baldrige guided - montgomery county public...

Glenallan Elementary School

“Driven by Purpose…Gator Success”

School Improvement Plan

2012 – 2013

One Community…One School…One Goal…The Success of Every Gator

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Baldrige CategorySchool-wide Program Components Page

Table of Contents 2School Improvement Plan Team Information 3

School Leadership Council Meeting Dates 4Leadership

Mission Vision

5 - 8

Organizational Performance Results Instructional Goals Operational Goals

9 - 10

Organizational Performance Results Reading Maryland School Assessment Data Math Maryland School Assessment Data 11 - 17

Focus on College Readiness: 21st Century Learner “Seven Keys to College Readiness Data”

M-Class Data TN2 Data

18 - 21

Linkage Charts Reading Math 22 - 23

Root Cause Analysis Narrative – RCA Process

RCA Action Plan 25 - 33

Needs Assessment and Data findings Subgroup Data Analysis 34

School Improvement Student Achievement Action Plans Reading Achievement Action Plan Math Achievement Action Plan

35 – 37

Glenallan Instructional Goals38

School Leadership Council Team Information

The School Leadership Council Team leads the Glenallan community in creating a positive teaching and learning environment. The team is utilized to engage in an open and honest dialogue to share in the decision making processes that impact the school climate and instructional program. The team is composed of representatives of all stakeholders of the school community and works collaboratively to develop a comprehensive plan for raising the academic achievement of all students. All members of the School Leadership Council Team who contributed to the school improvement plan are listed below.

3

Print Name PositionPeter Moran PrincipalPatrick Scott Assistant PrincipalChrissy Graham Staff Development TeacherLinda Raiford Reading SpecialistChristy Welsh Special Education TeacherStephanie Stewart Math Content CoachNadine Lyons School CounselorLeslie Chavis ESOL TeacherPat Bean Media SpecialistBeth Yetter Team Leader-KindergartenStephanie Stewart Team Leader-Grade 1Corinna Navas Team Leader-Grade 2Ursula Davies Team Leader-Grade 3Shyleen Billings Team Leader-Grade 4Brent Leitzel Team Leader-Grade 5Tracy Johnson Elected Faculty RepresentativeSandy Carroll Paraeducator/SEIU RepresentativeJennifer DePasquale P.T.A. PresidentNicole Shephard-Brown P.T.A. Board MemberMaria Gourdain P.T.A. Board Member

Listed below are the dates the Glenallan Leadership Team will meet during the 2012 -2013 school year to review the school improvement plan, monitor action plans, and identify next steps.

Date TimeJuly 25, 2012 8:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

July 26, 2012 8:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

August 2, 2012 8:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

September 27, 2012 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

October 25, 2012 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

November 29, 2012 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

January 31, 2013 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

February 28, 2013 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

April 19, 2013 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

May 30, 2013 9:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

4

Glenallan Elementary School LeadershipI. Leadership In July of 2012, the School Leadership Council team came together to continue the development of a professional learning community. This development began through making personal connections and sharing values in order to build positive relationships that are the key to a high functioning team. We discussed how we would build a professional learning community by using the article, “What is a professional learning community” by Rick Dufour. This discussion led to the team focusing on the importance of a shared leadership environment, capitalizing on the knowledge of one another, and working to develop a safe psychological environment to allow members to share their ideas and take intellectual risks.

The School Leadership Council focused on the key components to a Professional Learning Community, shared vision, mission, and values, collective inquiry, collaborative teams, action orientation, continuous improvement, and a results orientation. The team agreed that an important component was an action orientation that was shared with school staff and was a consistent focus of the instructional program. The team discussed six characteristics of an effective leadership team, which we will evaluate ourselves throughout the school year. These characteristics were:

Clear Purpose – School Instructional Council members understand that they are fully committed to the vision, goals, and objectives of the team.

Strong Relationships - Effective teams work on building and maintaining internal relationships. Team members are supportive; trust one another and have fun together.

Shared Leadership - Effective teams work on building and maintaining internal relationships. Team members are supportive; trust one another and have fun together.

Experimentation and Innovation - Well functioning teams encourage creativity and risk taking and experiment with different ways of doing things.

Open Communication - Well functioning teams encourage creativity and risk taking and experiment with different ways of doing things.

Defined Roles, Responsibilities, and Accountability - Roles, responsibilities, expectations and authorities are well defined, understood and accepted. Work is fairly distributed and skills are well represented with team member’s abilities being recognized and fully utilized.

In our second year of building a professional learning community, we are focusing on implementing collective inquiry; questioning and reflecting on our instruction in team/planning meetings, and building structures and processes to utilize the knowledge and resources that are within our building. As a leadership team we have committed to promoting the following:• Challenging and question each other's practice in spirited but optimistic ways. • Collectively problem solving and learning through applying new ideas and information that address

student needs.• Analyzing current practices in relation to student results, experimenting with new practices, and

assessing the relationship between practice and the effects of practice. • Working together to question, search, analyze, develop, test, and evaluate new skills, strategies,

awareness, attitudes, and beliefs that promote student learning.After participating in reading and discussing the book, Drive, by Daniel Pink we have identified three components of motivation to support our development of a PLC and our ability to engage in the collective inquiry process.• Mastery: The Urge To Get Better At Something that Matters• Autonomy: The Desire To Direct Our Own Lives• Purpose: The Yearning To Do What We Do In Service of Something Larger And More Enduring Than

Ourselves

5

The team collaborated to identify what the ideal leadership team would look like, sound like, and feel like. These details are listed below and will be revisited as we build our professional learning community

An effective leadership team looks like: Total participation Everyone talking Open and honest communication Respectful Sitting/Standing/Groups Diverse – race/age/experience/grade level Analyzing data to determine next steps Visuals Consistency/share responsibility Positive Energy/Smiling/Enthusiasm Having a good time Meaningful Working together Positive body language

An effective leadership team sounds like Productive talk Purposeful and constructive dialogue Respectful words Listening not just hearing Caring Sincere Student Focused

An effective leadership team feels like: Safe Feels needed and important Trusting Shared Responsibility Positive Rotating Roles Exciting Empowering Ownership Productive Common purpose Fun

6

Glenallan Vision and Mission

Glenallan Elementary Shared Vision StatementWe are a united, multicultural community of students, families, and educators committed to:

Cultivating a love of learning Developing the character of great people Empowering children with the knowledge and skills to excel as productive citizens in the 21st century

Glenallan Elementary Shared Mission StatementWe are one school…one community…with one goal… the success of every Glenallan Gator.

Montgomery County Public Schools Vision StatementA high-quality education is the fundamental right of every child. All children will receive the respect, encouragement, and opportunities they need to build the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to be successful, contributing members of a global society.

Montgomery County Public Schools Mission StatementTo provide a high-quality, world-class education that ensures success for every student through excellence in teaching and learning

The communication and development of the Glenallan vision and mission statement is essential to our movement of effectively serving the 21st century learner. We will revisit our vision and mission statement to ensure it represents all stakeholders and is a reflection of how we will attain the academic goals of every Glenallan student.

The vision of Glenallan will be communicated to all community stakeholders through a wide range of venues. First, it is vital that the vision is communicated in all personal settings. The focus of our summer “Meet and Greets” and Back to School Night presentation was on our vision and what specific things would occur within the instructional program to ensure it is fulfilled. The vision will be discussed at P.T.A. meetings, school leadership council meetings, transition team meetings, paraeducator meetings, staff trainings, and through our structure of room parents and volunteers. In addition, it will be a focus of our monthly Gator Gazette which will be available in English and in Spanish, weekly staff bulletins, connect ed communication, the structure that we have created for personal phone calls, and via Twitter messages.

Glenallan will focus on aligning the vision and mission of Montgomery County Public Schools to narrow our focus on providing a high quality, world class education. We will work as a leadership team to identify what a high quality, world class education looks like and develop and implement actions to ensure our instructional program is world class.

7

II. Organizational Performance Results- Instructional and Operational Goals

The goal of Glenallan Elementary School is that a collaborative culture is created among all members of the school community, staff, students, and parents. The focus of our collaboration is to increase the academic performance of every student. This goal will be measured by the staff and student’s ability to meet and exceed the Maryland School Assessment Annual Measurable Objectives of 90.6 in reading and 89.7 in mathematics. These goals will be examined through discussions focused on individual student achievement while consistently examining performance by race and students who receive special services.

We will examine multiple data points to emphasize the importance of the successful development of the whole student and make specific decisions based on multiple measures and teacher judgment. The measures we will use to measure student progress and make instructional decisions in reading are the (MCPSAP-PR) (Grades K-2 reading), Terra Nova II (TN2) (2nd grade reading), Maryland School Assessment (MSA) (Grades 3-5), Measures of Academic Progress in Reading (MAP-R) (Grades 3-5 reading), Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System (F&P) (Grades 3-5 reading).

In mathematics, we will measure student progress by examining common formatives in Kindergarten – Grade 2), Terra Nova II (TN2) (2nd grade math and computation), Maryland School Assessment (MSA) (Grades 3-5), and unit assessment results in Grade 3 – 5. In addition, we are working towards placing more emphasis on examining common formative results to drive re-teaching and acceleration. This data analysis movement will be supported through our Student Intervention Meetings (SIM) and during collaborative team planning conducted by our Math Content Coach (MCC).

9

Strategic Monitoring: Data Decision Making

These measures will be used to focus on individual student growth and identifying students who need specific interventions or acceleration that will best serve their academic progress. Data will be used to identify commonalities in order to strategically develop intervention programs to strengthen academic skills. We will utilize our structure of Student Intervention Meetings (SIM) to develop flexible groups and closely monitor individual student progress. These meetings will be monthly for each grade level so that current data is being reviewed and as a result instructional intervention/support decisions are timely and accurate. We will focus on strengthening our skills of data analysis, using multiple data measure to target individual students, and the effective use of strategic monitoring tools. Below is an example of the strategic monitoring tool format:

Las

t Nam

e

Firs

t Nam

e

Gra

de

12-1

3 T

CH

R

10-1

1 T

CH

R

GE

ND

ER

RA

CE

ESO

L L

evel

SPE

CIA

L E

D

10-1

1 M

ath

Scal

e Sc

ore

10-1

1 M

ath

Prof

Lev

el

AC

CE

LE

RA

TE

D M

AT

H 1

0-11

SUC

CE

SSFU

L

CO

MPL

ET

ION

201

0-20

11

SUC

CE

SSFU

L

CO

MPL

ET

ION

200

9-20

10

Littleton Jasmin 4 Leitzel Davies F B 490 adv y 93%100%

Jalloh Fatmata 4 Leitzel Davies F B rell 450 adv y 67% 99%

Tambal Awad 4 Leitzel Lozzi M B rell 440 prof100% 99%

Morgan Jordan 4 Leitzel Lozzi M B 3 438 prof100% 96%

Haaland Dylan 4 Leitzel Davies M B 428 prof 75% 92%Kassi Kensia 4 Billings Davies F B 422 prof 86%

Correia Jarrell 4 Leitzel Lozzi M B 420 prof y 64% 99%

Huggins Zenden 4Jameso

nBilling

s M B 410 prof 81% 95%Sealy Tai 4 Billings Billing

sM B

410 prof53%

Robinson Kelsie 4 Leitzel Lozzi F B 402 prof 75%

Folsom Martin 4 Davies M B 398 prof 75% 96%

Blake Jazmine 4 LeitzelBilling

s F B 396 prof 61% 90%

Gigax Tatiana 4Jameso

nBilling

s F B Y 393 prof 83% 73%

Pierrelus Ketsia 4 Billings Lozzi F B 3 390 prof100% 99%

Resper Tyree 4Jameso

n Lozzi M B 387 prof 97% 88%

Tarawally Aicha 4Jameso

n Davies F B 382 prof 72% 92%

JeanChaasadya

h 4Jameso

nBilling

s M B 375 bas 94% 73%Gombo Assiam 4 Jameso Davies F B 3 Y 372 bas 72% 74%

10

nEluamaka

-Thelma 4 Billings Lozzi F B

362 basMartin Olivya 4 Billings Lozzi F B 360 bas 78% 68%

Vance Noa 4Jameso

nBilling

s F B 360 bas 33% 88%Allen Qwame 4 Leitzel Davies M B 331 bas 36% 60%

Annual Measure.Obj

. 89.7Goga David 4 Jameso

nBilling

sM B 1

292exemp

t78%

Brice Tayshawn 4 Billings Lozzi M B Y 49 bas 69% 42%

School Improvement in Maryland2012 MSA Reading and Math - All Grades

Reading Percent. Prof./Adv

Met/Not Met

All 84.4% Met

African American 78.0% Met

Asian 94.7% Met

Latino 85.7% Met

White 84.6% Met

FARMS 81.3% Met

LEP 81.7% Met

Special Education 66.7% Met

Math Percent Prof./Adv

Met/Not Met

All 81.3% Met

African American 78.0% Met

Asian 84.2% Met

Latino 80.0% Met

White 92.3% Met

FARMS 77.6% Met11

LEP 74.6% Met

Special Education 50.0% Met

2012 MSA Reading and Math - All Grades

3rd Grade Reading % Adv/Prof

76.6% - 49/64

3rd Grade Math % Adv/Prof

76.6% - 49/64

4th Grade Reading % Adv/Prof

90.2% - 55/61

4th Grade Math % Adv/Prof

85.2% - 52/61

5th Grade Reading % Adv/Prof

85.4% - 41/48

5th Grade Math % Adv/Prof

81.5% - 39/48

3rd Grade Reading Performance by Race/Students Receiving Special Services

12

All Grade 3 Students

African American Hispanic L.E.P. FARMS0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

23.4%15/64 19%

4/21

34.6%9/26 29.2%

7/24

31.8%14/44

62.5%40/64

71.4%15/21 61.5%

17/26

70.8%17/24

59.1%26/44

14.1%9/64 9.5%

2/210 0

9.1%4/44

Basic Proficient Advanced

2011 – 2012 Grade 4 MSA Reading Performance by Race/Students Receiving Special Services


African American Hispanic LEP FARMS0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

9.816.7

8 10 9.3

65.6 66.772

85

69.8

24.616.7 20

0

20.9

90.283.4

9285

90.7

Basic Proficient Advanced Advanced/Proficient13

2011 – 2012 Grade 5 MSA Reading Performance by Race/Students Receiving Special Services


African American

Hispanic LEP FARMS0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

14.6

29.4

0

30.8

14.327.1 23.5

3238.5 35.7

58.347.1

64

30.8

50

85.4

70.6

96

69.3

85.7

Basic Proficient Advanced Advanced/Proficient

ADVANCED READING TRENDS 2010 VS. 2011 VS. 2012

14

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 50

10

20

30

40

50

60

15.48/52

21.713/60

55.727/49

16.711/66

21.310/47

36.622/60

14.19/64

24.615/61

58.328/48

2010 2011 2012

School Improvement in Maryland2011 - 2012 MSA Mathematics - All Grades

Grade 3 Maryland School Assessment Math Performanceby Race/Students Receiving Special Services



10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

23.4%19%

34.6% 33.3% 31.8%

48.3%52.4% 53.8%

58.3%52.3%

28.1% 28.6%

11.5% 8.3%15.9%

76.6%81%

65.3% 66.6% 68.2%


15

Grade 4 Maryland School Assessment Math Performance by Race/Students Receiving Special Services



10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

14.8% 11.1%20%

25%16.3%

50.8%

66.7%

44%

60%51.2%

34.4%

22.2%

36%

15%

32.6%

85.2% 88.9%80%

75%83.8%

Basic ProficientAdvanced Advanced/Proficient

Grade 5 Maryland School Assessment Math Performance Data by Race/Students Receiving Special Services



10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

16.7%

35.3%

8%

38.5%

17.9%

64.6%

52.9%

76%

61.5%

78.6%

18.8%11.8% 16%

0 0

81.3%

64.7%

92%

61.5%

78.6%


African American Proficient/Advanced 2011 vs. 201216

All African American Students

3rd Grade AA Students 4th Grade AA Students 5th Grade AA Students0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

70.2% 72.2%78.6%

61.5%

78% 81%88.9%

64.7%

2011 2012

Latino Achievement Trends Proficient/Advanced 2011 vs. 2012

Latino Students 3rd Grade Latino Students

4th Grade Latino Students

5th Grade Latino Students

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

80%

63.4%

91.7%85.7%

80%

65.4%

80%

92%

2011 2012

17

FARM Achievement Trends Proficient/Advanced 2010 vs. 2011 vs. 2012

All Farms 3rd Grade FARMS Students

4th Grade FARMS Students

5th Grade FARMS Students

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

76%

65%

80.8% 80.1%77.6%

68.2%

83.7% 82.1%86.2%

81.2%86.2%

2010 2011 2012

18

Focus on College Readiness: The 21 st Century Learner

Glenallan Elementary School is committed to building the foundational skills and motivation for beginning the journey toward college readiness and graduation. In order to develop college ready students, we will focus on building the 21st century learner. The Glenallan instructional program will be directed towards building the whole child. In order to raise the level of engagement student instruction will be focused on critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration among peers and collaboration through networking, effective oral and written communication, and building an intellectual risk taking environment through the encouragement of curiosity and imagination.

We will provide students the opportunity to address real world problems, issues that are impacting society and questions that make sense to their life experiences. In order to successfully implement this instruction, a culture of inquiry will be created among the Glenallan students. They will be encouraged to question and we must build excitement for learning so that students will continue self-learning outside of the instructional day.

In order to begin preparing our students for college, we must enhance our technology. School resources will be focused on implementing technology that allows students to learn with the hands on equipment that is being used outside of school. We will be fully implementing curriculum 2.0 in kindergarten through grade 3 and focusing on connecting learning to the community, not just the local community, but the national and global community as well.

In order to increase motivation and the intellectual curiosity of students we will be participating in field trips to local colleges, guest speakers from diverse career backgrounds, and providing students the opportunities to pursue their individual interests. The “Seven Keys to College Readiness” benchmarks will be utilized to determine individual student progress towards foundational readiness. On page 18 are the seven keys to college readiness with data to demonstrate our progress towards building the foundational skills

19

Glenallan Student Achievement vs. “Seven Keys to College Readiness”“Laying the Foundation for College Preparation”

Score 1650 on the SAT or 24 on the ACT

Score 3 on an Advanced Placement (AP) exam or 4 on an International Baccalaureate (IB) exam

Algebra 1 by Grade 8 with a “C” or higher

Complete Algebra 2 by Grade 11 with a “C” or higher

KEY 3:Complete advanced math (Math 6) in Grade 55th Grade Students Scoring Advanced Math MSA: 18.8%4th Grade Students Scoring Advanced Math MSA: 34.4%

20

3rd Grade Students Scoring Advanced Math MSA: 28.1%

KEY 2: Score “advanced” in reading on the Maryland School Assessment3rd Grade Students Scoring Advanced 4th Grade Students Scoring Advanced 5th Grade Students Scoring Advanced

2011:16.7% - 11/66 2012: 14.1% 9/64 2011: 21.3% - 10/47 2012: 15/61 24.6% 2011: 36.7% - 22/60 2012: 28/48 58.3%

KEY 1: Advanced reading in Grades K-2Kindergarten Students Text Level 4: 93.5% First Grade Students Text Level 16: 91.2% 2nd Grade: TN2 10-11: 45.1% 50th percentile above

Kindergarten Students Text Level 6: 68.0% Second Grade Students Text Level M : 56.25% 2nd Grade: TN 10-11:33.3% 70th percentile above

21

Kindergarten Student Subgroups Meeting Text Level 4“Meeting the 7 Keys to College Readiness”

0102030405060708090

100

93.572/77

95.622/23

94.116/17 89.2

25/28

1009/9

6.55/77

4.41/22

5.91/17

10.83/28

0

Met TL 4 Did not Meet Text Level 4

Grade 1 Student Subgroups Meeting Text Level 16“Meeting the 7 Keys to College Readiness”


African American

Asian Hispanic White0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10091.0271/78

10030/30

10013/13

72.421/29

1006/6

8.987/78

0 0

27.68/29

0

Met TL 16Did not Meet Text Level 16

22

Grade 2 Student Receiving Special Services Meeting/Exceeding the 70th Percentile“Meeting the 7 Keys to College Readiness”

All Gr. 2 Students LEP FARMS Special Education0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

4038% 37%

32%

25%

33%

26%24%

0

39%35% 36%

17%

2010 2011 2012

Grade 2 Student Subgroups Meeting/Exceeding the 70th Percentile“Meeting the 7 Keys to College Readiness

All Gr. 2 Students Latino African American White Asian0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

38%32% 35%

60%

42%33%

19%

40%

25%

75%

39%33%

21%

67% 71%

2010 2011 2012

23

24

LEADERSHIPVision: We are a united, multicultural community of students, families, and educators committed to:

• Cultivating a love of learning• Developing the character of great people• Empowering children with the knowledge and skills to excel as productive citizens in the 21st century

Mission: We are one school…one community…with one goal… the success of every Glenallan Gator.

The Vision and Mission are reflected by all staff, students, and parents through actions and conversations. The vision and mission is modeled through the instructional program and school climate and culture. It is communicated through all school events, the Gator Gazette, parent/teacher conferences, connect ed communication and by ensuring it is always translated to effectively communicate with our Spanish speaking community..

STUDENT AND

STAKEHOLDER FOCUS

Based on an analysis of the disaggregated reading data, Glenallan students require: High Quality differentiated

guided reading instruction

Increased opportunities and instruction in responding to higher order thinking questions to develop critical thinking skills.

Explicit writing instruction utilizing the writing workshop model

Collaborative and productive grade level teams focused on answering the 4 critical questions

(See Collaboration Action Plan pg38)

MSA PERFORMANCE RESULTS

Reading 3rd 4th 5thAll

Students49/6476.6%

55/6190.2%

41/4885.4%

Asian 9/9100%

9/9100%

0/10%

African American

19/2190.4%

14//1782.3%

24/2692%

White 3/475%

4/4100%

5/5100%

Hispanic 17/2561.5%

23/2592%

23/23100%

MU 3/475%

4/4100%

__

LEP 17/2470.8%

25/2792.6%

14/1782.3%

SPED 5/862.5%

4/4100%

1/1100%

FARMS 31/4368.1%

38/4290.4%

39/4586.7%

25

STRATEGIC PLANNING

By June 2013, students at Glenallan ES will demonstrate increased academic achievement in reading as measured by:Increasing the percent of all students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards.

The number of African American students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from 89% (57/64) to 91.0% (59/64)

The number of Hispanic students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from 86.3% (63/73) to 91.0 (67/73).

The number of White students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from 12/13(93%) to 13/13 (100%).

The number of Asian students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from (18/19) 95% to (19/19) 100%.

The number of Multiethnic students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from 88% (7/8) to 100% (8/8)

The number of LEP students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from 82% (56/68) to 91.0% (62/68).

The number of Special Ed. students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from77% (10/13) to 91.0% (12/13)

The number of FARMS students meeting and exceeding MSA reading standards will increase from 79% (108/130) to 91.0% (119/130)

PROCESS MANAGEMENT Staff will participate in monthly student intervention meetings using the PDSA approach. Classroom teachers, instructional specialists and administration will analyze data prior to data chats. All staff will use the strategic monitoring tool to target individual students and drive decisions regarding intensive interventions, small group instructional plans, and accelerated instruction. All teams will participate in weekly team meetings and collaborative team planning time. Grades 1 through 3 will participate in extended common planning time to effectively plan for Curriculum 2.0 implementation. Interventions will be planned utilizing classroom teachers, paraeducators, reading specialists, and reading recovery teacher. Classroom teachers in Kindergarten through Grade 2 will co-teach with ESOL teachers to address the diverse needs of all students. Kindergarten – Grade 5 teachers will co-teach with Special Education teachers to address the diverse needs of all students. All classroom teachers will use small group instruction to provide appropriate acceleration and additional support. Parent involvement will increase as a result of transition team meetings, increasing connections with parents through consistent verbal and written communication at all school events and through all correspondence.

MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS, AND KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT Strategic Monitoring Tool Mclass 3D MAP-R, MAP-P Reading Levels MSA DOI Peer visits with reflection

and debrief Informal/Formal

administrative observations Student Intervention

Meetings (SIM) Implementation of AMO

line in data measurement

FACULTY AND STAFF FOCUS

HUMAN RESOURCESProfessional Development and/or support to staff will be provided in the following areas: High Quality Daily Small group

instruction/guided reading Emphasis on rigor through

higher order thinking questions utilizing bloom’s taxonomy

Full inclusion of Special Education Students

Co-teaching to support ESOLstudents

Focus on written and oral expression through Writing Workshop

LEADERSHIP Vision: We are a united, multicultural community of students, families, and educators committed to:

• Cultivating a love of learning• Developing the character of great people• Empowering children with the knowledge and skills to excel as productive citizens in the 21st century

Mission: We are one school…one community…with one goal… the success of every Glenallan Gator.The Vision and Mission are reflected by all staff, students, and parents through actions and conversations. The vision and mission is modeled through the instructional program and school climate and culture. It is communicated through all school events, the Gator Gazette, parent/teacher conferences, connect Ed communication and by ensuring it is always translated to effectively communicate with our Spanish speaking community.

STRATEGIC PLANNING

By June 2013, students at Glenallan ES will demonstrate increased academic achievement in math as measured by:

Increasing the percent of all students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards. The percent of African American students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards will increase from 78.%

(39/50) to 100.0% The number of Hispanic students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards will increase from 80% (56/70)

to 100.0% The number of White students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards will increase from 92.3%

STUDENT ANDSTAKEHOLDER FOCUS

As a result of the root cause analysis it was revealed that students require:

Collaboratively planned and high quality small group instruction.

Extended time in differentiated small group instruction

Increased opportunities in and instruction in responding to higher order thinking questions to develop critical thinking skills.

Collaborative and productive grade level teams focused on answering the 4 critical questions

(See Collaboration Action Plan pg38)

MSA Math Performance

Math 3rd 4th 5thAll 49/64

76.6%52/6185.2%

39/4881.5%

Asian 8/988.8%

8/988.8%

0/10.%

African America

n

17/2180.9%

16/1888.8%

10/1662.5%

White 4/4100%

4/4100%

5/5100%

Hispanic 17/2568%

20/2676.9%

21/2391.3%

MU 3/475%

4/4100%

__

LEP 22/2975.8%

22/2975.8%

12/1770.6%

SPED 4/850%

3/475%

0/10%

FARMS 30/4369.7%

36/4481.8%

20/2580.0%

26

STRATEGIC PLANNING

By June 2013, students at Glenallan ES will demonstrate increased academic achievement in math as measured by:

Increasing the percent of all students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards. The percent of African American students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards will increase from 78.%

(39/50) to 100.0% The number of Hispanic students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards will increase from 80% (56/70)

to 100.0% The number of White students meeting and exceeding MSA math standards will increase from 92.3%

PROCESS MANAGEMENT Staff will participate in monthly student intervention meetings using the PDSA process to create consistently flexible intervention groups. Classroom teachers, instructional specialists and administrators will analyze

data prior to data chats. All staff will use strategic monitoring tools to advocate for students requiring intensive intervention support or and classroom data systems to address school improvement goals and guide instructional decisions. All teams will participate in team meetings and collaborative team planning time. Interventions will be planned utilizing classroom teachers, paraeducators, and MCC. All classroom teachers will implement daily small group instruction to provide acceleration, additional support, and specific and timely feedback. Classroom teachers will collaborate with ESOL and Special Education teachers to address the diverse needs of all students. Parent involvement will increase as a result of transition team meetings, increasing connections with parents through consistent verbal and written communication at all school events and through all correspondence.

FACULTY AND STAFF FOCUSHUMAN RESOURCES

Professional Development and/or support to staff will be provided as needed in the following areas: High quality/Daily Small group instruction Culturally Responsive Instruction Vocabulary Instruction Student Discourse Develop applicable math instruction to

real life Developing Number Sense Integrating Technology into Instruction

MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS, AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

Strategic Monitoring Tool Formative Assessments MSA MAP-M, MAP-P Data Chats DOI Peer Observations School-wide walk throughs Informal administrative

observations

Root Cause Analysis Process2012 – 2013

Year II

27

Data Analysis Process

During the summer leadership meetings of 2012, the School Leadership Council thoroughly analyzed Maryland School Assessment Data, Terra Nova II math and reading results, MAP-r data, M-class results, and math unit assessment data. In addition, benchmarks of “the Seven Keys to College Readiness” initiative were analyzed to determine Glenallan student progress. A data capture sheet was utilized to identify areas of success as a result of school improvement action plans and areas that required strategic planning for improvement.

Root Cause Analysis

The root cause analysis process began with the leadership team in July of 2011. We first studied how the process was used in another school related situation in order to gain understanding in identifying the deepest underlying causes of a school related problem. Through our conversations, the importance of focusing on student measurable results that we have the ability to influence and be held accountable was stressed.

The first step that we took was analyzing the data that was collected on student performance during the 2010 – 2011 school year. It was important that we selected performance data that we found an urgent need to change. Through our analysis of Maryland School Assessment (MSA) data we selected, “Why our African American students did not meet the Annual Measurement Objective in Mathematics?” Our leadership team was interested in examining what happened, how it happened, and why it happened. We analyzed other data points such as unit assessment results to support our event selection.

The Glenallan staff development teacher then led us into casual factor charting. This structure allowed our leadership team to organize the information gathered and participate in an open brain storming sessions. This step in the process required us to look at other data points and engage in conversations about the instructional program and structure, relationships with students, and gathering additional data. We created a list of 22 potential root causes. They are the following:

Students aren’t understanding concepts Students do not know basic concepts Students have learning gaps Students have a lack of motivation/confidence Students are not engaged in lessons/student attention Lack of problem solving strategies Pace of curriculum is to fast Students are reluctant to ask for help Instruction is to abstract/use of manipulatives Test taking performance Students are not enrolled in appropriate math classes Teachers are not meeting students diverse learning styles Teachers lack content knowledge

28

Parents lack content knowledge Consistency and appropriate grouping of small group instruction Student attention Time of day that math instruction occurs Interruptions to instruction Social issues impact attention Lack of movement during instruction Instruction doesn’t connect to students real lives

We then moved into the root cause analysis identification process. This included the leadership team engaging in conversations to determine causes that could be eliminated because they were not within our control to change. In addition, we identified causes that could be combined with others because of their similarities. After a through conversation of eliminating root causes and combining others we identified the following:

• Use of manipulatives to make instruction more concrete• Addressing various learning styles• Connecting to students’ real lives• Increasing movement• Formal and informal checks for understanding• Effective, consistent small group instruction

Among these causes we looked for trends that would lead us to our root cause. Collaboratively, we made recommendations for preventing the reoccurrence of our identified achievement concern. As we discussed causes such as connecting to students’ real lives, making math skills more applicable, checking for understanding, and addressing the different learning styles of individual students we identified the structure that we must strengthen to address the. This structure was the planning and implementation of high quality small group instruction. This recommendation was presented at the September School Leadership Council meeting and team members agreed that this was the root cause of the Glenallan African American students not meeting the Annual Measurement Objective in mathematics.

29

Data Analyzed to Support Root Cause Analysis in 2011AFRICAN AMERICAN MATH PERFORMANCE

ALL STUDENTS GRADES 3 - 5

Basic Proficient Advanced0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

31%18/58

62.0%36/58

6.9%4/58

Series1

Math Performance – All students Grade 3 – Grade 5

30


African American Hispanic Asian0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

28.8%19/66

27.8%5/18

37%10/27

16.7%2/12

47%31/66

66.7%12/18

48.1%17/27

25%3/1224.2%

16/66

5.6%1/18

14.8%4/27

58.3%7/12

Basic Proficient Advanced

Root Cause Analysis NotesQuestion: Why did our African American students not meet AMO?

31

BrainstormWe brainstormed 22 possible reasons

Eliminate Factors Outside our

Control

We eliminated the following:Pace of curriculumParent content knowledgeInterruption of instructionStudents don't ask for helpInterruption of instruction

Group Like items together

Lack of motivation/confidenceStudents are not engaged in lessonsStudent attentionSocial issues-paying attention

32

Create a unifying statement

We are not consistently engaging all learners.

What SHOULD it look like?

We created a list of look-fors based on other brainstormed resons:Use of manipulatives to make instruction more concreteAddressing various learning stylesConnecting to students’ real livesIncreasing movementFormal and informal checks for understandingEffective, consistent small group instruction

Glenallan Root Cause Analysis Action Plan2012 – 2013

School: Glenallan Elementary School Department/Team: All Glenallan Staff/Parents/Students Date: September 26, 2012SIP Goal/Objective: To plan and implement high quality small group instruction to raise the academic achievement of African American Students in Mathematics.

Action steps/objectives/ processesTimeline

Person(s) Responsible

Resources Needed Monitoring tools or data points

(formative & summative)

Monitoring:Date and by whom

Results/Next Steps(include evaluation of

processes for effectiveness and

efficiency)1.) Utilize collaborative

planning to develop and implement high quality small group instruction

Classroom TeachersMath Content CoachStaff Development Teacher

Extending Planning TimeEIC Lesson Seeds

Professional Resources and Materials

September Staff Training

Math planning template

Math Planning RubricWeekly Math PlansClassroom ObservationsTargeted Student PerformanceStudent Intervention Meetings

Weekly ObservationsFormal ObservationsPeter/Patrick

Chrissy/Stephanie

Plans (on Tshared) indicate differentiated small group instruction for students

Specific resources are selected during collaborative planning in addition to content

Find ways to increase communication with special educators and paraeducators

2.) Extend time of small group instructiona. (Group sizes: 6

students maximum) for more effective differentiation to reach each child’s individual needs and shorten whole group and activator to 30 minutes.

Classroom Teachers

Math Content Coach

Staff Development Teacher

Model Lessons by MCC

Staff Training

Visit to observe Highland

Small Group Instruction Structure

Small Group Observations

Peer Observations

Formal/Informal Observations

Planning Templates

Student Intervention Meetings

Formal/Informal (Patrick and Peter)

Observations(Small Group Walk Throughs)

Planning Template Construction(Stephanie and Chrissy)

Planning Template

Flexibility based on student needs

Increased planning for centers/ independent work

Stronger focus on shortening whole group lessons during planning

Teachers planning for different small group structures

Ensuring independent

33

Review and Feedback(Peter and Patrick)

work and centers can be completed independently

Next year: lengthen math blocks at all grade levels, increase amount of collaborative planning time

Notes 2-29-12: on average we are getting into small groups 40 min into math block; we need to improve upon this; barriers-not starting math on time because of transitions, focus lesson taking longer because of filling in gaps and reviewing concepts with the whole class, planning for small group; teachers noted the level of progress is significantly higher for students in small group instruction as opposed to whole group approach; very important to differentiate in heterogeneous math classes next year we will have this in K-3 and it’s coming to other grade levels; Ideas: preview lessons for filling in gaps, projects or games for independent work so more time for small group lesson

Team leaders will talk with teammates about extending math block and how to increase planning time for small group instruction

34

3.) Differentiate small group instruction by student interests and learning styles.

Classroom Teachers

Student RelationshipsStrategic Monitoring toolsIndividual Student Data ChatsStudent Surveys

Student Intervention MeetingsFormal/Informal Observ.Data segregated by small groups

Weekly: Peter/Patrick

Stephanie/Chrissy - Weekly

4.) Utilize small group instructional time to implement higher order thinking questions.

Classroom Teachers

MCC/SDT

Bloom’s TaxonomyHOT questions reflected in planning templates

Math Planning Templates


Focus on movement towards “advanced” math data



Increase higher order thinking questions for all groups especially “reteaching”

Keep list of higher order thinking questions at small group instruction table

Utilize flexible grouping and math discourse

5.) Small group instruction in math will occur daily and utilize flexible grouping practices.Students who need:

Reteaching: 4-5 times per week

Grade Level Content: 3-4 times per week

Enrichment/Acceleration: 2-3 times per week

Classroom Teachers

MCC/SDT

Common Formatives

Formative Assessment Data


Weekly Math plans

Planning Feedback forms


Common Formative Data


35

Root Cause Analysis Results: Year I 2011 - 2012

All Students African American

Hispanic L.E.P. FARMS Special Education

40

50

60

70

80

90

77%

70.2%

80%

73%76%

58%

81.3%78% 80%

74.6%77.6%

50.3%

20112012

African American Student Achievement - Math 2011 vs. 2012

All African American Students

3rd Grade AA Students 4th Grade AA Students 5th Grade AA Students0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

70.2% 72.2%78.6%

61.5%

78% 81%88.9%

64.7%

2011 2012

36

The Glenallan Elementary School Leadership Team completed a thorough review of the School Improvement Plan during the summer of 2011. Staff participated in a round table discussion to celebrate student achievement and determine potential upgrades to instructional programming and school operations. Specifically, we examined and evaluated the action plans from the 2011 - 2012 School Improvement Plan. The school leadership council identified action items that were successfully met and implemented upgrades to address the academic progress demonstrated through the 2011 – 2012 performance data.

Findings

After an extensive analysis of data and discussion by the Glenallan Elementary School Leadership Council (SLC) it was noted that reading performance results dipped as math performance increased significant. The SLC attributed this to the focus on implementing consistent and high quality small group instruction in mathematics. We believe that if our focus and training was in guided reading as well it would lead to an increase in student achievement. The data indicates that the students in third grade require guided meaningful instruction, close monitoring, and instructional interventions within the classroom. It should be noted that our advanced reading performance increased significantly in both fourth 24.6% and fifth grade 58.3%. In third grade only 14.1% of students performed advanced. Students who receive free and reduced meals (FARMS) in grade 3 performed at 68.4% proficient/advanced. It should be noted that students in grade 4 who receive (FARMS) performed at 90.7% and students in grade 5 who receive (FARMS) scored 85.7%. These discrepancies present the opportunities to engage in discussions about what instructional practices can be emulated in grade 3.

We will continue to strive for advanced performance in both reading and math. We strongly believe that the practices we are focused on, higher order thinking questions to promote critical thinking, implementing relevant and meaningful instructional content, and differentiating by levels and interests through small groups will result in advanced academic performance.

37

SIP Goal/Objective: Glenallan Elementary School’s students, staff, and parents will work collaboratively to ensure students’ achievement in reading and mathematics increases for all subgroups, as measured by the Maryland School Assessments (MSA) annual measurable objectives of 90.6% in Reading and 89.7% in Mathematics. Glenallan Elementary School’s students, staff, and parents will work collaboratively to ensure students’ achievement in mathematics meets foundational benchmarks for MCPS’s Seven Keys for College Readiness initiative.

MCPS Key 1: Advanced reading in Grades K – 2 (Kindergarten: Text Level 6, Grade 1 : Text Level 16, Grade 2: Text Level M or above 70 th

percentile on the Terra Nova II assessmentMCPS Key 2: Advanced reading MSA in Grades 3 - 5MCPS Key 3: Advanced Math PerformanceAction Steps Person(s)

ResponsibleResources Needed Monitoring

ToolsMonitoring: Date And By

Whom

Results/Next Steps

1) Collaboratively plan and implement daily high quality small group instruction that reflects the following key components:

using data to create flexible groups lessons that address all learners math discourse and a balance between

student and teacher talk (informal)formative assessments incorporating student interests and

learning styles HOT questions with all groups

All Staff -“Make and take” for meaningful centers/activities/projects-Training on math content by grade level-Peer observationVisits-Formative Assessment-Math planning template-Quarterly vertical meetings-Small group instruction idea bank

-Planning Templates-Common Formatives-Formal/ Informal Observations-MAP-M data, MSA data, MAP-P-Math plans on T-shared

-Teachers (daily)-Peter/Patrick-Weekly-Standard Feedback Form-Chrissy/Stephanie-SLC Meetings 10/25, 2/284/18

2.) Increase student discourse through utilizing higher order thinking questions and having students engaged in meaningful conversations.

Classroom TeachersMCCSDT

-Professional Development Training-Co-teaching Lessons-Bloom’s Taxonomy-Student vs Teacher Talk


-Peer visits

-Peter/Patrick – On-Going-MCC – Classroom visits

38

School Improvement Plan 2012 - 2013Math Student Achievement Action Plan

39

School Improvement PlanStudent Achievement Reading Action Plan

2012 - 2013

Action Steps Person(s) Responsible Resources Needed Monitoring Tools Monitoring: Date And By

Whom

Results/Next Steps

1. Improve the consistency and quality of our daily differentiated guided reading instruction.

All Staff -Master Schedule – Guidelines-Training on supporting struggling/accelerated reader-Guided Reading Resource Book-Grade level planning templates-F & P -Processing System for Reading Wheel

-Running Records-Peer Visits-Specialist Visit-Tuning Protocol-Student Intervention Meetings – Action Oriented on questions/problems-Informal data meetings with individual teachers on an as needed basis

Moran/Scott formal/informal observations – feedback

2. Increase student’s higher order and critical thinking skills through questioning.

All Staff -Bloom’s Taxonomy Wheels-Hot Sheets-Lesson Planning Templates reflecting questions-Graham – Staff Training-Stewart – GT Liaison

-Reading Planning Templates-MAP-r, MSA, TN2, M-class, Reading Text Levels-Formal/Informal Observations-Observe/Feedback on questioning strategies-Focused Conversations on students performing adv.

-Moran/Scott-On-Going-SLC –Monthly-SIM – Monthly

3. Increase consistency and quality of the writer’s workshop structure, and writing instruction.

Classroom Teachers C.Graham SDTL. Raidford RS-Writing Workshop by Ralph Fletcher-Peer visits

-Collect common writing task and review student work to make instructional decisions (Examining Student Work)-Posting high quality writing examples

Moran/Scott formal/informal observations – feedback

Action Steps Person(s) Responsible Resources Needed Monitoring Tools Monitoring: Date And By

Whom

Results/Next Steps

1. Each grade level team will complete grade level designed math and reading template focused on four questions.

What is it we want students to learn?

How will we know each student has learned it?

How will we respond when some students do not learn it?

How can we extend and enrich the learning for students who have demonstrated proficiency?

Grade Level Teams Planning SheetPlanning TimeExtended Planning TimeCurriculum 2.0 Resources

Planning Sheets posted to T-shared on Mondays

Evidence of how teams will address four critical questions

All StaffMoran/ScottSIM MeetingsSLC

2. Grade level teams will effectively collaborate through collective inquiry, sharing ideas, and utilizing one another to expand repertoire of skills, strategies, materials, assessment, and ideas in order to impact student achievement.

All Staff Planning TimePlanning Template/Evidence of Lesson PlansEvidence of Examining Student Work

Collaboration Motto – VisionTeam NormsHow team will address the four critical questionsCommon Formative Assessments – MathSeven Tenets Evaluation

Motto – 8/24Norms – 8/24Critical Questions 9/27

Team LeadersMoran/ScottSLC MeetingsSeven Tenets - Quarterly

40

School Improvement Plan 2012 - 2013Collaboration to Enhance Instruction and Raise Student Achievement

Action Plan

Glenallan Instructional Goal #1Glenallan Elementary School students will meet or exceed the Maryland School Assessments (MSA) Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) of 90.6% in Reading. All subgroups will achieve Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and will increase the percentages of students represented in proficient and advanced levels.

Glenallan Elementary School students will meet or exceed the benchmarks for MCPS’s Seven Keys for College Readiness:

MCPS Key 1: Advanced reading in Grades K – 2Kindergarten: Text Level 4Grade One: Text Level 16Grade Two: Text Level M, Advanced on TN2

MCPS Key 2: Advanced reading MSA in Grades 3 - 5 Grade Three: Text Level PGrade Four: Text Levels S-TGrade Five: Text Levels V-W

Glenallan Instructional School Goal #2Glenallan Elementary School students will meet or exceed the Maryland State Assessments (MSA) Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) of 89.7% in mathematics. All subgroups will achieve Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and will increase the percentages of students represented in proficient and advanced levels. All seven subgroups require close observation in order to reach or excess the targeted AMO.

Glenallan Instructional School Goal #3SIP Goal/Objective: To plan and implement high quality small group instruction to raise the academic achievement of African American Students in Mathematics. As a result, 90% of African American students will be proficient or advanced on the Maryland School Assessment, 75% of African American 2nd graders will meet or exceed the 50th percentile on the math and math computation sections of the Terra Nova II, and increase advanced performance from 6.9% (4 students) to 25.0%.

41

baldrige guided - montgomery county public...

Documents