequent in instruction
and discussion.
432
Students are minimally engaged or disengaged in the lesson. They do not have opportunities to practice, apply or
demonstrate that they are learning.
1
Uses a variety of questioning
and discussion techniques
Students initiate, participate and lead
academic discussions; all students are
engaged in learning through
conversations.
1098
Discussions directed by the teacher are
based on current and desired level of
understanding; all students are
held accountable to
answer questions
765
Students receive a majority of rote memory questions; mistakes and misconceptions are seldom addressed.
432
Classroom questioning techniques result in student recitation with low cognitive challenge; a few students dominate the conversations.
1
Using appropriate pacing
Students have multiple opportunities
for cognitive engagement and
Lesson has a coherent
structure that includes all
Students are limited in their opportunities to
engage and reflect during the lesson.
Pacing of the lesson is too slow, too rushed or both. As a result, pacing hinders active engagement. The
reflection during the lesson.
1098
lesson components and is taught based on the gradual release of
responsibility.
765
432
lesson has no evidence of a structure.
1
NOTES:
Indicator C: Uses varied assessment techniques to advance student learning
Exemplary Effective Development Needed
Unsatisfactory
Uses formative
assessments to inform instruction
Teachers and students are persistent in
applying a repertoire of learning strategies to attain the learning
targets.
1098
Teacher shows persistence with using several strategies to meet learning targets and the needs of all students.
765
Teacher uses some formative assessment techniques to monitor student progress.
432
Teacher does not use formative assessment techniques to monitor
student progress and adjust instruction to help students master the learning targets.
1
Provides feedback to advance learning
Students receive teacher feedback
and provide feedback to each other that promotes learning. Feedback is provided in a
timely manner to all students.
1098
Students receive teacher
feedback that promotes cognition. Feedback is provided in a
timely manner to all students.
765
Students receive specific feedback, but emphasis
is on procedures, compliance or grades.
Timeliness of feedback is inconsistent.
432
Students receive nonspecific feedback that does not guide learning. Students receive feedback
that is not timely.
1
Promotes student self assessment
Students continually revise their work and set goals to meet the expectations for learning and the
work of their peers.
Students frequently assess and monitor the quality of their own work.
Students are generally aware of their own level
of achievement.
Students do not engage in selfassessment.
Expectations for student learning and assessment criteria are not provided.
1098 765
432 1
Uses aligned, adequate and timely summative assessments
Teacher uses multiple summative assessments with student lead and
designed variations.
1098
Teacher uses multiple
summative assessments with adequate cognitive variations. There are
reliable timely feedback.
765
Teacher uses minimal summative assessments
with little variation.
432
Teacher does not effectively use summative
assessments and does not use aligned assessments.
1
NOTES:
Domain 4: Professionalism Indicator A: Establishes and maintains clear expectations for classroom behavior.
Exemplary Effective Development Needed
Unsatisfactory
Uses selfreflectio
n to improve
instruction.
Teacher models reflective practices for other educators,
through peer coaching, sharing,
facilitating or modeling in
professional learning communities.
1098
Teachers accurately
assesses his or her own
effectiveness using lesson artifacts and student data to identify areas of strength and areas
for growth.
765
With guidance, teacher is able to use reflection and selfassessment to assess student learning. With guidance, teacher is able to describe how to meet lesson goals and how to make adjustments.
432
Teacher does not effectively use reflection and selfassessment.
1
Uses feedback to improve instruction
Teacher seeks and uses feedback from colleagues. Also uses reflection and selfassessment to thoughtfully assess
instructional practices and
student learning.
1098
Teachers uses feedback from colleagues,
administrators and professional literature to enhance
professional practice.
765
Teachers occasionally uses feedback from
colleagues, administrators and
professional literature to enhance professional
practice.
432
Feedback from colleagues, administrators, families, student and professional literature is resisted and/or does not result in changes in professional practice.
1
NOTES:
Indicator B: Professional development
Exemplary Effective Development Needed
Unsatisfactory
Participation in
professional development
Teacher creates and engages in meaningful
professional growth activities for self; contributes and advocates for the
learning of students, colleagues and the
community.
1098
Teacher provides implementation of practices from
activities results in increased student
learnings.
765
Teacher provides evidence of continued development. Minimal participation is shown.
432
Teacher does not contribute to, or actively
and consistently participate in, professional learning activities or other activities designed to make the school a productive learning
environment.
1
Collaboration with
colleagues
Teacher leads collaboration with colleagues where
they analyze student data and work, set focused goals,
design common and assessments, resulting in
increased student learning and instructional effectiveness.
1098
Teacher collaborates with colleagues to
analyze student data, set focused goals, design common
assessments and analyze student
work.
765
Teacher collaborates with colleagues to
address student needs identified by data.
432
Teacher resists collaboration with
colleagues and detracts from collaborative
processes when engaged in them.
1
Contributes to school and district culture of learning
Teacher shows initiative, has made
substantial contributions at the school and district levels, and serves as a positive role
model.
1098
Teacher contributes to
development of a productive learning environment at the site and district
level.
765
Teacher occasionally contributes to
development of a productive learning
environment at the site and district level.
432
Teacher does not support or acts as a negative force
to the culture for professional learning at site and/or district.
1
NOTES:
Indicator C: Professionalism
Exemplary Effective Development Needed
Unsatisfactory
Ethical conduct
Teacher models school and district
policies and procedures and advocates for high
standards of professional and
ethical conduct in the school and community.
1098
Teacher complies to school and district policies and procedures and models high standards of
professional and ethical conduct.
765
Teacher acts in a professional and ethical
manner. Teacher complies with most school and district
policies and procedures, but
frequently pushes the envelope.
432
There is documentation of violation of school and/or
district policies and procedures.
1
Record keeping
Record keeping is timely, complete and
accurate and involves student participation and interpretation as appropriate.
1098
Record keeping is timely,
complete and accurate.
765
Record keeping is rudimentary and only partially effective in serving student and
system needs.
432
Records and reports are inaccurate and/or consistently late.
1
Organization and
timeliness
Teacher has developed systems for recording and communicating
Teacher completes
required and/or routine
Teacher requires occasional reminders to
complete required
Teacher does not complete required and/or routine tasks/duties in a
timely manner.
individual student knowledge, skills, and learning goals.
1098
tasks/duties in a well organized
manner.
765
and/or routine tasks/duties.
432
1
Communication with families.
Teacher develops systems for frequent,
ongoing, and appropriate twoway
interactions.
1098
Teacher initiates interactions with families regarding student progress.
765
Teacher responds appropriately to family
requests for communications regarding student
progress.
432
Teacher has not established a pattern of communication with families of appropriate frequency and content.
1
Multicultural, cultural and linguistic
understanding
Teacher adapts instructional practices based on cultural knowledge and experience.
1098
Teacher seeks out experiences
with and understanding of students’ home languages and
cultures.
765
Teacher demonstrates some understanding of the importance of this
knowledge.
432
Teacher demonstrates little interest in acquiring knowledge about or
engaging in experiences that expose her or him to students’ home languages
and cultures.
1 NOTES:
APPENDIX 3 The Tuning Protocol
1) Introduction (2 minutes) – Facilitator introduces goals of the protocol, guidelines, and schedule. Participants introduce themselves if necessary.
2) Presentation (5 minutes) – Presenter speaks to give a context for the student work.
Participants are absolutely silent, but may take notes.
a. Information about the students/class – what they’re like, age, how far into the term they are when they get this assignment
b. The prompt or assignment that generated this work c. Show samples of student work or video of the activity, etc. (student names removed)
d. Share the evaluation format (scoring rubric, assessment criteria…)
e. Provide a FOCUSING QUESTION FOR FEEDBACK. What does presenter want from the group?
i. Facilitator should write down the focusing question for all to see. This question should inform the direction of the group.
3) Clarifying Questions (5 minutes) – Participants ask “clarifying” questions to seek more information. (Example: what percentage of your class are special needs? What time of day do you have this class?) The questions should be a matter of fact, not questions like, “When I
teach this, I do _____.
a. Facilitator limits questions to those that are clarifying.
b. Things they might consider include: i. Were the instructions/prompts for the assignment clear?
ii. Does the assignment meet the desired goal of the presenter?
4) Examination of Student Work Samples (5 minutes) – Participants review the work silently
a. Participants make notes about what seems to be working with the assignment and where there might be a problem.
b. Presenter is silent during this time as well.
5) Warm and Cool Feedback (6 minutes) – Participants share feedback with each other while the presenter is silent, but may take notes.
a. Feedback usually starts w/warm (positive) comments and then moves to cool (instructive) comments.
b. This is the time for suggestions for strengthening the work c. While many elements of the work may be addressed, facilitator should make sure that the
focusing question is being adequately addressed.
6) In the original version of this protocol there are two more steps, but in the interest of our limited time together, I would suggest them as optional as time and interest allows. As
supported by DuFour, the following two steps are:
a. Reflection (5 minutes) – a chance for the presenter to speak to the comments/questions while participants are silent. This is not a time to defend oneself, but instead a time for the
presenter to reflect aloud on the ideas/questions presented.
Roles within the Tuning Protocol Presenter – the person bringing the work to be reviewed
Facilitator – the person who makes sure the protocol is followed, keeps time, and keeps the discussion targeted to the Focusing Question
Participants – the group members who will review the Presenter’s work
APPENDIX 4 Student Achievement Goal Form:
School Year: _________________________________________________
Goal 1: (classes/subgroups)
Students impacted by goal
# of students
Portion of 25%
Baseline data used
Rationale for goal
Goal 2: optional (classes/subgroups)
Students impacted by goal
# of students
Portion of 25%
Baseline data used
Rationale for goal
Exemplary 1098
Effective
765
Development Needed 432
Unsatisfactory 1
Surpassed goal and
demonstrated outstanding
student progress.
Met goal or otherwise showed
substantial progress
towards goal.
Did not fully meet goal, but some students
have demonstrated progress
towards goal.
Surpassed goal and
demonstrated outstanding
student progress.
APPENDIX 5
Teacher Analysis of Student Survey Data
Synopsis of Survey Results:
What I learned from the survey:
What I could change because of my findings:
Group Member Signatures:
_____________________________ _____________________________ Teacher Date
PLC Member Signatures _________________________________________________
Describe your goal data and results.
Did you achieve your desired results? Explain.
How will the results impact your future teaching?
WESTBROOK WALNUT GROVE
MENTORING PROGRAM
20142015 VISION STATEMENT
The vision for the Westbrook Walnut Grove School Teacher’s Mentoring Program is to provide a continuum of mentoring services in a safe and effective manner.
MISSION STATEMENT
Our mentors will be committed individuals, working one-on-one with new teachers for at least one year on a consistent basis, whose goal is to maximize a teacher’s potential.
INTRODUCTION
In the Westbrook Walnut Grove School District we have always had an informal approach to the introduction of new staff members to the culture, responsibilities and expectations of teachers in the district. We are now entering the first and second phases of a formal, uniform and comprehensive mentoring program starting in 2010-2011. This program will be reevaluated each spring.
We expect this program to include all teachers entering their first year of employment in the Westbrook Walnut Grove School District, regardless of certification and prior teaching experience.
The Mentor Program Planning Committee believes that a successful mentoring program is based on mutual respect and trust ensuring a high degree of professionalism. The mentoring relationship is only one layer of support provided by the district. Additional support includes grade level and/or subject colleagues, teacher coordinators, building principals, and the district superintendent.
I. Background and Goals
The following document, which outlines the WWG Mentor Program for certified teachers, is the product of collaborative efforts of members of the Westbrook Walnut Grove School District.
The purpose of the WWG Mentor Program is to provide new teachers with support, guidance, encouragement, challenges, and direction as they develop a professional vision and assimilate to the culture of our district. Experienced mentors have a great deal of knowledge, talents, and skills to share with their new teacher. In addition to the state goals of increased teacher retention and improvement of the new teacher’s ability to assist students to achieve consistent with the State learning standards, the WWG Mentor Program recognizes that a valued product of the mentoring relationship is increased and on-going conversation about quality teaching practices throughout the district.
The Mentor program is a component of the Flexible Learning Year (FLY) and is intended to extend the district’s orientation program for new teachers throughout the first year of employment.
The Goals of the program are:
· To assist new teacher in adjusting to their new workplace
· To provide emotional assistance, support and guidance regarding the District’s and the building’s professional culture
· To provide support and guidance regarding the district’s and the building’s policies and procedures
· To assist new teachers in preventing and resolving instructional and professional issues they may encounter
A. Characteristics of District-wide Mentoring Coordinator
· Tenured teacher with appropriate certification
· Minimum of 5 years teaching experience in the WWG District
· Currently in an active teaching position
· (In the future: participation in the program as a mentor)
· A willingness to participate in the program as a coordinator and the time available to oversee all aspects of the district-wide mentoring program
· Demonstrates mastery of pedagogical skills and curricula knowledge
· Demonstrates professional ethics as well as superior teaching ability
· Demonstrates strong interpersonal and communication skills
B. Characteristics of Mentors
Mentors must be tenured teachers presently working in the WWG School District. In order to qualify as a mentor in WWG, a teacher must possess the following attributes:
· A willingness to participate in the program as a mentor and the time available for a quality mentoring relationship
· Demonstrates mastery of pedagogical skills and curricula knowledge
· Demonstrates professional ethics as well as superior teaching ability
· Demonstrates strong interpersonal and communication skills
Mentors need to teach in the same school as the new teachers except when there is only one such position in a particular school, such as a library-media specialist or school psychologist. A counterpart in another building could provide the primary mentor relationship. Building support should also be provided outside of the formal mentoring program.
The Mentoring Selection Committees from each building will review the list of applicants from that building maintaining confidentiality throughout the process. The Mentoring Selection Committee will make the final selection based on the needs of the building. Every effort should be made to pair mentors and new teachers according to the same grade level/curriculum area. In general, mentors will be assigned on a one-to-one basis.
The District will make every effort to insure that there are a sufficient number of approved mentors to meet the number of new teachers in each school year. In the event that there are insufficient tenured applicants, second year probationary teachers who held tenure in other districts and recently retired WWG teachers may be considered for eligibility.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF MENTOR PROGRAM PERSONNEL
I. Responsibilities of the District-wide Mentor Program Coordinator
· Oversees the program district-wide
· Serves on each Mentor Selection Committee
· Schedules two joint meetings for mentors and new teachers to assess the mentor program, (end of first and second quarters)
· Mediates disagreements between mentors and new teachers
· Supervises the development of a monthly timeline unique to each mentor and new teacher
· Creates, review and/or revises mentor year-long program topics and timelines and reviews with the Assistant Superintendent for curriculum, instruction, and professional personnel before such plans are implemented or published
· Develops a schedule for large group mentor/new teacher sessions throughout the year
· Schedules opportunities for the mentor and new teachers to observe each other in the classroom or other workplace
· Tracks the release-time opportunities for equity, purpose and compliance
· Meets with each mentor and new teacher one-on-one at least once per semester
· Reviews mentor evaluation forms and reviews time logs at the end of each quarter
· Schedules end-of-year gathering to socialize and reflect on the mentoring experience
II. Responsibilities of the Mentor
· Provides the new teachers with support related to curriculum, instruction, classroom and time management, building and district policies and procedures, state mandates, parental contacts, adjustment to a new work environment, assessments, data analysis, written communication and any
and all other optics that may be of importance in the performance of the new teacher’s duties as a teacher and school community member
· Maintains confidentiality with regard to all professional issues
· Meets formally at least once a week with his/her new teacher throughout the year and informally as needed
· Attends one (1) training day in August plus six (6) hours of training to be scheduled during the course of the year
· Attends a minimum of 30 mentoring sessions with the new teacher
· Attends four (4) large group mentor/new teacher sessions to be scheduled during the course of the year
· Joins the new teacher in post-observation conferences with the building administrator if invited by the new teacher and welcomed by the administrator
· Documents time spent on mentoring activities using the WWG New Teacher Mentoring Log
· Assists the new teacher in creating professional goals
· Creates and maintains a journal with his/her new teacher
· Participates in mentor/new teacher classroom observations a minimum of twice in the mentor’s classroom and twice in the new teacher’s classroom as arranged by the program coordinator
· Participates in the evaluation of the mentoring program
C. Mentoring Activities
The mentor shall be responsible for providing guidance and support to the teacher assigned to him or her as a mentee. Mentors may advise their mentees on matters relating to classroom management, classroom set up, pedagogical matters, lesson plans, issues relating to the mission, organization, and any other matters relating to the mentee’s role at WWG. Mentors are expected to respond to questions posed by mentees with the utmost professionalism and, where necessary, provide the mentee with an appropriate referral.
Mentors are expected to meet with mentees on a regular basis, but no less than as follows:
· Once a week during the entire first year of school
The mentor’s role shall not be evaluative. Information obtained by a mentor cannot be used for purposes of evaluating or disciplining a new teacher, with the following exceptions; where it will be the responsibility and duty of a mentor to immediately advise the Principal for instruction and curriculum:
· Where withholding information poses a danger to life, health or safety of an individual: or
· Where the information indicates that the new teacher has committed an act which raises a reasonable question as to the new teacher’s moral character
Notwithstanding the above, willful failure of a new teacher to participate in a mentoring program may constitute insubordination and may result in disciplinary action and/or termination.
AUGUST
During the New Teacher Orientation in late August, mentors and new teachers will meet each other and take part in their first training session and orientation.
SEPTEMBER
Prior to opening day: Review classroom set-up, curriculum materials, school-wide and district-wide procedural materials, discipline policy, student assessment profiles, Back-to School Night.
OCTOBER
Discuss student files, parent communication, progress reports, grading systems, and procedures. Check on documentation required for personnel file.
NOVEMBER
Discuss scheduling and conducting parent-teacher conferences, writing report card comments, shared professional reading.
DECEMBER
Review and Discuss administrator’s observation of new teacher, strategies for classroom management during the various holiday seasons, sensitivity for diversity.
JANUARY
Mentors and new teachers conduct a mid-year self-assessment (constructive critique).
FEBRUARY
Review contract and certification requirements; check on documentation for personnel file.
MARCH – JUNE
Discuss standardized and state testing procedures, year-end responsibilities and activities, grading, report cards, first-year reflection.
JUNE
Review teacher evaluation of mentoring program, end-of-year gathering, and reflection.
MENTORING PROGRAM CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY
The mentoring program of the Westbrook Walnut Grove School District has been developed to ensure that each teacher new to the district be afforded the support of experienced teachers for orientation and instructional coaching. For mentoring to meet its goal of aiding new teachers in effective instructional practices, the environment must be risk-free and non-threatening; new teachers need to avail themselves of such help and willingly open their classrooms to their mentor and new teacher will remain confidential and non-evaluative.
Mentors will refrain from sharing any information regarding mentees
with the mentee’s colleagues, or students.
At their discretion, new teachers may wish to share personal or evaluative information with either mentors or department chair(s) as a means of seeking help/advice.
Should a mentee leave the district, professional ethics should maintain confidentiality.
It is important to recognize the positive potential in the mentor-mentee relationship. The confidentiality and trust built into the partnership needs to prevail if it is to work to the benefit of the mentee, mentor, students, and the district.
CONFIDENTIALITY VERIFICATION STATEMENT
I understand the confidentiality requirements of my position as mentor of:
Superintendent Name: Loy Woelber Superintendent Signature: _____________________________________________________ School Board Chair Signature: _________________________________________________ Consortium Schools District # Name
1. 051101 ADRIAN 2. 008101 COMFREY 3. 058101 EDGERTON 4. 040201 HENDRICKS 5. 067101 HILLSBEAVER CREEK
6. 040301 IVANHOE 7. 289501 JACKSON COUNTY CENTRAL 8. 216701 LAKEVIEW 9. 218401 LUVERNE 10. 041501 LYND 11. 041301 MARSHALL 12. 041401 MINNEOTA 13. 017301 MOUNTAIN LAKE 14. 289701 REDWOOD AREA 15. 290701 ROUND LAKEBREWSTER 16. 290201 RTR 17. 008401 SLEEPY EYE 18. 008501 SPRINGFIELD 19. 289801 WESTBROOKWALNUT GROVE 20. 017701 WINDOM 21. 051801 WORTHINGTON
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT—Math and Reading
Math and Reading Consortium Wide Report Math and Reading District Report
Math and Reading District Subgroup Report
District Proficiency Trend Chart District Comments on Math/Reading Data Reports
Westbrook Walnut Grove School with 400 students K12 has had an average of 40 students that move in / out of the district per year over the past 3 years.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Consortium Wide Professional Development Team Each school district identified one representative to sit on the FLY Professional Development Team. The FLY Professional Development Team met on an ongoing basis throughout the 20132014 school year and was responsible for planning and providing oversight for all consortium professional development activities. Consortium Wide Superintendent Meetings for the 201314 School Year The FLY Superintendents met together at scheduled monthly meetings throughout the 201314 school year. Professional Development Team activities and concerns are presented to the superintendent’s
group where they are discussed. These meetings allowed district superintendents to share common consortium concerns and discuss possible solutions, as well as ensure accountability towards the Flexible Learning Year plan approved by MDE. The Superintendents met on the following dates: September 17, October 23, November 20, December 11, January 29, March 19, April 9, and June 4. Consortium Wide Professional Development Roster of Events Joint Staff Development Days for 20132014 August 14th Full Day All FLY School Districts, Nurses Training October 16th – Early Out All staff available at 1pm January 20th– Full Day All FLY School Districts February 14th – Early Out All staff available at 1pm March 10 – Full Day All FLY School Districts On these joint staff development days, districts worked independently or in PODS of 3 districts together. The focus was on FLY initiatives that would continue to provide teachers information on how to increase student achievement. Teacher Induction Coordinators
o All Teacher Induction Coordinators met twice during the school year to provide support and shared learning. Instruments were created to assist in the process of transitioning to a new Teacher Induction Coordinator. The TIC Manual was updated.
o During the summer, there was a TIC Training with Lori Bird, Director Center for Mentoring and Induction, Minnesota State University, Mankato.
PLC Training September 23, 2013 – Solution Tree Trainer Peter Noonan spoke on PLC protocol, successful
PLC teams, and how they impact student achievement. April 14, 2013 – Rick Wormeli presented the research and foundational elements of moving
toward Standards Based Grading. Paraprofessional Workshop – Paraprofessionals from 6 FLY districts gathered January 20, 2014, in Windom. Sessions were specific to the work of a paraprofessional and included these topics: Diffusing Difficult Classroom Behavior, Show Me the Data, Accommodating Visual Challenges in the Classroom, Supporting Every Learner Through Education Technology, Becoming a Difference Maker and Everything You Wanted to Know About Being a Media Assistant in the Media Center, But Were Afraid to Ask. FLY Summer Institute – The topic was: Integrating Technology with Your Instruction. This professional development opportunity was offered to all FLY teachers. The presenter was Brandon Raymo, Assistant Director of Minnesota River Valley Education District. The goal of the training
was: 1) to help teachers learn how to use Google Drive, 2) to explain the how, what and why of grading rubrics, and 3) to learn how to address informational text across content areas. District Professional Development Report WWG has had a great experience with PLC’s and using them for the betterment of staff, students and curriculum.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT – Teacher Induction Consortium Wide Teacher Induction Activities Each school district identified one Teacher Induction Coordinator who were asked to make a three year commitment to serving in this position. The Teacher Induction Coordinators were expected to attend all designated training dates, communicate with other Teacher Induction Coordinators, Continue full implementation of Firstyear and second year Teacher Induction structure in each FLY district using the FLY Induction Checklist and Rubrics. Other goals for the year included continuing full implementation of a complete structure for crossdistrict mentoring and to assess the effectiveness of the Teacher Induction programs at the end of the year with the FLY Mentor Survey and the New Teacher Survey. Each school district gathered baseline information in spring 2011. The same checklist and rubric were completed in spring 2012, 2013 and 2014 to measure each school district’s growth on the components of a teacher induction program. These measured each respective school district’s status on teacher induction program implementation. The data is used by each school district to create an improvement plan for the next year to fit the unique needs of each school district. Teacher Induction Coordinators Professional Development
o All Teacher Induction Coordinators met twice during the school year to provide support and shared learning. Instruments were created to assist in the process of transitioning to a new Teacher Induction Coordinator. The TIC Manual was updated.
o Summer Training with Lori Bird – Director Center for Mentoring and Induction Minnesota State University, Mankato Goal: The purpose of this training was to provide new TICs in the FLY Consortium with foundational knowledge for working with mentors in their district to support beginning teacher development. Returning TICs were invited and encouraged to attend this session Outcomes: Understand the basic principles of coaching as an effective support function that promotes
teacher development. Apply standards of effective teaching practice (i.e. Charlotte Danielson’s framework) in
collaborative conversations with beginning teachers. Utilize tools for formative assessment in implementation of a growthoriented model of
professional development.
District Mentor/Mentee Training Offered Some school districts collaborated at the beginning of the year to provide training to both the mentors and the new teachers. The training materials were developed by the Teacher Induction Coordinators as a group with each Teacher Induction Coordinator tailoring the information to fit his/her needs. District Specific Teacher Induction Report
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT – PLCs Consortium Wide PLC Background Professional Learning Community trainers and all administrators have been participating in professional development trainings focused on DuFour’s Professional Learning Community Framework. Subsequently, the PLC trainers were responsible for training their respective staff members in DuFour’s PLC framework using DuFour’s manual entitled Learning by Doing. Solution Tree was designated as the company that would provide all of our training as the DuFour model of PLCs is the model the FLY consortium would be implementing. PLC trainers were identified by each school district. Each school district was allocated one PLC trainer for each 25 FTE’s of teaching staff. All administrators and all PLC trainers (approximately 140) were expected to attend the designated trainings throughout the 201314 school year. All of the administrators and trainers were responsible for training their individual school district staff. Consortium Wide PLCRelated Activities for 201314 PLC Training
September 23, 2013 – Solution Tree Trainer Peter Noonan spoke on PLC protocol, successful PLC teams and how they impact student achievement.
April 14, 2013 – Rick Wormeli presented the research and foundational elements of moving toward Standards Based Grading.
PLC Focus
Power Standards Chart – The FLY Coordinator provided a template for all of the districts to input their power standards and create joint lists of the power standards from every district.
Assessment Repository – Every PLC group was assigned the work of submitting 3 Formative Assessments to a common Google Drive platform open to FLY districts with the intent of sharing resources.
Consortium Wide Cross District PLC Activities for 201314 Approximately 195 people participated in crossdistrict PLCs during the 20132014 school year. The teams reported it was very valuable time for them to meet with other content area teachers.
Meeting Dates/Times
August 14, 2013 (minimum 3 hours) October 16, 2013 Early out (minimum 1.5 hours) January 20, 2014 Face to Face meeting (minimum 3 hours)
March 10, 2013 Common FLY Day (minimum of 3 hours in AM)
Consortium Wide Plan for the Evaluation of PLCs in Each District Over the course of the 1314 school year, the consortium decided it was time to conduct an evaluation/assessment of the PLCs operating in each school district. To determine the best way to do this, the consortium contracted with the Minnesota Evaluation Studies Institute (MESI) from the University of Minnesota. Research and focus groups/interviews were done in June 2014. The final report from MESI with recommendations and potential evaluation tools will be presented in the Fall of 2014 and will guide PLC Evaluation throughout the remainder of the 1415 school year. District YearEnd PLC Report Below is a summary from each building level addressing PLC success stories, roadblocks, lingering questions, a response to the district PLC survey, and a rating for each school building on its PLC status (initiating, implementing, developing or sustaining). WWG Elementary Location –
Focused on: --evaluation of a new reading series --completed curriculum alignment with state standards --spent a lot of PLC time developing teacher evaluation form --examined student work
WWG High School Location –
Aug. 14 (8--3) Power standards in your class activity w/2 assessments Aug. 28
Overview of PLC work/direction of WB PLC
Sept. 11 Teacher eval
Oct. 16 (1--3:45) Tuning protocol & teacher eval
Nov. 20 Teacher eval
Dec. 4 Looking at Mission Statements
Dec. 18 Tuning Protocol
Jan. 8 Disc. On future of PLC Jan. 20
(8:30--11:30) Feedback/grading systems Feb. 14
(1--3:30) Feedback/grading systems
Feb. 26 Newly formed SGPLC work on focus areas**
Mar. 10 (all day) X--District/Sped & Para unit
Mar. 19 SGPLCs to work on focus areas
Apr. 2 SGPLCs to work on focus areas
Apr. 16 SGPLCs to work on focus areas
May 7 Standards Based Grading
**WWGHS created 5 SGPLCs (small group PLCs) to each focus on a different issue. The topics were: Skinny v. Block/Core Courses/Improve student grasp of current affairs Scheduling
(next year’s schedule, snow schedule, late start schedule, GST) Life 101 –
topics/role of advisors/roles of part time staff
At Risk Students Falling through the cracks? Responding to student needs Teacher
Evaluation
(8:30--11:30) Feedback/grading
systems Feb. 14 (1--3:30) Feedback/grading
systems
Feb. 26 Newly formed SGPLC work on focus
areas**
Mar. 10 (all day) X--District/Sped & Para unit
Mar. 19 SGPLCs to work on focus areas
Apr. 2 SGPLCs to work on focus areas\
Apr. 16 SGPLCs to work on focus areas
May 7 Standards Based Grading
**WWGHS created 5 SGPLCs (small group PLCs) to each focus on a different issue. The topics were:
Skinny v. Block/Core Courses/Improve student grasp of current affairs Scheduling (next
year’s schedule, snow schedule, late start schedule, GST) Life 101 – topics/role of
advisors/roles of part time staff
At Risk Students Falling through the cracks? Responding to student needs Teacher Evaluation
Westbrook Walnut Grove School Survey Mid year 2014 - 2015
SCHOOL VISITS N/A Strongly
Agree Agree Disag
ree Strongly Disagree
1 When I visit or phone the school, I am greeted in a friendly, courteous manner.
2 I feel comfortable communicating with my child's teachers.
3 The administration is accessible and responsive to my needs.
ACADEMIC EXPECTATIONS N/A Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
4 WWG Schools offers an academic program that is meaningful & relevant with high expectations.
5 I am aware of what the academic expectations are for my child.
6 Homework completion is important for students to succeed in classes.
RESPECT/CARING N/A Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
7 In this school all students are respected.
8 There is someone in this school that my child can count on and talk to.
COUNSELING DEPARTMENT N/A Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
9 The counseling department is accessible and responsive to my needs.
10 I receive enough information regarding postsecondary options.
11 I am aware of and understand the significance of the EXPLORE test for grade 8, PLAN for grade 10, and ACT for college acceptance.
/ ATHLETIC/ FINE ARTS DEPARTMENT N/A Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
12 The athletic/arts department is accessible and responsive to my needs.
13 The athletic/arts department deals with student/parent concerns effectively.
14 I feel coaches make my student feel valued and appreciated.
SAFETY/DISCIPLINE N/A Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
15 WWG School is a safe place.
16 I know what the expectations are of my student regarding behavior and discipline.
17 I (parent/guardian) believe that the school discipline program is fair and relevant.
18 I utilize the Student Handbook/Planner on the school website.
HOMESCHOOL COMMUNICATION N/A Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
19 Parents are kept informed about their child's academic progress at school.
20 I utilize WWG Public Schools Online student information system.
Rank the following information outlets from WWG School from 1 through 4 with 1 being the most used.
TAPS Website
Instant Alert
Mailings
Home
Other
21 I gather information regarding Tracy Area Public Schools from…
Comments
Westbrook Walnut Grove School Demographics and Financial Information
State Aid Receivable
FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 General 462,446 1,236,906 1,376,719 1,560,016 632,910 Community Service 2,226 4,359 3,774 4,149 1,257 Total Receivable 464,672 1,241,265 1,380,493 1,564,165 634,167
Change in fund balance from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013
General Fund – The overall fund balance decreased $156,872 Food Service Fund – The overall fund balance decreased $15,708 Community Service Fund – The overall fund balance increased $53,317
General Fund Operating Fund Balances
The above graph represents the fund balance of the general fund including all reserved and unreserved balances for the years ended June 30, 2009 through June 30, 2013.
The graph on the top of this page represents the unreserved fund balance for the food service fund, the bottom graph on this page represents the community service fund including all reserved and unreserved balances, for the years ended June 30, 2009 through June 30, 2013.
FY 2012 FY 2013 Restricted for: Deferred Maintenance 7,843 12,671 Health and Safety 34,164 150,136 Gifted & Talented 6,636 9,658 Safe Schools Crime Levy 12,907 12,907 Disabled Accessibility 12,947 8,890 Operating Capital 750
Unassigned: Designated for Student Activities 86,369 120,717 Unassigned 2,218,586 1,906,851
FY 2012 FY 2013 Restricted for: Community Education (7,658) 2,450 Early Childhood Family Education (222) 9,243 School Readiness 1,224 (58)
