EDL 663 School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

EDL 663
School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate
EDL 663 School Improvement Plan Part One The first requirement was to find and locate the existing School Improvement Plan at my school. This proved to be quite a difficult task for two reasons. First were the schedules of my mentor, the principal. The beginning of this semester has been a very busy one for our administration; adding new programs to our school to raise our overall School Performance Score (SPS). The administration was constantly in meetings, most of which were away from school. The only way for me to reach them during this busy time was through email. Accordingly, through email the principal informed me that there was a copy of the School Improvement Plan on the school website. The second reason was the fact that there were three plans on the schools website. There was the original plan turned into the school board, a second that was a revised copy of the original plan and the third which was a Recovery School Improvement Plan. I brought all of these to a high school basketball game that I knew the principal would be supervising and was finally able to have a face-to-face discussion with him. It was determined that the Recovery School Improvement Plan was actually the same thing as the revised version and that it was the current one. The second requirement was to download the Rubric for School Improvement Plans. I completed this task and it is now in a binder with the School Improvement Plan as well as copies of the recent Quality School Team reports on the school, which pertains to the items in the School Improvement Plan. The problem with this Rubric is that it is not the same one that is used by the school. The principal informed me that the school board has their own Rubric that they use in scoring the School Improvement Plans and determined that the States plan could be used to fulfill the requirements of this project. After the Rubric and School Improvement Plans were located, a team was assembled to complete the rest of the evaluation of the project. The principal determined that these meetings would be held on Fridays at Seventh Hour every other week. All the stakeholders on the team would have to be able to meet during this time. There are four groups of stakeholders organized as follows: The first group of stakeholders is that of the administrators. They include the Principal, the API over math and science, the API over English and social studies, the teacher coach, and the Gifted and Talented Coordinator. The second group of stakeholders is the teachers. These teachers are either the Department Chairs or a teacher chosen by the principal for being a leader in their respective department. These teachers included, the Department Chair of the English department, Department Chair of the math department, the Head Free Enterprise Teacher, Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) coordinator (also an electives teacher), as well as a science teacher.
EDL 663
The third group is students. Two students were nominated by the Principal and they accepted the nomination to serve on the team. They are the Student Body President and Vice President. The final group of stakeholders is parents. Two parents were chosen. One is the Parent Teacher Organization president, the other is the secretary of the same organization. The President has a son in the tenth grade and is also an athlete for the schools basketball team. The Secretary is the mother of a freshman whom is in the Gifted/Talented program, the music program, and on the schools Robotics team. These two individuals were chosen due to the fact that they work with and represent the other parents of the school and the fact that their children have such different interests in the programs offered by the school. Therefore, the members of the School Improvement Team are: Mr. Jimmy Newman, Principal Ms. Shalika Scott, Assistant Principal Mr. Glen Blankenship, Assistant Principal Ms. Naomi Hill, Gifted/Talented Coordinator Ms. Phuong Thai, Teacher Coach Ms. Susan Arnold, PBIS/ Electives Mr. Sean Tate, SIT Chair, Head Free Enterprise Ms. Mary Wells, Math Chair Ms. Anitra Walker, English Chair Ms. Brenda Evans, Science Mrs. Felecia Graves, PTO President Mrs. Tifani Sant, PTO Secretary Mr. Spencer Hunt, Student Body President Ms. Ashley Hunter, Student Body V.P. The next requirement was to setup the School Improvement Team meetings for the semester. The meetings will be held on the following dates, the agenda of each meeting is also listed: February 4, 2011- Introduce team members, initialize the review of School Improvement Plan. February 11, 2011- Plan for and setup rubric for Walkthroughs as well as how to collect evidence on these items. February 25, 2011- Review of School Profile, analyze if and how the economics of the school population as well as the legal and political systems affect the students. Analyze the results of the Best Practices survey that was delivered at the Professional Development Day. March 11, 2011March 25, 2011The scoring and evaluation of the current School Improvement Plan. An analysis of the plan will be completed addressing each item included in Part V of the plan.
EDL 663
April 8, 2011-
An action plan will be created addressing curriculum and teaching, professional development, include provisions for creating a better school climate, communication, parentschool relationship as well as to create strategies to monitor the action plan. April 15, 2011Identify methods to present results to all stakeholders, meet with principal for his input, conduct a confidential evaluation of my leadership by my team and finally decide on when this information will be presented to the other stakeholders. As noted in the tentative schedule, the first meeting was supposed to be held on February fourth. However, an email was sent from central office at about noon on the third stating that school would be canceled due to weather on the fourth. Accordingly, I sent out an email right after this instructing the team members that the meeting would be conducted that afternoon. The teachers were mostly present as well as an administrator and Mrs. Sant. The meeting was handled quickly being that the central office had also canceled all meetings after school. The members of the group were introduced, the tentative schedule and requirements to complete the project were discussed. The group set up rules for speaking and discussed the confidentiality of the information that was discussed in the meetings. The concluding topic discussed was a brief synopsis of the current state of the school. Our school is not a school in decline nor is it academically unacceptable. The principal stated that the only reason that the school had a recovery plan was that it was district mandated even though we had raised our SPS scores by five points, we had not fully met our SPS growth target. He continued by stating that all the high schools in the district had a recovery plan except one. Because the meeting had to be cut short due to weather, the team was given the assignment to review the other aspects of the plan and come prepared to discuss them at the next meeting. A follow up meeting was scheduled for Friday, February 11th. Reflection The biggest item that I have to reflect on through the first part of this assignment is the fact that an administrator has to be flexible but still accomplish their responsibilities. At one point I considered asking for an extension of an assignment. However, I decided that it was necessary and could be accomplished because any further delay would make the rest of the project extremely difficult. I have also seen the importance of the School Improvement Plan. It came to my attention that not very many members of the group even knew that the plan was available online, nor did they know what it actually said. I found this to be very concerning being that this is the blueprint by which we are striving to better ourselves as a school. I also found that it was a problem that there was more than one plan online.
EDL 663
Regarding the meetings, I have been on the School Improvement team since I was employed at our school, three years ago. The main problem seemed to be that a meeting was held only once or twice a semester and there was no follow up, evaluation or documentation of the goals. I know that through this project it will be different this year. It is my hope that through my leadership we will not be rushing around at the last minute to collect documentation for our plan. Instead we will actually do what our plan states and collect documentation as we go. I know that the team that has been created will be able to achieve the goals set and will be able to help in bettering our school. School Improvement Plan Part II: Walkthroughs The Walkthrough at my school was quite an experience. Due to previous walkthroughs by individuals that were not part of the Administration or Department Chairs, confidentiality issues had arisen. These previous individuals would often tell their findings to others who were not the teachers that the observation was based on. Therefore, the principal was very wary about this part of the assignment. Fortunately the principal is my mentor, so I knew that these issues had arisen previously and as a precaution discussed the whole project with him before I even began. During our discussion I suggested that the department chairs and all administration be on the team to help combat the issue of confidentiality. The principal agreed to this arrangement under the stipulation that I would stress the importance of confidentiality. The School Improvement Team met on February 11th to discuss the next aspect of evaluating our School Improvement Plan. As a group it was decided that we would use the walkthrough form that was already in place with the school district. This decision had a dual purpose; so that the team could use this for documentation purposes; and the administration could use these as their mandated walkthroughs. Despite this decision, the team also decided that we would focus primarily on the following aspects: looking for the strategies that work; student interaction; use of resources; levels of bloom taxonomy; and classroom organization. For educational purposes and efficiency, I paired myself as well as some of the department chairs with members of the team that had not previously been trained to conduct walkthroughs. We decided that neither the parents nor the students should take part in the actual walkthrough, but would be allowed to see the combined results. The team decided to conduct each of the walkthroughs during their planning periods or, in the case of administration, at their predetermined times. It was decided that we would meet back a week from that date to discuss our findings. As a precaution and in accordance with the
EDL 663
principal's stipulation, during the meeting I stressed the issues of confidentiality for the members of the team that were not department chairs or administration. The pairs of teams conducted their walkthroughs during the next week. Afterwards I collected the walkthrough forms and combined their results into statistics. I accepted the task of combining the statistics to assure that confidentiality would remain. The following figures present the combined results of the walkthroughs.
Figure 1: Instruction Type
Figure 2: Student Engagement
EDL 663
Figure 3: Strategies That Work Part 1
Figure 4: Strategies That Work Part 2
EDL 663
Figure 5: Student Use of Resources
Figure 6: Teacher Use of Resources
EDL 663
Figure 7: Level of Bloom's Taxonomy After the data was collected and the graphs were created, results indicate that whole group instruction was delivered over 60% of the time (see Instruction Type, Fig. 1). Additionally, results indicate that the instructional methods which were implemented the most were those that leant themselves to whole group instruction (see Strategies that Work, Fig. 3 and Fig. 4). These methods included: reinforcing effort and providing recognition (47%); summarizing and note taking (33%); and cues, questions and advance organizers (27%). The team then analyzed the amount of teacher and student use of resources in the classroom (see Use of Resources Fig. 5 and Fig. 6). Results indicate that the teachers were using PowerPoint the most at 17%, Board Work at 15%, Interactive Whiteboards at 16% and Other Forms of Technology at 11%. However, the students were using Worksheets (mostly guided notes) 32% of the time, and Other Manipulative Forms 20% of the time. In contrast, only 8% of students were utilizing the Interactive Whiteboard. A positive note came during our review of Student Engagement, Fig. 2, where we observed that in 85% of classrooms at least 75% of students were engaged in the lessons that were taking place. This data indicates that as a faculty we still need to improve on our delivery methods as well as how we teach our students. During our review of the results the team discussed how the data indicates that our students are engaged most of the time and the area that needs the most improvement is still in the form of instructional delivery. Unfortunately, however, we noted that even though our students appeared to be engaged, results of Bloom's Taxonomy indicate they were not engaged in higher order thinking (see Fig. 7). The walkthroughs documented that 64% of our lessons were on the basic level of knowledge, 60% were on the level of understanding, 57% were on applying what was being taught and that only 16% reached the highest level of thinking, that of creating.
EDL 663
In conclusion, the team discussed how this data did not seem to surprise anyone because our School Improvement Plan had documented these weaknesses through QST visits from the year before. The surprise did come in the fact that it appeared as though the previous year's goals that were set to repair the issues were not working. We also discussed how, as a faculty we had been trained on small group and individual instruction as well as other forms of differentiated instruction. Further, it was also discussed how we had training on the different levels of Blooms and that we needed to discover the reason that these things were not occurring in the classroom. The team decided that there were two possible solutions to these questions. These included the fact that the teachers were either (1) not comfortable with the methods or (2) simply chose not to implement the methods. The team decided to add questions to the survey pertaining to the teachers thoughts of effectiveness as well as how often the teachers use the strategies. The updated survey will be distributed to the teachers during our Professional Development day. The team also decided that we would focus our School Improvement Plan on differentiated instruction as well as having our students reach a level of higher order thinking. We decided that we would use the data collected during walkthroughs as well as through the results of the updated survey to create future professional development trainings. The official form that was used for the walkthroughs is presented on the following page. The form was copied from a PDF file. On the file, one could see boxes that are used to check off each of the areas.
EBR WALKTHROUGH 10-11 Teacher / Room: School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate Grade: EDL 663 Date: Subject: Time: Author: Number of Students Learning Environment 1-10 Transitions/Routines 11-20 Control/Discipline 21-30 Timely Student Work Displayed Greater than 30 Rapport with Students Classroom Organization Orderly classroom conducive to learning Whole Group Instruction New Blooms Taxonomy Small Group Instruction Remembering (list, recall, define) Individual Instruction Understanding (describe, discuss, explain) Student Engagement Applying (demonstrate, illustrate, solve) 100% Analyzing (compare/contrast, distinguish) Greater than 75% Evaluating (judge, select, convince) About 50% Creating (construct, create, design) Less than 50% Lesson Components Classroom Strategies that Work Evidence of Lesson Plan Identifying similarities and differences Clearly expressed objectives (written or stated)/Agenda Summarizing and note taking Anticipatory Set/ "Hook" Reinforcing effort and providing recognition Input / Teacher Instruction Homework and practice Modeling / Examples Provided Nonlinguistic representation Checking for Understanding (Cues and Questions) Cooperative learning Guided Practice/ Monitor student Work Setting objectives and providing specific feedback Independent Practice / Provide reinforcement practice once skill is mastered Generating and testing hypotheses Closure/ Bring Lesson to Conclusion Cues, questions, and advance organizers Material T S s T= Teacher S=Stude nt Literacy Strategies Manipulative Teacher models and reinforces vocabulary Interactive White Boards Teacher models/reinforces comprehension strategies Powerpoint/Multi Media A print rich environment is evident Inspiration/Kidspiration Students engage in decoding words Students are actively engaged in literacy activity Students actively engage in writing activities Comments: Reading Material and Classroom Libraries Worksheet/Workbook Board Work Other
EDL 663
Reflection: There were several things that I learned throughout this part of the assignment. First and foremost, I learned that walkthroughs are open to objectivity. The person conducting the walkthroughs looks for different things and may have different views on the things that they are viewing as compared to someone else that could be doing the same walkthrough. I also learned that teachers are very aware of people doing walkthroughs. Accordingly, I purposely stood outside of some of the classrooms to observe both before and after I did the formal walkthrough. I noticed a distinct difference in the teachers approach when they knew someone was observing them. Furthermore, it is important to note that this was with a statistically small amount of teachers. Another issue that we encountered as a team was the fact that there seemed to be several teachers out with fieldtrips or at playoff games. This greatly limited the amount of teachers we were able to see. So, with the permission and suggestion of the administration we included the walkthroughs that had been done previously in the semester by the Department Chairs as well as the administration. Under the direction of my mentor, the principal, I went on more walkthroughs than previously decided so that I would be able to understand the task that this part of the assignment was trying to teach. Part III: School Profile
1. On March 4th, I led a discussion with the School Improvement Team regarding detailed
research on the demographics of our school, the culture of our school and the most recent test results. We began looking at the data, from EDL 660 and comparing it to more up to date information. During the discussion, we noticed that there had been significant changes in the data because the EDL 660 data was out of date. After we reviewed these materials, the team discussed the areas that we found weak in comparison to those area that are the school's strengths. Additionally, while evaluating these strengths and weaknesses we reviewed the attendance record, discipline record, the QST data, and the walkthroughs conducted in part two of the School Improvement Plan project to find any trends in relation to what we could observe through the previous years school report card. 2. Woodlawn High School (WHS) is located on Jefferson Highway, approximately five miles north of the Ascension Parish line. The current school building is relatively new, having been built in 2003. However, the history of the school goes back to 1911. This past January, the school added a new wing to the building, which currently hosts several teachers that were previously floaters. I understand that this new wing is predicted to house a new Freshman Academy in the fall of 2011. Because of population influx after Hurricane Katrina as well as taking in students from the closure of Lee High School in 2009, the school's population has grown rapidly over the past several years. The current student population is 1,299 students in grades 9 12. The SIP Team broke these 1,299 students down into several categories.
EDL 663
The first breakdown was by grade. Woodlawn High School has 392 Freshmen, 354 Sophomores, 273 Juniors and 280 Seniors (see Fig, 1).
Figure 1: Students By Grade Secondly, the population was broken down by ethnicity. WHS currently has a student population of 791 Black students, one American Indian student, 41 Asian students, 72 Hispanic students and 394 White students (see Fig. 2).
Figure 2: Students By Ethnicity Third, the population was broken down by gender. There are 629 female students and 670 male students (see Fig. 3).
EDL 663
Figure 3: Student By Gender The students were then broken down by educational types. WHS has 86 disabled/special education students. There also are 66 Gifted and Talented students, and 1,147 regular education students (see Fig. 4).
Figure 4: Students by Education Type Economically, WHS has 777 or 59.8% of our student population living in poverty, and 522 or 40.2% of our students living above the poverty line (see Fig. 5). However, in comparison, we only have 663 students or 51% who receive free lunch, 100 or 8% of students receiving reduced lunch, and 552 or 41% of students paying full price (see Fig. 6). The principal stated that this is a problem because 40.2% of students living above the poverty line and 41% paying full lunch. This discrepancy indicates that we should have .8% more of students receiving free/reduced lunch, which would result in our school receiving more Title One money.
EDL 663
Figure 5: Percent of Students in Poverty
Figure 6: Students By Lunch Payment In order to help our students, WHS has the following programs in place: Career to Work, INTECH, La Gear-UP, LEAD TECH, School-To-Work, Accelerated Reader, and Prostart. The school also has Algebra I Online. The school has the following policies to help the WHS community: Crisis Management, Discipline/Behavior Plan (Juvenile Justice Reform Act requirement), Family Involvement Policy, Security Procedures, Safe and Drug-Free Prevention Activities, Student Code of Conduct, and Teacher Quality Strategies. The School also has several partners in education. These include the following universities: Baton Rouge Community College, Southeastern Louisiana University, and Louisiana State University. Technical Institute partnerships include: Louisiana Technical College, American Builders and Contractors, and ITT. Community partnerships include: Woodlawn Baptist Church and Healing Place Church. In the form of business and industry, the schools partners are: Raising Canes, the Jones Creek Business Association, and ISC. Woodlawn High School matriculates students graduate from both Woodlawn Middle and Southeast Middle school. As of this year, and partially due to the results of my action in EDL 662, the school has a PTO that is striving to improve the school climate and teacher appreciation. Professional Development and 67 responded. Some of these teachers decided not to answer some of the questions. The data presented here will be the overall data per
who
3. Instructional Practices Survey- The survey was distributed to 80 teachers at an all-day
EDL 663
question because several members of the team were worried about the matter of confidentiality due to the fact that there are so few individuals in each department. In the SIT meeting these surveys were broken down into different core subjects. The survey asked questions ranging from Marzanos Best Strategies to items that were included in the SIP.
The results of the survey indicate that, in regards to Best Strategies used often or most often, most teachers use summarizing and note taking, identifying similarities and differences, reinforcing effort and providing recognition, cooperative learning, setting objectives and giving feedback as well as cues, questions and advanced organizers. Teachers use nonlinguistic representation seldom (see Fig. 7 and Fig. 8). The results of this part of the survey were quite a surprise to the School Improvement Team with some members of the team suggesting that individuals are calling certain activities something that the activity really is not. Thus we decided that our team meetings need to distinguish exactly what these items are so that our teachers know when they are actually doing these items. It was also decided that we would have professional development opportunities focused on these strategies.
Figure 7: Best Strategies Part I
EDL 663
Figure 8: Best Strategies Part II In regards to action items that are currently in our School Improvement Plan, 52% of all teachers stated that they either disagree or strongly disagree the PD 360 is effective, while only 23 stated that they agreed or strongly agreed with the fact that PD 360 is effective (see Fig. 9). In regards to course portfolio binders, 41% of teachers either disagreed or disagreed strongly that the binders were effective while 28% agreed or strongly agreed that the binders were effective, and 32% of teachers were undecided on the matter (see Fig. 10). In regards to the effectiveness of team meetings, 34% were undecided, with an equal number of 33% each disagreeing, disagreeing strongly or agreeing, and agreeing strongly (see Fig. 11).
Figure 9: PD 360 Effectiveness
EDL 663
Figure 10: Effectiveness of Course Portfolio Binders
Figure 11: Effectiveness of Team Meetings
The final section of the survey polled teachers on how often they did certain things. When asked, how often do you have differentiated instruction in at least one class per week, 18 teachers replied always, 26 replied frequently, eight replied rarely, five replied very rarely, and three replied never (see Fig. 12). When asked, how often do you update portfolio binders, two replied always, 24 replied frequently, 20 replied rarely, seven replied very rarely, and seven replied never (see Fig. 12). When asked, how often do you analyze and use benchmark data in reteaching, nine replied always, 22 replied frequently, 20 replied rarely, six replied very rarely, and five replied never (see fig. 12). When asked, how often do you have enough time to reteach, seven replied always, 14 replied frequently, 21 replied rarely, 14 replied very rarely, and nine replied never (see Fig. 12).
EDL 663
When asked, how often do you recommend the free after school tutoring, 17 said always, 25 said frequently, ten said rarely, seven said very rarely, and seven said never (see Fig. 13). When asked, how often do you utilize the methods in PD 360, six said always, 16 said frequently, 26 said rarely, eight said very rarely, and ten said never (see Fig. 13). When asked, how often do you allow students to revise work, 11 said always, 31 said frequently, 18 said rarely, three said very rarely, and two said never (see Fig. 13). When asked, how often do you utilize your Promethean Board by using flipcharts and other forms of student interaction, 19 said always, 12 said frequently, seven said rarely, three said very rarely, and 15 said never (see Fig. 13).
Figure 12: How Often Do You Part I
EDL 663
Figure 13: How Often Do You Part II Included below is a copy of the survey that was distributed to the teachers.
EDL 663
Instructional Best Practices Survey
Directions: Please complete the following survey. All information gathered from the survey will be analyzed to further our professional development at Woodlawn High School. Place a check in the box that supports your implementation of the best practice or other item as found on the School Improvement Plan.
Subjects taught (majority of the day):
___________________
Place a mark in the area that corresponds with how frequently you utilize each of the following in your classroom: I have not been trained 1. Identifying similarities and differences 2. Summarizing and note taking 3. Reinforcing effort and providing recognition 4. Homework and practice 5. Nonlinguistic Representations 6. Cooperative Learning 7. Setting Objectives and giving feedback 8. Generating and testing hypotheses 9. Cues, Questions and Advance Organizers Rarely Seldom Often Very Often
EDL 663
Place a corresponding mark next to the area that answers how effective you believe the following are in helping you to become a better teacher: Strongly Disagree Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly Agree
1. PD 360 2. Course Portfolio Binder 3. Team Meetings Place a mark in the corresponding column that answers how often you do each of the following: Never 1. Have Differentiated Instruction in at least one class a week. 2. Update Portfolio Binders 3. Analyze and Use Benchmark Data in reteaching 4. Have enough time to reteach 5. Recommend the free after school tutoring to your students. 6. Utilize methods learned in PD360. 7. Allow students to revise work. 8. Utilize your Promethean Board by using flipcharts and other forms of student interaction. Very Rarely Rarely Frequently Always
EDL 663
Reflection: I found that the State takes quite a while to input the latest data. I also found that small things such as .8% poverty can led to bigger things such as getting more money. I also found that teachers need to be instructed on what some of the best strategies are and that some teachers call strategies things that they actually are not. I also found that data is important and that when looking at data one needs to be careful to draw the right conclusions. Part IV: Score Rubric for SIP The School Improvement Team met to analyze our School Improvement Plan (SIP). During the meeting, each required item was analyzed and discussed as a team. The proceedings are the results of this analysis. The principal insisted that I notify the instructors that the schools SIP is based upon the districts rubric and not the states. The team decided to compare the SIP to the states plan because all the best schools in the state use the state's plan as a comparison in order to get better. Vision The school's plan received a D on Guideline I because the SIP does not convey the mission of the school nor does it convey the vision. In fact, there is no mission or vision for the school located anywhere on the SIP. When the team discussed whether or not they knew the schools mission or vision, many said that they knew the districts but no one knew the schools. The school could not be graded on Guideline II because the mission statement is not listed in the SIP. However, regarding Guideline III, the plan received a D because it does not directly nor indirectly refer to learning for all students. Finally, the school's plan received a D on Guideline IV because no stakeholders were involved, or no information was provided regarding their, the stakeholders, participation in the making of the vision statement. Comprehensive Needs Assessment The plan received an A on Guideline I because all the listed sources are included in identifying the needs and data was presented. The data included walkthroughs, QST visits, parent surveys, student surveys, and teacher lesson plans as well as teacher surveys. Because there was no information provided about the sample size (or no samples were taken), the plan received a D on Guideline II. The school's plan received an A on Guideline III because student and school level data are provided from all listed types of data, and data is presented. The behavioral data is evidenced through QST Reports and Student Surveys. The cognitive data is evidenced through GEE results.
EDL 663
The attitudinal data is evidenced through Student Surveys, Parent Surveys, and Teacher Surveys as well as QST Reports. The plan received an A on Guideline IV, because all strengths and weaknesses are based on an accurate interpretation of the data. The strengths and weaknesses are documented through the use of the plans data triangulation. Each weakness listed in the plan is accompanied by at least three sources of evidence. The plan also lists the weaknesses in rank order showing which are more important. The action plan is written so that each of the weaknesses are addressed in the order that the weakness is ranked. The only suggestion that the team had to improve this was to have different forms of data type with each weakness given that each data form displayed for a weakness was of the same type. Because all underlying causes of the strengths and weaknesses are based on an accurate interpretation of the data, the plan received an A on Guideline V. Again, the team wished that various types of data would have been used to document both the successes and weaknesses. However, there were three findings to the schools contributing factors that were listed and under each finding the plan provided at least three discoveries of evidence. The plan received a C on Guideline VI because the school could not receive an A or B being that the plan did not have acceptable ratings on parts I-V, as the state rubric states that a school that does not pass all parts cannot receive a passing grade overall. If this stipulation had not been in place, the team would have given the plan an A because we all felt as though the demographics/school characteristics, strengths and weaknesses had been all clearly described. Goals The SIP has two goals. These two goals state, By 2013-2014 all students will reach high standards, attaining proficiency or better in mathematics and, By 2013-2014 all students will reach high standards, attaining proficiency or better in English/language arts. The team felt that these goals were a little aggressive and likely not quite obtainable. On the contrary, the team felt as though the objectives clarified the goals. It was due to these objectives being clearly linked to student learning that the team decided to give the plan an A on Guideline I. After reviewing the weaknesses in Academic Achievement, the team decided that although the actual goals did not address all of the weaknesses, the activities to be completed under the goals did address each of the weaknesses. It is with this in mind and because most weaknesses in Academic Achievement are addressed that the team decided to give the plan a B.
EDL 663
The team had a difficult time determining how to grade the plan on Guideline III. It was decided that the plan deserved a B on Guideline III, given that the goals state the direction for school improvement in a relatively clear manner. This grade was given to the plan despite the fact that the goals taken by themselves were not very clear, but the goals became clearer when taken with the activities. Objectives The team decided to give the plan an A on Guideline I because all of the objectives can be verified/measured. Each objective stated something along the lines of an increase in the index score from the current percentage to a higher percentage. The team further decided to give the plan an A on Guideline II given that all of the objectives are clearly linked to specific goals. The team felt as though the objectives were not only linked to the goal but they in fact expounded on the goal. Because all objectives represent high expectation for student achievement for all, the team decided to give the plan an A on Guideline III. The concern that the team had for this section was that they felt the objectives may be too high, which could be setting the school up for failure. The team gave the plan a B on Guideline IV given that most of the objectives are realistically achievable in the time frame. The team felt as though a few of the goals were a little too far reached and possibly unachievable. However, the team felt that the two years that were given for most goals was a realistic time to achieve the objectives that had been set. Given that objectives clearly state the direction for school improvement, the team gave the plan an A on Guideline V. The team felt as a collaborative whole that if the objectives were met then the school would improve academically. The team also observed that the objectives were clearly written and appeared to be written correctly. Scientifically-based Research The team identified that the strategies directly and positively implemented the weaknesses in the school most of the time, so Guideline I was given a B. Because the plan does not present sound and current research to support the proposed strategies, the team gave the plan a D on Guideline II. The team decided that the plan does not demonstrate a summary that indicates the student population and school needs have been considered using a research rationale, therefore the plan was given a D for Guideline III as well. The plan does demonstrate that all strategies can be implemented with available or obtainable resources, and therefore was awarded an A for Guideline IV. Finally, for Guideline V the plan was awarded a C given that the plan has few objectives that have potentially effective strategies.
EDL 663
Action Plan The team gave the SIP a D for Guideline I due to the fact that the events in the plan have no logical sequence, or no timeline is given. The action items simply state who is responsible, the date by which it started and the date that it is to be completed. There are no step by step plans for any of the action items. The team gave the plan an A for Guideline II because all activities clearly indicate a person who will be responsible for implementing the activity. The only thing that the team thought would have been better for this guideline is that the person responsible could have been more specific. For example, instead of simply having an administrator responsible, the plan could have stated which administrator would be responsible. Guideline III was given a B because 25% of the activities were not clearly written. Also, the action plans only told who, what and the purpose. None of the activities explained how the actions would take place. The team thought that next year we really need to think out some of our action plans and have a plan for how we are going to implement them before we put them in our SIP. The team gave the plan an A on Guideline IV given that all activities include a specific date. The plan has dates for each activity; however the team did notice that some of the items that should have taken place by now had not actually taken place. The team looked at some things that we could be doing to make sure that those action items actually happen. Finally, the team gave the plan a C on Guideline V because there is a clear action plan for few strategies. Although some of the action items were well written, the team decided a C was appropriate for this part of the plan because Guideline I received a D and therefore could give this part of the evaluation nothing more than a C. Professional Development Guideline I of the Professional Development section states, professional development identifies how the activities will take place (procedures) and who will be involved. Regarding this guideline, the SIT gave the plan a B due to the fact that procedures and participants are specified for most activities. The team decided that those that were not specified were the same ones that the teachers were not actively accomplishing. Guideline II states, professional development is job-embedded and frequent. The team decided to give the plan an A given that weekly/Bi-weekly job-embedded professional development activities are presented. The team decided that some of the professional development requirements are better written than others. The team also observed that a majority of the requirements were weekly or bi-weekly.
EDL 663
Guideline III states, professional development includes sufficient follow-up/support procedures to ensure sustained impact. The team gave the plan a D because no activities include specific follow up/support. It was suggested by several team members that this is another area that the plan is lacking and this needs to be addressed during the plan revision. The team discussed the importance of follow up and support for the teachers. We went as far as stating that the lack in this area is leading to a downward turn in school climate. Guideline IV states, professional development is designed to reach all personnel (teachers, administrators, counselors, paraprofessionals and other staff.)" The team decided on a grade of B since it was documented that activities are designed to reach most personnel. The plan has professional development for teachers, administrators and paraprofessionals. However, there is no professional development listed for counselors or other staff. Guideline V states, professional development is potentially effective for achieving the objectives and/or implementing the strategies. The team was torn on this guideline. We wanted and felt the plan deserved an A given that all activities are potentially effective for achieving the objectives. However, because the guideline states that you must receive a passing grade on II and III to receive an A on V, the team decided that it would give the plan a C on this Guideline V. The plan does have some real positives, such as: it helps implement the strategies; the professional development supports and impacts the school positively; and the professional development is aligned with the strategies. Family Involvement This category is something that the team thought to be a little humorous due to the fact that our school has very little family involvement. Furthermore, we observed that the plan has no goals or objectives regarding family involvement. We felt that there was only one action item to improve family involvement, and this item was to have a cultural day. Unfortunately, this event has been changed three times so far and as of today there are no current plans for the event. The team recognized that family involvement occurred due to sporting events and the arts. We discussed how the school seems to have failed in this aspect and did not show any signs of improving other than the fact that they had appointed a Family Involvement Coordinator. However, it was noted that this person was appointed solely because of a need for the individual to complete a requirement for their masters program. Based on the foregoing and few activities are clearly linked to identified objectives, the team decided to give the plan a C on Guideline I. The team decided on a D on Guideline II since no activities that encourage family members to participate in student learning are included. We gave the school a D on Guideline III due to the fact that there are no activities for increasing family-school communication about student learning.
EDL 663
We continued our analysis of the SIP by giving the plan a D on Guideline IV due to the fact that there are no activities for incorporating family members of all students. Coordination of Resources The team discovered that only one action plan item was tied to any sort of funds. Because few monetary resources were targeted to reach the identified objectives, the team decided on a C for Guideline I. The plan did signify that the cost for those items that were not tied to funds were estimated to be zero. An N/A was decided on for Guideline II because of the fact that there was no equipment purchased for the fulfillment of the plan. We gave the plan an A on Guideline III since, time allocations are clearly targeted to reach the identified objectives. Each of the action items and goals had a date clearly stated for completion. The team also decided that the plan did an excellent job at identifying who was responsible for the completion of the action plan. As a team we noticed that various people were designated to ensure the completion of the goals. Evaluation The team observed that the evaluations of implementation listed were only sign in sheets and other forms of reports. The evaluation methods did not say how these items would be used to evaluate the action items. For this reason, the team gave the plan a D on Guideline I because no procedures are provided to evaluate the implementation activities, or all procedures are unclear. The evaluation procedures do not provide any evidence to evaluate the short-term effects, nor does it utilize student portfolios or any comparison of student or teacher work over time. The team decided that the plan also gets a D on Guideline II due to the fact that none of the activities have valid short-term evaluation methods. The summative evaluations in the SIP are blank with nothing there. There are no testing instruments nor documentation of strategy implementation listed of any sort. There is also no comparison or analysis of test data. Guideline III received a D since no valid procedures to examine the effort on student achievement are presented. The goals are derived from the weaknesses; however, there is no detailed plan on how to achieve the goals. The plan lacks procedures to determine if the goals were achieved. There is also no comparison of any sort of test data. Again, for this reason Guideline V also receives a D due to the fact that no valid procedures to determine whether or not the goals have been achieved are presented. Due to the fact that every part of the evaluation received a grade of unacceptable, Guideline V also received a D because valid evaluation procedures are not specified for the strategies and activities. Reflection:
EDL 663
As the team analyzed the plan we realized how much we were lacking. It was flabbergasting that not one of the administrators knew the schools vision nor was there any evidenced research into the goals and action plan that was set out in the plan. The team was also surprised that members of the administration have asked the teachers and other stakeholders to accomplish action items, often threatening staff members of being written up, and yet have provided no proper way to evaluate the action items. The other large surprise was that there was only one goal that was aimed at anything near Parental Involvement. The next part of this paper will analyze what this signifies about the school. In conclusion, the team wondered how the plan actually passed as acceptable in the first place. We realized that the fact that we do not have any real plan is possibly one of the largest components to why so many of our stakeholders feel as though our school is in decline. The team left with a feeling as though the plan was put together hastily and is, therefore, not effective. Part V: Analysis 1. What does the School Improvement Plan tell you about the culture of the school? Academically the School Improvement Plan, SIP, shows that the school is trying to focus on numeracy, literacy and differentiated instruction. This is shown through both of the goals the school is working on, which are: By 2013-2014, all students will reach high standards, attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts; and, By 2013-2014, all students will reach high standards attaining proficiency or better in mathematics.
Differentiated instruction and best practices are also being worked on as demonstrated through several activities including: Activity Two, Teachers will be assigned to crosscurricular teams to collaborate differentiated instructional strategies; and Activity Four, physical and online teacher team meetings will be conducted to discuss differentiated instructional activities and create lesson plans. These goals and activities correspond directly with two of the three weaknesses outlined in the plan. These include, a lack of differentiated instruction and a continual decrease in standardized test scores.
The plan also shows that the school is putting their priorities in advancing literacy and numeracy as well as differentiated instruction, and not so much in the third weakness, a lack of positive school climate. This is evident as there are no goals addressing this weakness in the plan and there is only one action item, Activity Seven, which states, Teachers, students, parents, and community members will plan and activate a schoolwide cultural share day
EDL 663
(WHS Annual International Festival). Though data collection shows the climate of the school is negative for both teachers and students. A lack of parental involvment is another issue the school faces. However, there are no goals nor are there any action items addressing the issue. The plan shows that this is not something the school finds as important enough to work on. Financially, the plan shows that the school has little to no outside funding. There are no grants listed that the school received and the bussiness partners are very sparse. The school has financial needs and should explore these options in greater detail. Regarding data, the school collects and utilizes a great deal of data. This ranges from test scores to QST visits. This also includes walkthroughs as well as parent, teacher and student surveys. This data is all documented in the plan. Perhaps the worst thing that is conveyed through the plan is seen by what is missing from the plan. This is a school vision and mission statement. The plan does not show either of these crucial elements. Without these elements it is impossible to tell where the school is headed in the long run. 2. What is the focus of the School Improvement Plan? The focus of the SIP is two folded. The first of these is to improve the usage of differentiated instruction. These two areas are teaching utilizing differentiated instruction. The other focus is improving standardized test scores in the area of English/Language arts and mathematics. This is seen throughout the plan in the goals and action items. 3. How is professional development viewed or perceived? Professional Development (PD) is documented by three different methods in the SIP. These include whole group, small group and individual. The plan documents procedures for each method. Whole group PD is documented by a once a month professional development session that is to be held after school. Activity Eight reads, All faculty will attend once a month professional development that will be held after school with presentations given by fellow teachers and administrators. The meetings are held on the last Wednesday of each month except during the two months that the district mandates all-day professional development. These meetings are led by the administration, with some teacher or outside led presentations. This is also when the Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports Team (PBIS) deliver their data on student behavior. Small group professional development occurs in two different ways. The first of these is department meetings. Each department meets at least once a month, however, most meet bimonthly. In this meeting the Department Chair delivers information that was obtained from administration. The main focus of this meeting is to train teachers in constructed responses.
EDL 663
This includes analyzing district made questions, creating an across the department rubric as well as the creation of constructed responses. The analysis of benchmark exams also occurs at this meeting. The overall purpose for this professional development is to increase student test scores. The second form of small group professional development as outlined in the SIP is that of Cross Curricular Meetings. Activity Two states, Teachers will be assigned to cross curricular teams to collaborate differentiatiated instructional strategies. The teams meet bimonthly and are made up of core-subject teachers that have a common planning period. These teams vote on a team leader whom leads and directs with team support the items or gals the team will work on. The primary purpose of these teams is differentiated instruction. The way these meetings function is that the team gathers and chooses a form of differentiated instruction, which is generally chosen by the team leader beforehand. This is typically a broad idea such as one of Marzanos strategies. The team then has until the next meeting to institute the chosen differentiation in their classrooms. At the next meeting the teams discuss evidence of the implementation by delivering a sample of student work, as well as a reflection on the implementation. The team then discusses the next strategy, is trained in the strategy and discusses any other issues they may need help in before the meeting closes. The plan also shows individuals' professional development. The plan demonstrates two methods that teachers facilitate individual professional development. These are through an online resource called PD 360 and the other is through the keeping and maintaining of a course portfolio. Activity One states, teachers will use PD 360 as a way to engage in effective professional development and collaborate with other teachers on the use of differentiated instructional strategies. PD 360 is an online professional development community. The district has created three courses that the school has mandated to be completed within the program. These courses as outlined in the plan include: differentiated instruction, classroom management and classroom strategies that work. Teachers view these items through online videos and answer questions on how the teacher will implement these strategies into their classrooms. Teachers can also form friends where one can post items to another teachers wall as well as collaborate on various ideas. The primary purpose of these videos and questions is to improve teaching skills. This allows teachers to be more efficient, thereby giving the students the needed assistance to increase standardized test scores. Activity Five addresses the next form of individual professional development stating that Teachers will create portfolios to include EBR comprehensive curricula, weekly lesson plans, student-centered activities, sample student work, and various forms of assessment tools.
EDL 663
The portfolio includes the teachers lesson plans, student assessments, benchmark data as well as student and teacher reflection sheets. The purpose of these binders is so that a teacher can do a self check to see what forms of instructions are productive and which are not. They then can modify the less or nonproductive to improve the teacher's overall instruction. The benchmark data is also analyzed so that the teachers can reteach GLEs not obtained or learned previously. Overall, through the self-evaluation and data analysis the teacher can improve their instruction and hopefully raise standardized test scores. Overall, the professional development of the plan can be analyzed through Activity Four, which states, Physical and online PD 360 teacher team collaboration will be conducted to discuss differentiated instructional activities and create lesson plans. This clearly demonstrates that professional development is seen as both a team and individual effort utilizing technology and collaboration among teachers. 4. How are components of effective teaching reflected in the plan? The plan, if acted upon correctly, will ensure that components of effective teaching are taking place. The plan is detailed in data to show the administration strives to ensure these components are in place. The goals and action items listed, if followed correctly, ensures that the components are in the school. Academic needs of all students are addressed in the plan through the data and action items. Strengths and weaknesses as well as what contributes to these areas are listed in the plan. The weekly lesson plans that are required by the SIP also document the components of effective teaching. 5. In your opinion, what impact will this School Improvement Plan have on teaching and learning? Justify your response. I believe that our SIP could have a great impact on the climate, teaching ability and student achievement within our school. Currently, however, it is not fulfilling any of these items. The school does not perceive the plan to be anything of great importance. Several of the teachers as well as a couple of administrators have said that they believe that the plan is a complete waste of time. I believe that the plan has the potential to do great things. The plan lines out exactly how we could improve our school. It uses a great variety of data including: walkthroughs; parent, teacher and student surveys; QST reports; and standardized test results. The plan defines some of the problems that the school currently deals with and states the strengths of the school. The plan gives the contributions to these weaknesses and strengths. Furthermore, the plan lines out activities that if done properly could do a great deal for our school. The problem lies in the selling of the action items to the faculty, as well as the stewardship of the completion of these items. The teachers at our school, for the most part, do not know what the plan has in it. They do not understand why they are being asked to complete things such as PD 360 or to turn things in at their team meetings. In fact, a number of teachers do not even attend these meetings.
EDL 663
The PD 360 is, as the teacher survey said, something that teachers believe does not work. Through my conversations, I know that there are teachers that simply allow the videos to play and then put down anything for the answers. Regarding the portfolios, I have been asked by an administrator only once this entire school year to see mine. I know that teachers, once again through personal conversation, are not doing this. Nor are they held responsible for these items. I firmly believe that if teachers were keyed into helping create the action items, if they understood the importance of these items, or if they bought into the system then our school could improve. I also believe that if the school set up some system of accountability for having completed these items then the school would be more successful. However, because neither of these occur, I feel that, as many teachers have stated, the SIP is only worth the paper it was printed on. The other problem that the school faces is that there is no school vision or mission statement. Neither teachers nor administrators know the last time our school had such a thing. I feel that this is something that needs to be addressed immediately. The air around the school is to start new programs. I often hear "lets begin a Freshman Academy", or "lets have a new program for credit recovery". I truly believe that if as a school we would go back to the basics, then we could and would succeed. The school is one that has not met its yearly growth target in over four years, but has had a minimal growth. Once again, I believe that this could change and that the SIP could be important if we had the following three things; 1) teacher buy in 2) teacher accountability; and 3) a School Vision. It is my understanding that if the school does not focus on these items in the upcoming year, we as a school should expect to see our scores remain stagnant or even drop. In the words of my father, if you keep doing what youve been doing, you will keep getting what youve been getting. It is time for the SIP at our school to be a document for strengthening our school and not something that is simply tossed to the side. SIP VI Action Plan Address the curriculum and teaching strategies Activity: Weaknesses: 1. Students needing quicker feedback. 2. Catching students up on skills. Incorporate a Math and English camp in the summer of Students will be on the same 2011 for incoming freshman. This will act as a level and the teacher will not remediation for students so that the school year can have to spend as much time The students will be given a pretest at the beginning of the camp to see the current Indicator of Implementation (Observable Change) Procedures for Evaluating Indicators of Implementation (How do you know the activity is working?)
EDL 663
begin with students all on the same level, or at least close to the same level. (August 2011)
in the beginning of the year remediating the students.
level of the students skills as well as a posttest to evaluate the differentiation in students skills. Teachers will add the Administration as well as Department Chairs as students in the teachers Blackboard course so that the Administration and Department Chairs can monitor teacher usage of Blackboard. Teachers will document these activities in their lesson plans having at least one student-led activity per week. The administration will keep track of when these lessons are taking place and attempt to observe. Students will satisfy the rubrics criteria. Teachers will be evaluated by posting the rubrics onto their Blackboard site. Students will be evaluated through completed assignments; teachers will also be evaluated by documentation of these activities in their lesson plans.
Every teacher will create and use a Blackboard course for their classes. These courses will include readings as well as discussion boards and quizzes that students must complete. These activities will reach specific GLEs as well as certain levels of Blooms Taxonomy. (Must Be Created By September 2011) (Ongoing)
Students will have more online assignments including Discussion Boards and Quizzes, which will allow for quicker feedback from the teacher.
Teachers will incorporate more student led instruction in order to better teach the standards and GLEs as well as difficulty levels and the various levels of Blooms Taxonomy. (Ongoing)
Students will have a greater variety of assignments and therefore more interest in their education allowing for more student engagement and better test scores.
Each project given will require an effective rubric which will reach most if not all of the levels of Blooms Taxonomy. (Ongoing)
There will be increased students scores as they complete the requirements of the rubric. Students leading their learning. This will also result in higher test scores.
Teachers will incorporate tiered instruction into their weekly lesson plans. (Ongoing)
Address professional development using the human development theory Activity Indicator of Implementation Procedures for Evaluating Indicators
EDL 663
Weaknesses: 1. A lack of technological knowledge by teachers. 2. Lack of knowledge in creating effective rubrics. 3. Lack of teachers knowing the expectations by the WHS administration. 4. A lack of classroom management. 100% of teacher completion of a Blackboard course. This will reach Ericksons seventh level of development. (September 2011)
(Observable Change)
of Implementation
Lessons will be geared to online learning. Students will be able to better prepare for EOC testing by becoming used to these types of tests through quizzes given on the teacher-made sites. Rubrics will be available for the students to understand exactly what the teacher is expecting and how the students will be graded. Parents and students will have a greater understanding of how a student received a certain score and what could have been done to receive a higher score.
Administrators as well as Department Heads will be given a student access to go on to the Blackboard sites to ensure that teachers are giving the students the required amount of online learning materials as well as quizzing students in the format that will be seen in the EOC, End of Course, tests. Teachers will have rubrics posted on their Blackboard accounts for various projects. Administration will be able to analyze these rubrics to check for quality. Teams will keep record of attendance as well as samples of work turned in biweekly.
Teachers will be placed into small teams of no more than eight teachers. These teachers will be from across the curriculum and work together to create and evaluate rubrics. This will reach the fifth level of Ericksons development theory. (Bi-monthly team meetings)
EDL 663
All new teachers of WHS will have a mentor teacher that has been at WHS for at least three years. This will reach the seventh and eighth level of Ericksons development theory. (Ongoing)
Teachers will know what is expected of them from the administration. Teachers will understand the policies of WHS. There will be consistency between old and new teachers in regards to discipline. Teachers will analyze their classroom management skills by weekly journaling in Blackboard.
Administrators will assign seasoned teachers of WHS to be mentors of new teachers. The administration will train the seasoned teachers as to what they expect and what to train the new teachers in. The administration will then hold the seasoned teacher accountable for the teaching of the new teacher. Administration will select a faculty member to be the administrator of the Blackboard site. This administrator will keep record of whom is completing the discussion board topics as well as quizzes and weekly journals.
Teachers will be enrolled in a Blackboard course where a discussion board, quizzes as well as journal entries will be incorporated around a full faculty study of Dr. Randall S. Spricks Discipline in the Secondary Classroom. This will reach Ericksons sixth level of development. (Weekly and Monthly)
Include provisions for creating or maintaining a school culture conducive to learning, communicating the vision, making decisions in an ethical manner, and being a good manager of time and operations Activities School Culture Conducive to Learning Weaknesses 1. Teachers complaining about items being required of them that the teacher does not feel are in their job description.
2. A lack of consistent and effective
Indicator of Implementation (Observable Change)
Procedures for Evaluating Indicators of Implementation (How do you know the activity is working?)
rules. Have a teacher job description signed by each teacher including a requirement of needed Professional Development. (Before First Day of School) Have precise, consistent rules for students; as well as multiple consequences for the Less complaining by teachers and more responsibility for the job. All stakeholders will know what is expected of student Documentation of Professional Development from ERO. There will be less complaining on the parts of the teachers and more personal accountability. Referrals will be reduced. All stakeholders will know exactly what to expect when a
EDL 663
breaking of these rules. (August 2011)
behavior as well as what the rule is broken. The PBIS team will help consequences will be for the address and implement these new rules. breaking of these rules.
Activities Communicating the Vision Weaknesses: 1. No one knows the current school vision.
2. Lack of positive impact in the
community. Incorporate all stakeholder groups in A vision and mission Stakeholders will meet to discuss and order to create both a vision and a mission statement will be created for analyze the previous vision and mission statement for the school. (August 2011) the school. statement in order to create a new vision and mission statement. The new vision and mission statements will be included in the new student handbook as well as posted in classrooms and hallways. Purchase posters as well as a large banner All stakeholders will know to display around the school with the the vision and mission school vision printed on these items. statements of WHS. Also publish the schools vision and mission in the student handbook. (August 2011) Incorporate the schools vision and mission into faculty meetings by having the administration lead the faculty in the recitation of the vision and mission. (Ongoing) The whole faculty will feel more like a team striving to reach the same goal. School climate will improve and better teaching will occur because everyone will know the goal that the school is working towards. There will be incentives for all stakeholders to learn the vision and mission statements. This would include a free duty period for teachers as well as a PBIS token for students. Staff will be looking for other members of the staff who are showing exemplary examples of including the school vision in their daily teaching lives. The administration will ensure that the vision and mission statements are recited at each meeting.
EDL 663
The principal will assign a teacher to serve as Public Relations Director to communicate the vision and mission of the school with the outside community by writing articles for local newspapers and other publications as well as creating a school newsletter explaining the positive events occurring at the school. (September 2011)
The stakeholders will know the positive things that are going on at the school. School climate will increase and staff as well as students will be happy to call WHS the place where they go to school.
The administration will choose a PR person who will be required to turn in a bi-monthly article on positive things that are occurring at the school. This article will be turned into the chosen member of the administration who will read over it and ensure that it gets to the local media.
Activities Making Decisions in an Ethical Manner Weaknesses 1. A lack of data driven decisions. 2. A lack of confidentiality in private matters.
All school-wide decisions will be data driven and consistent from teacher to teacher. (Ongoing)
School climate will increase as teachers understand exactly where the decisions are based.
Administration, Department Heads and Team Leaders will explain decisions to teachers using data collected through various resources. Teachers will be able to look at the data and as a stakeholder help in making some of the decisions that occur at the school. School leaders will observe the actions that occur at the school to ensure confidentiality. Leaders will meet with teachers that break the code of ethics as well as confidentiality and explain to the teachers the severity of the incident before enforcing consequences on said teachers.
Teachers will be trained in the areas of confidentiality and ethics in decision making at the first Professional Development of the school year. Each teacher will sign an oath of confidentiality upon leaving the Professional Development. (August 2011)
Teachers will follow the code of ethics and confidentiality. The school climate will increase as teachers can start to depend on each other to keep confidences. Students will be more likely to come to the faculty with their issues as they become more secure with the teachers and obtain the knowledge of the staff
EDL 663
level of confidentiality.
Activities Being a good manager of time and operations Weaknesses 1. Complaining that money in the schools budget is not being used effectively. 2. Problems with areas of the school not being monitored at all times. 3. Dirtiness of school facilities.
4. Ineffective walkthroughs.
During the first Professional Development of the school year the principal will lead the faculty through a study of the school budget. (August 2011)
Teachers will become more responsible for the tools given to them by the school. Teachers will ensure their stewardship over their classrooms and the resources in them. The rules that have been set will also be enforced at all times allowing the school climate to increase as teachers and students feel safer in their environment. Classrooms will be clean on a daily basis. Teachers and students will know what to expect from the custodial staff and what they need to make sure and pickup before they leave for the day. There
Teachers will turn off all technological equipment when not in use. As school leaders complete walkthroughs they will pay attention to see if the teacher and students are using the instructive equipment in an effective manner. The administration will assign teachers duty spots and planning periods each day. The administration will ensure that teachers are in their duty spots at the specified times or the teacher will have to pay the consequences that are a result of their neglect. During walkthroughs the administration will ensure the cleanliness of the classrooms making notes on what needs to be kept up and what to tell Aramark to correct when they come.
Each teacher will be assigned a duty period as well as a planning period to ensure that the school is being monitored for safety purposes as well as giving the teachers a period each day to plan for their lessons. (Ongoing) The Administration will contact Aramark to establish a list of cleaning that the custodial staff will complete on a daily, weekly and monthly basis. The teachers will be given this list so that they know when custodial items will
EDL 663
be handled as well as given a list on ways to handle minor custodial items themselves. (August 2011) Walkthroughs will be completed by Department Chairs, Instructional Specialist as well as the Administration on a biweekly schedule. (Bi-weekly)
will be a greater stewardship over the resources that we have at WHS. Leaders will complete walkthroughs on a weekly basis looking for items that have been discussed in the SIP. The walkthroughs will evaluate the teachers effectiveness in teaching, ensure that the teacher is being consistent with stated school rules as well as to ensure that the teacher is mandating a stewardship over their classroom.
Address data-based strategies to monitor, evaluate, and revise the SIP with fairness and integrity A constant evaluation of the School Improvement Plan is needed in order to ensure success in fulfilling all of the items set out in the plan. All stakeholders must do their part in ensuring that they are compliant in the areas of the SIP that is addressed to them. An in-service will occur at the beginning of the next school year to train the teachers regarding what exactly is in the plan. A Data Team will be formed to ensure that the data is collected and that compliance with the SIP is occurring. The Data Team will form their opinion based on the walkthroughs; parent, teacher and student surveys; QST reports; and as well as student test scores. The Data team will keep the stakeholders informed about the progress of the plan in several ways. The administration will have a weekly briefing with members of the team. The faculty will be kept informed through a monthly PowerPoint delivery of the current data. The parents, students and community will be kept informed by the Public Relations releases that are sent out to the local media outlets and school newsletter. All decisions for the changes of the plan will be done based on the data received, analyzed and delivered by the data team. The administration as well as stake holders will add professional development opportunities on an as-needed basis utilizing the data collected to form these opinions. At the end of the school year, the stakeholders will complete a survey on the effectiveness of the SIP. This data will be used to plan for the following years SIP, disaggregated student test scores as well as QST reports. Part VII: Presentation and Evaluation of Instructional Leadership Skills 1. Lead the team in the communication plan with parents, community, and stakeholders.
EDL 663
As a team we have decided to communicate the School Improvement Plan to parents in three different ways. First, we will email the plan to faculty as well as any parents and community members whose email addresses the school possesses Second, we will add the new plan to our school website so that it can be dispersed to everyone. Thirdly, we will create a handout to give to parents at orientation. 2. Present this plan to the principal, and then with the principals input present the plan to the faculty (and/or parent organization). The principal and I decided that we would present the plan to our teachers at the start of the next school year, during the teacher in service. We have decided that I, along with other members of the team, will lead a breakout session to explain the plan in detail to the rest of the faculty. The principal also suggested that I inform the PTO Board about the plan for the next year so that we could get assistance from them in completing/implementing the plan. My principal also informed me that he was "very happy with the job that [I] did." He also said that he felt "as though [he] did not even need to be at the meetings to know that things were going to be run successfully and efficiently." 3. Self evaluate your instructional leadership skills for this project. To self evaluate my instructional leadership skills, I gave myself the same survey that I gave my team. I judged myself on every aspect that I asked my team to judge me on. The following are my answers to the survey with accompanying explanations. I made sure that during the project I communicated often and clearly with the members of my team. This was accomplished through frequent emails, notes in boxes and a few personal visits to the members classrooms or offices. My organization skills were pretty good throughout the process. I ensured that all members had copies of whatever we were discussing. I also made sure that time was organized so that we could move smoothly, and so that we did not linger on any one item for too long. I feel as though a positive climate was something that I was able to establish, and did establish from the very beginning of the project. I was able to choose who was on the team, and I knew that the people I chose would be able to work together and not cut each other down as we brought ideas to the table. Respect was prevalent at all times in the project. I believe that I did very well on making sure that this was in place. I spoke with the team about proper respect at the very first meeting so that we could bring all ideas to the table without the threat of someone looking down on someone else for their ideas. Integrity was maintained throughout. I feel as though I made it perfectly clear and led the team with the utmost integrity. I made sure that the team understood that the work being completed was to be done confidentially. I also ensured that we, the team, made every effort to be cost effective and efficient in our decision making.
EDL 663
Feedback was detrimental to this process. I feel as though I did well in this area. However, at the beginning of the project I could have been more receptive. As time went on I realized that in order for a School Improvement Team to be effective, the leader needs to be able to listen and be receptive to the feedback given him from the team. This project could not have been completed without the help of my team, and the suggestions and ideas that they each provided. In regards to content knowledge, I think I could have done a little better at the beginning of the plan. Early on there were many things in the current plan that I did not know about but should have known about. However, as the project continued I became more comfortable because I did the research required to find out about the items that I had not previously known about. As we began to do walkthroughs and create our action plan, I made sure to have done research prior to meeting with our team. I feel that I did fairly well in guiding the meetings. There were times that I felt as though I could have kept us on task a little better and we would have been able to get more things done. Some of the time, the team got so caught up in the task being done that we would stay a little too long on a specific task and have to call another meeting just to finish all that we had on the agenda from the previous meeting. I find that all of the meetings were productive. We seemed to accomplish at least some of the task that was set aside for each meeting. There were meetings when I felt we could have accomplished a little more, while there was quite a bit accomplished in other meetings. Overall, I learned a lot through this assignment and have grown professionally. Furthermore, I feel I have increased in both my maturity and in my skills of leadership through this process. 4. Survey your team by conducting a confidential evaluation of yourself by team members. The answers that my team gave on their surveys were very similar to how I judged myself. All of the members stated that I improved over time. I did not receive anything less than an "agree", while most answers were "strongly agree with the statement." Overall, by analyzing these statistics I found that I did very well and feel very accomplished in the fulfillment of this assignment. I also learned that I need to work on my presentation of materials to adults. I know that I still feel a little uncomfortable when doing this and could use some more improvement. I also know that I need to be able to steer the direction of the conversation a little better to keep the team on track and increase productivity.
EDL 663
Leadership Assessment Please complete the following survey based on the leadership skills performed by Sean Tate in the School improvement Plan process. Please circle the response that best describes his performance for each task listed. 1. The leader communicated effectively. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
2. The leader was organized for each meeting. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
3. The leader established a positive climate. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
4. The leader ensured that respect for each individual was given. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
5. The leader acts with integrity. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
6. The leader listed and acted upon all feedback. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
7. The leader is knowledgeable of content being presented.
EDL 663
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
8. The leader was effective in guiding the meetings. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
9. Meetings were productive and protocols were followed. Strongly Disagree 10. Comments/Critiques: Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

EDL 663 School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EDL 663 School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EDL 663

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 1: Instruction Type

Figure 2: Student Engagement

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 3: Strategies That Work Part 1

Figure 4: Strategies That Work Part 2

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 5: Student Use of Resources

Figure 6: Teacher Use of Resources

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 5: Percent of Students in Poverty

3. Instructional Practices Survey- The survey was distributed to 80 teachers at an all-day

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 7: Best Strategies Part I

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 9: PD 360 Effectiveness

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 10: Effectiveness of Course Portfolio Binders

Figure 11: Effectiveness of Team Meetings

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Figure 12: How Often Do You Part I

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Instructional Best Practices Survey

Subjects taught (majority of the day):

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

in the beginning of the year remediating the students.

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Indicator of Implementation (Observable Change)

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

breaking of these rules. (August 2011)

Indicator of Implementation (Observable Change)

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Indicator of Implementation (Observable Change)

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

Indicator of Implementation (Observable Change)

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate

School Improvement Plan Sean C. Tate