Thursday, October 30, 2014
MATH FUN
Monday, October 27, 2014
Shakespearience
Students at Driggs School watched a Professional Shakespearean Play. They learned sign language and about how to put on a performance.
School Improvement Plan DRAFT
This is the draft of The Driggs School Improvement Plan.
We welcome
feedback.
or 203-574-8160
77 Woodlawn Terrace
Waterbury, CT 06710
School Improvement Plan
Directions: Provide a comprehensive,
bold, and transformative plan to dramatically improve student achievement. Identify school strengths and growth areas,
and use this analysis to inform the selection of school goals and reform
strategies. Articulate strategies to
advance school performance in the areas of talent, academics, culture and
climate, and operations.
Attach the SWDT schedule and
your professional development calendar.
Section 1: Needs
Analysis. The school must provide a thorough needs
analysis informed by the school audit tool. In the space provided:
·
Summarize the school’s greatest strengths.
·
Summarize and provide a root cause analysis
for the school’s most significant growth areas.
·
Complete and submit Appendix A: School Audit
Tool to inform the needs analysis.
|
|
Strengths:
|
Explanation
and data to substantiate:
|
Indicator 1.4
Professional development
|
·
Weekly grade level meetings are based on district professional
development initiatives
·
Professional development days/times are also based on district’s
initiatives
·
Additional Professional development made available for
technology, teaching and learning per request of the teacher
·
80% of Audit tool responders rated this area proficient, 20% developing
|
Indicator 4.4
Routines and transitions
|
·
Discipline data supports that currently our behavior issues are
not during routines or transitions.
·
Discipline data supports that there is a 80% decrease in office
referrals this year
·
Hallways are quiet during instructional times
|
Indicator 2.4
Curriculum and instruction aligned to CCSS
|
·
Lesson plans are aligned to district guide
·
Weekly Grade level meetings and Collaborative Lesson planning
supports teachers to be in alignment of CCSS
|
Growth Areas:
|
Explanation
and data to substantiate:
|
2.1 Academic
Rigor
|
Driggs scored
lower than district in MClass in 5 out of 6 grade levels
Driggs matched
the district average in the Math portion of Acuity
District
initiatives to promote mathematical practices in 2,3,4 and 7
|
2.4 Curriculum
and instruction in alignment of the CCSS
|
Team still
feels as if they are struggling with the new standards for ELA and the CBC
model.
Mathematical
practices have been challenging to teachers in adjusting to their teaching
practices
|
3.2 Attendance
|
Driggs has 71
students who are considered chronically absent. 10 of those are considered
seriously chronically absent.
|
Talent
(T): Employ systems and strategies to recruit, hire, develop,
evaluate, and retain excellent school leaders, teachers, and support staff
via: Instructional practice, Evaluation and professional culture,
Recruitment and retention strategies, Professional development, Leadership
effectiveness and Instructional leadership
Academics
(A): Design and implement a rigorous, aligned, and engaging
academic program that allows all students to achieve at high levels via:
Academic rigor, Student engagement, Differentiation, Curriculum and
instruction aligned to CCSS, Supports for special populations & Assessment
system and data culture
Culture
and Climate (C): Foster a positive learning environment that
supports high-quality teaching and learning, and engages families and the
community as partners in the educational process via: School environment, student
attendance, Student behavior, Interpersonal interactions, Family engagement and
Community partners and wraparound strategy.
Operations (O): Create systems and
processes that promote organizational efficiency and effectiveness,
including through the use of time and financial resources via: Adequate
instructional time, Use of instructional time, Use of staff time, Routines
and transitions, and Financial management
|
Section 3:
Implementation Timeline. Using the chart below, please summarize
key strategies presented in this plan in the areas of talent, academics,
culture and climate, and operations (add rows, as necessary). Identify progress metrics and when each
strategy will be implemented.
|
GOAL 1 (ACADEMIC):
|
||||||
Strategy:
|
Strategy
Heading
T,
A, C or O
|
Progress
Metric:
|
Year
1
|
|||
Q1
|
Q2
|
Q3
|
Q4
|
|||
1.
Embedding self-assessment as a common
regular practice.
a.
student self-ratings
b.
biweekly review of goal attainment with
intervention students
c.
teacher practice inventory
|
A,O, T
|
a. Classroom based exit
tickets/ student self-assessments.
b. Mclass Data,
Culminating assessments, CFA
c. Assessment data and
summary/analysis accompanied by a questionaire
|
A
B
C
|
A
|
A
B
|
A
B
|
2.
Actively use learning targets for initiating
lesson, activities, assessments of a lesson, feedback from instructional
leaders
|
A, O
|
Walk through
observations, informal/formal observations, “ Focus Walk Through on Adult
Practice” Checklist/ Rubric
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
3.
Professional development centered on student/staff needs
a.
Explicit professional development on phonemic
awareness and phonics
b.
Using K-1 coaching cycles to create
individualized coaching points for
teachers
|
T
|
MClass, Interventionist
progress monitoring, exit tickets, anchor charts, Tier II and Tier II monthly
progress monitoring, data reviewed at biweekly grade level meetings, teachers
provide feedback
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
4.
Provide
parents with academic knowledge through literacy nights and mClass/CCSS parent trainings.
|
C
|
Parent Survey, Sign In
Sheets, Literacy Facilitator available to parents open house, literacy
nights/ sessions
|
X
|
X
|
||
GOAL 2 (ACADEMIC):
|
||||||
Strategy:
|
Strategy
Heading
T,
A, C or O
|
Progress
Metric:
|
Year
1
|
|||
Q1
|
Q2
|
Q3
|
Q4
|
|||
1. Embedding self-assessment as a common
regular practice.
a.
student self-ratings
b.
teacher self-assessment
|
a. Classroom based exit tickets/ student
self-assessments.
b. Acuity, Performance Tasks, Culminating assessments, District and grade level CFA
c. Assessment data and summary/analysis accompanied by a questionnaire
|
A
|
A
B
|
A
|
A
B
|
|
2.
Actively use learning targets for initiating
lesson, activities, assessments of a lesson, feedback from instructional
leaders
|
Walk through observations, informal/formal observations, “
Focus Walk Through on Adult Practice” Checklist/ Rubric
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
3.
Professional development centered on student/staff needs
a.
Explicit professional development on Standards
for Mathematical Practice 2,3,4,7
b.
Using coaching cycles to create individualized
coaching points for teachers
|
Acuity, Performance Tasks, Culminating assessments, District and grade level CFA
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
4.
Provide
parents with academic knowledge through math nights/sessions.
|
Parent Survey, Sign In Sheets, Math Coach available
to parents open house, math nights/ sessions
|
X
|
X
|
|||
GOAL 3 (CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM):
|
||||||
Strategy:
|
Strategy
Heading
T,
A, C or O
|
Progress
Metric:
|
Year
1
|
|||
Q1
|
Q2
|
Q3
|
Q4
|
|||
1. Introduction
of Walking School Bus to involve community in getting students to come to
school.
|
C
|
Attendance, Surveys
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
2. Continuation of Truancy Clinic to target
truant families and offer services to assist with getting students to school.
|
O
|
Attendance
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
3. Celebrating classes with perfect attendance.
|
C
|
Attendance and monthly celebrations.
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
4. Mapping families who are truant to develop a
community watch system for getting students to school.
|
O, C
|
Attendance, Surveys
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
5. After
school programs that will target truant/ chronically absent students
|
After school attendance and comparison data with
attendance
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
6.
|
||||||
7.
|
||||||
8.
|
||||||
9.
|
||||||
GOAL 4 (SURVEY TARGET):
|
||||||
Strategy:
|
Strategy
Heading
T,
A, C or O
|
Progress
Metric:
|
Year
1
|
|||
Q1
|
Q2
|
Q3
|
Q4
|
|||
1. Administration
has created a focus on customer service that branches from students to
parents.
|
C
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
2. Addition of two after school programs.
|
A, C
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
3. Creation of business cards to help bridge
communication.
|
C
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
4. Creation
of blog to keep parents abreast of events and celebrate community.
|
C
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
5. Postcards/
communication about positive behavior to celebrate students showing SOAR.
|
C
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
6. Item
exchange
|
Parent Surveys
|
|||||
7. Extended
calendar of family nights to invite families in and build community.
|
C
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
8. Extending
academic meetings to help parents understand and share the language of CCSS
and CBC.
|
C, A
|
Parent Surveys
|
||||
9.
|
||||||
10.
|
||||||
|
Appendix A: School Audit Tool
Directions: Using the rubrics that follow, evaluate school systems and performance
in each of the following domain areas: (1) talent; (2) academics; (3) culture
and climate; and (4) operations. Use
longitudinal quantitative and qualitative data to inform evaluations in each
category. Diagnostic findings should
inform the school improvement planning process, helping school and district
leaders to prioritize specific growth areas and design aligned interventions.
1.
Talent: Employ systems and
strategies to recruit, hire, develop, evaluate, and retain excellent school
leaders, teachers, and support staff.
|
||||
Sub-Indicators:
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
1.1. Instructional
practice
|
||||
1.2. Evaluation
and professional culture
|
||||
1.3. Recruitment
and retention strategies
|
||||
1.4. Professional
development
|
||||
1.5. Leadership
effectiveness
|
||||
1.6. Instructional
leadership
|
||||
2.
Academics: Design and
implement a rigorous, aligned, and engaging academic program that allows all
students to achieve at high levels.
|
||||
2.1. Academic
rigor
|
||||
2.2. Student
engagement
|
||||
2.3. Differentiation
|
||||
2.4. Curriculum
and instruction aligned to CCSS
|
||||
2.5. Supports
for special populations
|
||||
2.6. Assessment
system and data culture
|
||||
3.
Culture and Climate: Foster a
positive learning environment that supports high-quality teaching and
learning, and engages families and the community as partners in the
educational process.
|
||||
3.1. School
environment
|
||||
3.2. Student
attendance
|
||||
3.3. Student
behavior
|
||||
3.4. Interpersonal
interactions
|
||||
3.5. Family
engagement
|
||||
3.6. Community
partners and wraparound strategy
|
||||
4.
Operations:
Create systems and processes that promote organizational efficiency and
effectiveness, including through the use of time and financial
resources.
|
||||
4.1. Adequate
instructional time
|
||||
4.2. Use
of instructional time
|
||||
4.3. Use
of staff time
|
||||
4.4. Routines
and transitions
|
||||
4.5. Financial
management
|
||||
1
|
Below Standard
|
|||
2
|
Developing
|
|||
3
|
Proficient
|
|||
4
|
Exemplary
|
|||
School Audit Rubric
TALENT
|
||||
Indicator
|
Below Standard
|
Developing
|
Proficient
|
Exemplary
|
1.1. Instructional Practice
|
Teacher effectiveness is
inconsistent and highly variable from classroom to classroom. There are significant concerns about
instruction. Staffing decisions do not
reflect teacher effectiveness and student needs.
|
Instructional quality is
moderate; however, teacher effectiveness is variable from classroom to
classroom. Staffing decisions do not
always reflect teacher effectiveness and student needs.
|
Most classes are led by
effective educators, and instructional quality is strong. There are some systems in place to promote
and develop teacher effectiveness and make appropriate staffing decisions.
|
100% of classes are led
by deeply passionate and highly effective educators. There are strong systems in place to
promote staff efficacy and make staffing decisions driven exclusively by
student needs.
|
1.2. Evaluation and Professional
Culture
|
There are significant
concerns about staff professionalism. Staff come to school unprepared, and
there is little sense of personal responsibility. There is a culture of low expectations;
individuals are not accountable for their work. Evaluations are infrequent,
and few if any staff were formally evaluated 3 or more times in 2012-13. Instructional leaders do not provide
regular feedback to staff.
|
There are some concerns
about professionalism. Some staff come
to school unprepared. Some teachers
feel responsible for their work. Some teachers were formally evaluated at
least 3 times in 2012-13, but most were not. Leaders communicate some
expectations for and feedback on performance, but do not consistently
follow-up to see whether or not the feedback is acted upon.
|
The school is a
professional work environment. Most
staff are prepared to start the school day on time with appropriate
instructional materials ready to go. Most individuals feel responsible for
their work. Most teachers were
formally evaluated at least 3 times in 2012-13 in alignment with SEED
expectations. Leaders provide feedback and hold individuals accountable for
effort and results.
|
100% of staff are prepared
to start the school day on time with appropriate instructional materials
ready to go. The vast majority of staff feel deep personal responsibility to
do their best work. All teachers were
formally evaluated at least 3 times in 2012-13. Leaders conduct frequent
informal evaluations and provide meaningful feedback. Individuals are held
accountable for their performance.
|
1.3. Recruitment and Retention Strategies
|
The school and/or district lack systems to recruit and
attract top talent. Retention of
high-quality staff is a significant concern.
The school lacks systems and strategies to retain top teachers and
leaders.
|
The school and/or district have components of a plan for
recruitment and retention of quality educators (e.g., mentoring,
induction). The plan is not fully
developed or consistently implemented.
|
The school and/or district have systems for strategic
recruitment and retention. Efforts are made to match the most effective
educators to the students with the greatest needs. Retention of high-quality
teachers is high.
|
The school and/or district effectively implement a long-term
plan for recruitment and retention. Efforts are made to match the most effective
educators to the students with the greatest needs. Deliberate, successful
efforts are made to retain top talent.
|
1.4. Professional Development
|
Professional Development
(PD) opportunities are infrequent and/or of inconsistent quality and
relevance. PD does not align to staff’s development areas and/or students’
needs. As a result, teachers struggle
to implement PD strategies. There is
no clear process to support or hold teachers accountable for the
implementation of PD strategies.
|
PD opportunities are
provided; however, they are not always tightly aligned with student and adult
learning needs. The quality of PD opportunities is inconsistent. Sometimes,
teachers report that PD improves their instructional practices. Teachers are
not generally held accountable for implementing skills learned through PD.
|
The school offers
targeted, job-embedded PD throughout the school year. PD is generally connected
to student needs and staff growth areas identified through observations. Most
teachers feel PD opportunities help them improve their classroom practices.
Most teachers are able to translate and incorporate PD strategies into their
daily instruction.
|
The school consistently
offers rich and meaningful PD opportunities that are aligned to student needs
and staff growth areas identified through observations. Teachers effectively translate PD
strategies into their daily instruction. The school has a process for
monitoring and supporting the implementation of PD strategies.
|
1.5. Leadership Effectiveness
|
Leadership fails to convey a school mission or strategic
direction. The school team is stuck in a fire-fighting or reactive mode,
lacks school goals, and/or suffers from initiative fatigue. The school community questions whether the
school can/will improve.
|
The mission and strategic direction are not well
communicated. A school improvement plan does not consistently guide daily
activities and decision-making. The
community generally understands the need for change, however actions are more
often governed by the status quo.
|
Leadership focuses on school mission and strategic direction
with staff, students, and families. The school is implementing a solid
improvement plan and has a clear set of measurable goals. The plan may lack coherence and a strategy
for sustainability. Leadership conveys urgency.
|
Leadership focuses on school mission and strategic direction
with staff, students, and families. The school has a manageable set of goals
and a clear set of strategies to achieve those goals. The plan is being implemented and monitored
with fidelity. Leadership conveys deep urgency.
|
1.6. Instructional Leadership
|
Few staff can articulate a common understanding of what
excellent instruction looks like. School norms and expectations are not
clear. Instructional leaders do not demonstrate a commitment to developing
consistent and high-quality instructional practice school-wide.
|
Some staff can articulate a common understanding of what
effective instruction looks like. School norms and expectations are enforced
with limited consistency. Instructional leaders demonstrate some commitment
to improving instructional practice school-wide.
|
Most staff articulates a common understanding of what
effective instruction looks like. School norms and expectations are
consistently enforced. Instructional leaders consistently demonstrate a
commitment to improving instructional practice school-wide.
|
All staff articulates a common understanding of what
effective instruction looks like. Educators relentlessly pursue excellent
pedagogy. Instructional leaders have communicated and enforced high
expectations school-wide.
|
ACADEMICS
|
||||
Indicator
|
Below Standard
|
Developing
|
Proficient
|
Exemplary
|
2.1. Academic Rigor*[1]
|
Most observed lessons are teacher- led and whole group. Teachers rarely engage students in
higher-order thinking. Most students
demonstrate a surface-level understanding of concepts. Observed lessons are
indicative of low expectations and little sense of urgency.
|
Some observed lessons are somewhat student-centered,
challenging and engaging. Teachers
engage students in some higher-order thinking. Many students demonstrate only
a surface-level understanding of concepts.
Teachers
demonstrate moderate expectations and some urgency.
|
Observed lessons are
appropriately accessible and challenging for most students. Teachers engage students in higher-order
thinking, and students are pushed toward content mastery. Lessons begin to engage students as
self-directed learners. Teachers
communicate solid expectations.
|
All observed lessons are appropriately accessible and
challenging. Teachers push
students, promoting academic risk-taking.
Students are
developing the capacity to engage in complex content and pose higher-level
questions to the teacher and peers. Teachers
promote high expectations.
|
2.2.
Student Engagement*
|
Few students are actively
engaged and excited about their work.
The majority of students are engaged in off-task behaviors and some
are disruptive to their classmates.
Observed lessons primarily appeal to one learning style. Few students are truly involved in the
lessons.
|
Some students exhibit
moderate engagement, but many are engaged in off-task behaviors. Some observed lessons appeal to multiple
learning styles. Students are involved
in the lessons, but participation is more passive than active. Students are easily distracted from
assigned tasks.
|
Most students are engaged
and exhibit on-task behaviors. The
observed lessons appeal to multiple learning styles. Students are involved in the lesson, but
participation is, at times, more passive than active. A handful of students are easily distracted
from the task at hand.
|
All students are visibly
engaged, ready to learn, and on task.
Students are clearly focused on learning in all classrooms. The lessons appeal to and seem to support
all learning styles. Students are actively engaged in the lessons and excited
to participate in classroom dialogue and instruction.
|
2.3.
Differentia-tion and
Checking for Under-standing*
|
Most teachers take a
one-size-fits-all approach and struggle to differentiate their instruction to
meet individual learning needs. There is no evidence around the use of data
to inform instruction and minimal efforts to check for student understanding.
|
Some teachers are
differentiating at least part of the observed lessons; however, the practice
is not consistent or widespread. There is some evidence of the use of student
data to adapt the learning process. Some teachers use strategies to monitor
understanding.
|
Most teachers employ
strategies to tier or differentiate instruction at various points in the
lesson. Most teachers use data or
checks for understanding to differentiate the learning process on the
fly. Teachers take time to support
students struggling to engage with the content.
|
Teachers consistently and
seamlessly differentiate instruction. Teachers use data and formal/informal
strategies to gauge understanding, and differentiate the learning process
accordingly. Tight feedback loop between monitoring efforts and instruction.
|
2.4. Curriculum
and Instruction Aligned to Common Core State Standards
|
The school lacks a
rigorous, standards-based curriculum that is aligned to the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) and/or the curriculum is not being implemented with
fidelity. As a result, pacing is inconsistent. The percentage of students at
or above goal on state assessments is > 10 points below the state average.
|
The school has curricula
for some grades and content areas, some of which are rigorous,
standards-based. Curricula are implemented with some fidelity. Teachers
struggle with consistent pacing. The percentage of students at or above goal
on state assessments is 6-10 points below the state average.
|
Rigorous, standards-based
curricula exist for almost all grade levels and content areas, and are being
implemented consistently across classrooms.
Teachers demonstrate consistent pacing. The percentage of students at
or above goal on state assessments is within 5 percentage points of the state
average.
|
Rigorous, standards-based
curricula exist for all grade levels and content areas. Curricula are aligned
with the CCSS and are being implemented with a high degree of fidelity
throughout the school. The percentage
of students at or above goal on state assessments meets or exceeds the state
average.
|
2.5.
Support for Special
Populations
|
The school is inadequately
meeting the needs of its high-needs students. IEP goals are not regularly
met. Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) is not fully considered when making
placements. The school lacks appropriate interventions and supports for ELLs. There are significant achievement gaps
between subgroups and non-identified students as measured by state
assessments, and no evidence of progress.
|
The school typically meets
the needs of its high-needs students. Most special education students meet
their IEP goals, but LRE is not always considered when making placement
determinations. The school typically meets the needs of its ELLs, and
attempts to track progress and set content and language mastery goals. There
are significant gaps between subgroups and non-identified students as
measured by state assessments and marginal progress over time.
|
The school consistently
meets the needs of its high-needs students. Special education students
regularly meet their IEP goals and LRE is a critical factor in placement
determinations. The school meets the needs, tracks progress, and sets content
and language mastery goals for all ELLs.
There are small gaps between subgroups and non-identified students as
measured by state assessments, and some signs of progress toward closing the
gaps.
|
The school is successfully
closing the achievement gap for its high-needs students. General and special
education teachers work collaboratively to support students. The school
tracks the effectiveness of language acquisition instructional strategies and
adjusts programming accordingly. There
is no achievement gap between subgroups and non-identified students as
measured by state assessments.
|
2.6.
Assessment Systems
and Data Culture
|
The school lacks a
comprehensive assessment system (including summative and benchmark
assessments). Teachers rarely collect, analyze, and/or discuss data. The school lacks or fails to implement SRBI
protocols linking data to interventions.
|
The school has some
consistent assessments; however, there are major gaps in certain grades and
content areas. There are some efforts to collect and use data. SRBI systems and processes are somewhat
present.
|
The school implements a
clear system of benchmark assessments. Some teachers are developing
familiarity with regularly using formative assessments to differentiate
instruction. The school has emerging processes in place to use the data to
inform interventions.
|
Teachers consistently
administer assessments throughout the year. Assessments are standards-based
and provide real-time data. Teachers embed formative assessments in their
daily lessons. The school has strong processes to collect, analyze, and use
data to inform interventions.
|
CULTURE AND CLIMATE
|
||||
Indicator
|
Below Standard
|
Developing
|
Proficient
|
Exemplary
|
3.1. School Environment
|
The school fails to create
a welcoming and stimulating learning environment. Communal spaces and classrooms may be
unkempt, rundown, unsafe, or sterile.
Many classrooms are neither warm nor inviting and lack intellectual
stimulation. Little to no student work
or data is displayed to help convey a sense of pride and high expectations.
|
The school struggles to
provide a welcoming environment conducive to high-quality teaching and
learning. Large sections of the school
are not clean, bright, welcoming, or reflective of student work. Though the school has some data and student
work displayed, efforts to brand the school and convey high expectations are
very minimal. Sections of the school
need significant attention.
|
The school generally
provides a welcoming learning environment. Most of the facility is in good
repair and conducive to teaching and learning. Most classrooms and common spaces are
bright and clean, displaying data and student work; however, some sections
lack visual stimulation. The school
has made an effort to foster school identity through branding and consistent
messaging in classrooms and communal spaces.
|
The school provides a
welcoming and stimulating learning environment. Common spaces and classrooms
are bright, clean, welcoming, and conducive to high-quality teaching and
learning. Data and student work are visible and present throughout the
school, inspiring students and teachers to do their best work. There is clear branding and consistent
messaging throughout the school, promoting school identity and pride.
|
3.2. Student Attendance
|
The school has few, if any, strategies to increase attendance. Average daily attendance is ≤ 88% and/or chronic absenteeism is > 20%.
|
The school has some strategies to increase attendance. Average daily attendance is between 89%
and 93% and/or chronic absenteeism is between 16% and 20%.
|
The school has multiple, effective strategies to increase
attendance. Average daily
attendance is between 94% and 97% and/or chronic absenteeism is
between 11% and 15%.
|
The school implements effective strategies to increase
attendance and on-time arrival. Average
daily attendance is > 97% and chronic absenteeism is ≤ 10%.
|
3.3.
Student Behavior
|
A school-wide behavior management plan may exist, but there is
little evidence of implementation. Student misbehavior is a significant challenge and creates
regular distractions. Disciplinary
approaches appear to be inconsistent; students and staff do not have a common
understanding of behavioral expectations.
Discipline is mostly punitive.
The rate of suspensions/expulsions as a proportion of student
enrollment is greater than 20% (total # 2012-13 incidents/total enrollment).
|
A school-wide behavior management plan is in place, and there
are some signs of implementation. Student misbehavior is a challenge and creates frequent
disruptions. There may be confusion among students and staff regarding
behavioral expectations. Discipline is primarily punitive,
and there is inconsistent reinforcement of desired behaviors. The rate of suspensions/expulsions as a
proportion of student enrollment is between 15% and 20%.
|
A school-wide behavior management plan is in place and
effectively implemented most of the time. Student behavior is under control. Misbehavior is infrequent, with periodic
distractions to instruction. Most
students behave in a calm and respectful manner. Students and staff
have a common understanding of the behavior policy. There is positive reinforcement
of desired behaviors. The suspension/expulsion rate is
between 10% and 14%.
|
A school-wide behavior management plan is consistently and
effectively implemented. All students behave in a calm, orderly, and respectful manner throughout
the school day. Classroom distractions
are minimal, and immediately and appropriately addressed. Rewards and consequences are clear and
appropriate, and are consistently applied across the school. The
suspension/expulsion rate is < 10%.
|
3.4.
Interpersonal
Interactions
|
There is a weak sense of
community. The quality and types of
student, adult, and student/adult interactions raise concerns. There are signs of divisiveness or
hostility among students and with staff. There are minimal signs of
connections between students and staff; interactions are largely
transactional or triggered when students are off task.
|
There is a moderate sense
of community. Students are somewhat
respectful toward one another and adults.
There is some teasing and divisiveness; however, it does not define
school culture. Communication between
students and staff is somewhat positive.
There are some connections between students and staff.
|
There is a good overall
sense of community. Students are
generally respectful toward one another and adults. Interactions are mostly positive. There is minimal teasing and
divisiveness. Communication between
students and staff is generally positive and respectful. There are signs of connections between
students and staff. Most staff seem
invested in their students.
|
There is a strong sense of
community. Students are respectful and
courteous of one another and adults.
Student interactions are overwhelmingly positive and polite. The school has an inclusive and welcoming
environment. Student/adult interactions
are positive and respectful, demonstrating strong relationships. Staff seems invested in the well-being and
development of students.
|
3.5.
Family and Community
Engagement
|
The school offers
infrequent opportunities to involve parents in the school community. Family
involvement is minimal. Teachers rarely reach out to families regarding their
child’s academic progress.
|
The school offers several
family events throughout the year. Roughly half of families participate in
school activities. More than half of
all teachers reach out to families regarding their child’s academic progress.
|
The school offers
periodic, meaningful opportunities for parents/families to engage in student’s
education. Most families participate in school activities. Most educators communicate regularly with
families.
|
The school frequently
engages parents/family as partners in student’s education. Almost all
families participate in school activities. Nearly all educators communicate
with families on a regular basis.
|
3.6.
Community Partners
and Wraparound Strategy
|
The school offers
inadequate supports to address students’ nonacademic needs. There are limited wraparound services. The school makes little or no effort to
engage community partners to expand services offered through the school.
|
The school offers some support
to address students’ nonacademic needs through wraparound services. Community
and partner engagement is spotty and event-specific.
|
The school offers a range
of wraparound services to address students’ nonacademic needs. The school has
several sustained community partnerships.
|
The school has a clear
process for evaluating students’ needs and connecting students to appropriate
wraparound services. The school has sustained community partnerships to help
address student needs.
|
OPERATIONS
|
||||
Indicator
|
Below Standard
|
Developing
|
Proficient
|
Exemplary
|
4.1.
Adequate
Instructional Time
|
There is not enough time
in the school schedule to appropriately meet students’ academic needs. There is a significant amount of wasted
time in the school calendar and daily schedule. The schedule includes ≤ 5 hours of
instruction per day, and ≤ 60 minutes of ELA time.[2]
|
Students would benefit
from increased instructional and/or intervention time. The school calendar and daily schedule
could be improved to increase time on task.
The schedule includes > 5 and ≤ 5.5 hours of instruction per day,
and > 60 and ≤ 90 minutes of ELA time.
|
The school has taken steps
to increase instructional time on task through extended learning
opportunities. The school calendar and
daily schedule are well constructed. The schedule includes > 5.5 and ≤ 6
hours of instruction per day, and > 90 and ≤ 120 minutes of ELA time.
|
The school has multiple
extended learning opportunities available to students. The school implements a thoughtful and
strategic school calendar and daily schedule.
The schedule includes > 6 hours of instruction per day, and >
120 minutes of ELA time.
|
4.2.
Use of Instructional
Time*
|
Staff and students use
time ineffectively. Misused
instructional time results from misbehavior, poor scheduling, and inefficient
transitions. There are missed
opportunities to maximize time on task.
Observed teachers struggle with pacing and fail to use class time in a
constructive manner.
|
Staff and student use of
time is somewhat effective. Some students
are off task and there are missed opportunities to maximize instructional
time. Lesson schedules are moderately
well planned, paced, and executed.
Teachers could be more skilled and/or methodical in the use of class
time.
|
Most staff and students use
time well. A handful of students
require redirection; however, the majority of students transition quickly to
academic work when prompted by the teacher.
There is minimal downtime.
Lessons are well planned, paced, and executed. Teachers are adept at managing and using
class time.
|
Staff and students
maximize their use of time. There is
no downtime. Transitions are smooth
and efficient. Students transition
promptly to academic work with minimal cues and reminders from teachers. Teachers meticulously use every moment of
class time to prioritize instructional time on task.
|
4.3.
Use of Staff Time
|
Educators lack adequate
and/or recurring professional development and/or common planning time. Common
planning time is currently disorganized and the time is not used effectively.
As a result, staff members are unable to develop and/or share practices on a
regular basis.
|
Most academic teams have
common planning periods (less than 1 hour/week); however, the school has
failed to secure vertical and horizontal planning. Collaborative planning
time is used at a basic level (e.g., organization of resources or topics not
directly related to classroom instruction).
|
All academic teams have
common planning periods (1-2 hours/week) and they are seldom interrupted by
non-instructional tasks. Staff members use this time to discuss instructional
strategies, discuss student work, develop curricular resources, and use data
to adjust instruction.
|
All educators have weekly
common planning time for vertical and horizontal planning (more than 2
hours/week). Common planning periods are tightly protected and only
interrupted by emergencies. The school has established tight protocols to
ensure that common planning time is used effectively.
|
4.4.
Routines and
Transitions
|
The school is chaotic and
disorderly. The safety of students and
staff is a concern. The school lacks
critical systems and routines. Movement
of students is chaotic and noisy with little adult intervention. Adults are not present during transitions; therefore, there
is very little re-direction.
|
The school is somewhat chaotic and/or disorderly, particularly
in certain locations and during certain times of day. Some staff make an effort to maintain
procedures and routines; however, staff presence is minimal and redirection
of misbehavior is lacking.
|
The school environment is calm and orderly in most locations and
during most of the day. Rules and procedures are fairly
clear, consistent, and evident.
Routines seem somewhat apparent and institutionalized. Adults are
present to reinforce norms.
|
The school environment is calm and orderly. Rules and procedures are clear, specific, consistent, and
evident. Routines are largely unspoken
and institutionalized. Adults are consistently present to reinforce norms.
|
4.5. Financial Management
|
The school and/or district
do not make sound budgetary decisions based on student need and projected
impact. Budget decisions are largely
governed by past practice and do not account for sustainability. There is little
to no evidence around school and/or district leaders successfully advocating
for school resource needs.
|
Budget decisions are
sometimes focused on factors unrelated to student needs and school goals. A
number of expenditures and initiatives lack a plan for sustainability beyond
the current school year. School and/or district leaders do not effectively
advocate for school needs or pursue additional resources.
|
The school and/or district
have emerging strategic budgeting practices.
The school and/or district have begun to repurpose funds to align
expenditures more closely with school goals and student needs. Sustainability
may pose a concern. School/district leaders effectively advocate for school
needs and pursue additional resources.
|
The school and district
engage in strategic budgeting. The school and district invest in high-yield,
research-based initiatives aligned to student needs and school goals. There
is a clear sustainability plan for all major expenditures. School/district
leaders effectively advocate for school needs, and build strategic
relationships to pursue needed resources.
|
[1]
Ratings for the four sub-indicators marked with an asterisk (*) should be based
largely on classroom observations.
[2]
The total amount of ELA instructional time per day at the secondary level can
include reading- and/or writing-intensive coursework.
Note: The rubrics draw from the CSDE’s School
Quality Review and Network Walkthrough Tool, and Mass Insight Education’s School
Readiness Assessment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)