debbie c. hester austin isd july 9 & 11, 2012 texas turnaround center
TRANSCRIPT
Debbie C. HesterAustin ISD
July 9 & 11, 2012Texas Turnaround Center
PURPOSE &
OUTCOME
Professional Service Providers will be introduced to systemic tools to guide and facilitate school improvement strategies through the job embedded professional development for district and campus leaders of low-performing schools.
District Capacity and Will to Support
Turnaround Effort
EXPECTATIONS
The Role of the Principal and their Leadership Team:•Assistant Principals•Academic Dean/Instructional Coaches•Counselors•Teachers•Teacher AssistantsPage 4: A Leader’s Guide for Tx Turnaround Implementation
Page 8: A Leader’s Guide for Tx Turnaround Implementation
REQUIRED DOCUMENTS
The focused data analysis (FDA) with student level review (SLR) assists campuses and PSPs in a data analysis process that supports appropriate goal setting and school improvement planning.
Results from these analyses will be considerations for the on-site needs assessment and development of the School Improvement Plan (SIP).
Focused Data Analysis &Needs Assessment
Review
Principal & Campus Leadership Teams: •Identify students based on the following criteria
Students with 18+ or more absences Students with 5+ removals due to
discipline Students not meeting standards on
academics in core•Identify teacher effectiveness using the Teacher Demographic Data•Identify trends for high expectations, safety using the Climate Survey Data
STUDENT INTERVENTIONS
CAUSAL FACTORS
1. Impacting Factor
2. Possible Impacting Factor
3. Not an Impacting Factor
School Improvemen
t PlanStrategy
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
•Site Based Decision Making •Board Approval•Submit to TEA
WHAT NEXT?
DISTRICT LEADERSHow can each department align their work and services to support the implementation of the School Improvement Plan?
Pages 16-23 : A Leader’s Guide for Texas Turnaround Implementation
WEEKLY CAMPUS SUPPORT
Lesson Plan Development
Supervising Instruction
Progress Monitoring
Attendance, Behavior & Academic Interventions
Attendance
Reflect how attendance impacts academic achievementGrade
Number of Students in Attendance
Target Group(18+ absences in the prior school
year)
0-1 Absences this six weeks
2-4 Absences this six weeks
5 to 8Absences this six weeks
9+Absences this six weeks
6
7
8
BehaviorHow does behavior impact academic achievement?Grade
Number of Students in Discipline
Target Group(5+ removals)
0-1 Referrals
2-4 Referrals
5-8Referrals
9+Referrals
6
7
8
Middle School Campus
(enrollment)
Students with service
tracking
# of service tracking records
Students with intervention
goals
# of intervention
goals Bedichek (1,018) 973 8,114 414 783 Burnet (991) 907 7,194 737 1,985 Garcia (422) 338 1,825 290 573 Lamar (549) 474 3,655 54 86 Mendez (1,007) 938 7,130 158 211 Pearce (539) 604 6,823 249 317
eCST Service Tracking and Intervention Usage by AU Middle School Campus (2011-2012 SY)
Note. Campus enrollment as of end of SY 2011-2012.Source. eCST Application, AISD Department of Learning Support Services.
INTERVENTIONS
• Effective
• Highly Effective
• Not Effective
Engagement
Rigor
Quality Interactions
EVIDENCE OF IMPACT
Page 53-56:A Leader’s Guide for Texas Turnaround Implementation
Contact Information:Debbie C. Hester, Austin [email protected]