School Improvement Plan
2007-2008
Snohomish School District #201
Centennial Middle School
Scott M. Peacock
Introduction
Demographics and Special Programs
Centennial Middle School serves the 7th and 8th grade students from the north end of Snohomish School district. Though our enrollment for the 2007-08 school year has dropped to about 700 students, we served 770 students during the 2006-2007 school year.
Our demographic breakdown, as of October 2006 included:
· 53% male students/47% female students
· 1.6% American Indian/Alaskan Native
· 2.6% Asian
· .9% Black
· 4.3% Hispanic
· 90.6% White
As of May 2007 our special programs incorporated the following:
· 12.1% free or reduced price meals
· 11.5% special education including:
o District middle level Life Skills program
o District middle level Deaf/Hard of Hearing program
o District middle level Asperger’s (Connections) program
o Building behavioral support program for students with behavioral disabilities
o Building resource program to support students with specific learning disabilities
· Transitional Bilingual education serving .7% of our students
Our Community
Due to the diverse needs of our students, there is a strong commitment to community and partnership at CMS. For the past six years we have continued to define the values that we share with students around the ideal of Respect –toward oneself, toward CMS, and for other people. Our conversations with students always center upon the need to accept responsibility for our choices, with regard to how those choices deepen a sense of belonging that we all must feel. This focus has been fundamental to an extraordinarily positive school climate, a strong sense of safety, and student ownership over our school.
This focus on Respect has also led to clarification of the roles that our school, parents and students share in our educational partnership. Three years ago we developed and published our “Partnership between CMS, Students and Parents”, which appears in every newsletter. The definition of each party’s role in the education of our students has led us to restructure our after-school conferences in ways that require the student to lead the conversation with parents and teachers present. We have also implemented such things as our annual panel discussion for parents/students each August focusing on “Transitioning into Middle School”, a WEB mentor program, along with a comprehensive Pyramid of Interventions for struggling students which provides levels of intervention from the classroom to the school-wide level, while sharpening the quality of communication and involvement in the home. Respect and partnership form the foundation for every decision, action and interaction within our school.
Background
For the past five years, the Centennial staff has continually enriched the quality of our conversations and deepened our professional relationships through a commitment to collaborative learning. In February 2003, we embarked on the School Improvement Planning Technical Assistance Project (SIPTAP). This comprehensive school improvement training process, facilitated by ESD 189 and at the building level by our CMS School Improvement Team, jump-started our collaborative focus on improvement using a broad range of data—test scores, discipline data, Healthy Youth Survey data, student, parent, teacher surveys, departmental minutes, and newsletters, etc. Over the course of the next year, through the 2003-2004 school year, we (certificated staff, classified staff, parents and students) explored our effectiveness by looking at data within each of the Nine Characteristics of Effective Schools, ultimately developing consensus around a school improvement plan that focused on research-based best practices designed to improve student learning in reading and math.
Our school-wide goals, outlined below by year suggest that the process we use to develop them, and the strategies that we use to further them, have shifted significantly over time. Our awareness of how we can improve student learning at the individual classroom, teacher and student level has increased, moving us from a focus on school-wide goals to collaboratively developed team goals that support literacy and critical thinking in each content area. Our school has adopted, in structure and practice, the fundamental principals of a professional learning community.
Our Goals
2004-2005
· CMS will improve the achievement of ALL students in reading by raising the average RIT score 4 points (from 6-7th and 7-8th grades) on district level tests AND increasing by 5% students meeting standard on the 2005 WASL.
Strategies:
o School-wide read-aloud time
o Reading mentorships for struggling readers (focusing on fluency and comprehension)
o Development of an accelerated reading class for struggling readers taught by a reading specialist
o Focus on school-wide reading culture (read-aloud, book fairs, “Battle of the Books”)
· CMS will improve the achievement of ALL students in mathematics by raising the average RIT score 8 points (from 6-7th and 7-8th grades) on district level tests AND increasing by 8% students meeting standard on the 2005 WASL.
Strategies:
o Focus on mathematical communication process (vocabulary development, written responses, interactive learning)
o Implement student math portfolios for organizing and managing learning.
2005-2006
· Extension of reading and math strategies and goals outlined for 2004-2005 to 2005-2006.
· CMS will improve student learning in all of the content areas (reading, science, language arts, math and social studies) by focusing on a professional development and planning process which supports deep alignment of curriculum, instruction and assessment.
Strategies:
o Create common planning time for core content areas each day
o Building leadership team/departmental team leaders focus on improvement of student learning (no separate School Improvement Team)
o Each departmental team develops its own goals, strategies and action plans based on best practices
o Each team develops learning targets and common assessment practices to expand data beyond WASL and level tests. (Greater focus on formative assessment and instructional practices.)
o As much as possible, limit teaching assignments to the fewest preps possible and into specific content areas in order to maximize collaboration.
2006-2007
· CMS will increase the number of students meeting departmental and state standards in literacy through all curricular areas by at least 5% each year as measured by classroom-based, district and state standards.
Under this goal, each team—math, language arts, reading, social studies, science, history, health/fitness, and electives developed goals and action plans designed to increase achievement in their areas by focusing for fully on learning targets, assessment and instructional practices likely to address identified student needs. Previous school improvement goals and strategies (in reading and math) were incorporated and adapted into team goals.
Collaborative team goals:
o Math--Math department will identify students at level two or below on the WASL and move 5% of them to level three.
o Lang. Arts—In 2007, the percentage of seventh and eighth grade students who score a 9 or better on the WASL writing assessment will increase by 5% from the previous year.
o Reading—CMS will improve the achievement of ALL students in reading by increasing by 5% the number of students meeting standard on the WASL and classroom-based assessments each year.
o Science—10% more students will meet the 8th grade science standards as measured by the WASL.
o History— In 2007, the percentage of seventh and eighth grade students who score a 9 or better on the WASL writing assessment will increase by 5% from the previous year.
Elective teachers also identified the following goals:
o Health—All 8th grade health students will be able to list 8 of the qualities of Emotional Quotient (EQ) and will give a specific example for four of the EQ qualities that they have and use by the end of the semester.
o Life Fitness—All CMS Life Fitness students will demonstrate their understanding and knowledge verbally and in written form, with 80% accuracy, a bank of 20 life fitness terms.
o Band—90% of Cadet Band students will earn a score of 90% or above on a rhythm test where they independently count eight bars containing quarter note/eight note syncopations, and eighth note/sixteenth note combinations by 3rd quarter.
o Art—All art students will be able to draw a picture with 3 dimensional perspective by correctly using shading and two point perspective by the end of the quarter.
Organizational Growth and Outcomes
By focusing on team goal-setting based on competencies fundamental to each discipline, teachers have been able to implement assessment techniques and instructional strategies that meet student needs and represent educational best practices. Instead of relying on a building study team to gather data and identify broad strategies, teams have been able to do that work themselves with a high level of ownership that fits well within their disciplines. As teams and teachers have focused on what students need to know and be able to do, they have all focused on how to assess learning. This has led to an almost universal reliance upon rubric development and assessment planning. All core content areas (math, science, language arts, reading and history) have committed to the development of common assessments, thus allowing them to measure student learning throughout the year and adjust instruction accordingly.
District training in mastery learning (Guskey), Understanding by Design, WASL stem question training, Professional Learning Community Institutes have all provided critical information that has been integrated into our school improvement process at the team and building level with a relevance that teachers have never experienced before. In fact, team planning/goal-setting has allowed teachers to identify where they need more training—such as in the areas of developing essential understandings and WASL item scoring.
Over the course of the past five years we have seen impressive growth in all areas. From 2002-2007, WASL results show growth in the following areas as percent of students meeting standard on 7th grade WASL:
2002 2007
Math 32.7 55.8 (+10.7% last year)
Reading 48.8 67.4 (+10.6% last year)
Writing 61.1 78.6 (+7.8% last year)
On 8th grade WASL we only have two years of data for reading and math reflecting the number of students meeting standard:
2006 2007
Reading 59.4 57.9 (-1.5% last year)
Math 44.8 53.6 (+8.8% last year)
For 8th grade science, we have had testing since 2003 with the following results:
2003 2007
Science 44.9 55.4 (+10.8% last year)
At least according to WASL data, we easily exceeded our school improvement goal of improving literacy in all content areas by at least 5%, with the exception of the surprising and unsettling drop in 8th grade reading. Even in the areas of special education, where growth is so difficult that in both 7th and 8th grades, we increased the number of students meeting standards by 13.8% in math and by 7.2% in reading on the 2007 WASL.
Current Situation
As illustrated in the previous section outlining background, our data has been showing a general and significant upward trend in student achievement, as reflected in WASL scores. As a school, we are pleased with that, but have been concerned over the years that though WASL may be a useful indicator of our school’s academic effectiveness when we receive the data the following fall, that it is not a very helpful tool when it comes to guiding teachers in selecting instructional strategies, or providing information that allows us to support individual students.
Level tests provide us with more timely information about information, along with growth data, and are broken into strands that align with WASL. However, they are limited in that they are only multiple choice, and do not provide our teachers with the ability to measure critical thinking, which can only be assessed through extended response answers more typical of WASL.
As a result, we are currently deepening our work in the development of learning targets, disciplinary standards, and common assessments in each area. Starting last year on our own, then continuing the work this year with Valley View Middle School staff, we are identifying the essential understandings (Big Ideas) and learning targets in every discipline. We are then using those learning targets to develop formative assessments that are to be given several times during the year. These assessments align with WASL in that they measure what students know and are able to do in on tasks not measured by WASL, but that are also important. They also measure student performance on important skills measured by WASL, thus allowing teachers the opportunity to sharpen student skills before taking state tests in the spring.
School district support has been and will continue to be critical in our work. The following district initiatives have reinforced the work we are doing at Centennial and are listed with the building initiative in school improvement planning (in italics):
o Mastery Learning (Thomas Guskey) and Classroom strategies that work (Pickering)/Common planning time and the collaborative development of common assessments and assessment tools
o Understanding by Design/ Development of essential understandings, learning targets, and common assessments throughout the building
o Math Curriculum and Instruction (Rick Jennings)/Continued clarity of essential understandings, learning targets, best practices and assessment development, implementation of Bridges to Algebra program and Math Tutorial classes
o Continuous Improvement Techniques (ESD 189)/Common planning time focusing on classroom strategies that work, focused learning targets, and student involvement in assessment.
o Professional Learning Communities/Common planning time, common assessments, classroom strategies that work, developing school-wide support systems such as the Pyramid of Interventions
By planning school improvement and focusing our research and conversations around best-practices in each discipline, teachers have been able to effectively integrate district initiatives into classroom instruction. They are involved in seeking out ways for our district to deepen its involvement and support of broad initiatives as they take shape at the building level.
Action Plans
School goal: CMS will increase the number of students meeting departmental and state standards in literacy throughout all curricular areas by at least 5% each year as measured by classroom based, district and state standards.
School Math goal: 85% of students will increase levels test scores by at least 6 points from Spring ’07 to Spring ’08.
Strategies you will use:
|
Activities |
Lead Person |
Others involved |
Person accountable |
Timeline |
Your plan for monitoring effectiveness |
Resources you will need/use |
Evaluation |
|
|
Start |
Finish |
|
|
|
||||
|
Math tutorial grade 7 |
Tutorial teachers |
District math consultant Kevin Berry |
Deborah Cuevas Kevin Berry |
8/07 |
6/08 |
Level test scores WASL scores Bridges to Algebra data Common assessments Common planning |
Bridges to Algebra Best practices training Common assessment training Common planning time Additional staffing for tutorial classes |
WASL Level tests |
|
Math tutorial grade 8 |
Tutorial teachers |
District math consultant Larry Taylor |
Jill Smith Larry Taylor |
8/07 |
6/08 |
Level test scores WASL scores Bridges to Algebra data Common planning |
Same as above |
WASL Level tests |
|
Additional curriculum planning with Math 7 and Math 8 teachers |
Deb Cuevas (Team Leader) Rick Jennings |
All math teachers |
Math team |
8/07 |
6/08 |
Ongoing planning and feedback |
District math consultant Best practices training Math curriculum CIT training Common planning time |
Team feedback
|
|
Development of common assessments |
Deborah Cuevas |
All math teachers District math consultant |
Math team |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Common assessment results WASL Level tests |
Common planning time PGF |
Common assessment WASL Level tests |
|
Score common assessments |
Deborah Cuevas |
All math teachers |
Math team |
9/07 |
9/08 |
Ongoing assessment results |
Common planning/PGF for scoring and calibration |
Same |
|
Use data from assessments to drive instruction |
Deborah Cuevas |
All math teachers |
Math team |
9/07 |
9/08 |
Ongoing assessment results |
Common planning/PGF District math consultant |
Same |
|
Integrate WASL items into units |
Deborah Cuevas |
Math team |
Math team |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Assessment results |
Assessments Common planning PGFs |
Same |
|
Develop common, daily entry tasks |
Deborah Cuevas |
Math team |
Math team |
8/07 |
6/07 |
Feedback on tasks Assessment results |
|
Same |
|
Revise and continue Continuous Improvement Techniques |
Deborah Cuevas |
Math team |
Larry Taylor Jill Smith Jacqui Aos Principal TLS dept. |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Classroom data from run charts |
CIT handbook and CD |
CIT class data WASL Level test |
School Reading goal: Improve students’ knowledge and skills in Reading as measured by a 10% increase in students’ overall scores between classroom-based assessment (CBA) #1 and CBA #3.
Strategies you will use:
|
Activities |
Lead Person |
Others involved |
Person accountable |
Timeline |
Your plan for monitoring effectiveness |
Resources you will need/use |
Evaluation |
|
|
Start |
Finish |
|
|
|
||||
|
Review reading CBAs |
Shelley Barker Heather Bird Kathy Williams |
Language Arts and Reading teachers |
Shelley Barker Heather Bird Kathy Williams
|
9/07 |
6/08 |
CBA results |
CBAs Two half-day trainings for teachers to learn how to use the CBAs |
WASL Level test results |
|
Implement CBA-focused lessons into current curriculum |
Shelley Barker Heather Bird Kathy Williams |
Language arts and reading teachers |
Language arts and reading teachers |
9/07 |
6/08 |
CBAs |
District literacy specialist PGFs/planning time |
Student responses on CBAs Level tests WASL |
|
Administer CBAs in 7th and 8th grade in a controlled environment |
Shelley Barker Heather Bird Kathy Williams |
All 7th grade reading teachers and 8th grade language arts teachers |
All reading and 8th grade LA teachers |
10/07 |
1/08 |
CBA results Monitor test environment |
Curriculum department CBAs |
Team feedback |
|
Score CBAs |
Heather Bird Kathy Williams |
All LA and reading teachers |
All LA and reading teachers |
10/07 |
1/08 |
Team feedback |
District literacy specialist Building reading specialist PGF |
N/A |
|
Make curricular and instructional decisions based on data |
Shelley Barker |
LA and reading teachers |
LA and reading teachers |
10/07 |
6/08 |
CBA results |
District literacy specialist Building reading specialist PGFs Common planning |
Analysis of reading level tests from 7th to 8th grade CBAs WASL |
|
Implementation of Continuous Improvement Techniques training |
Shelley Barker |
Shelley Barker Jackie Lacy Karen Taylor Kathy Williams |
Shelley Barker
|
8/07 |
6/08 |
CIT data Team feedback |
ESD 189 CIT materials |
Reading WASL CBAs Level tests |
School-wide Strategy: Develop a research team that explores early adolescent development and effective middle school structures. This team will recommend research-based strategies consistent with our values and the needs of middle school students for implementation in the fall of 2008.
Rationale: Our practices and structures must reflect the unique developmental challenges of early adolescents, as articulated in our values.
|
Activities |
Lead Person |
Others involved |
Person accountable |
Timeline |
Your plan for monitoring effectiveness |
Resources you will need/use |
Evaluation |
|
|
Start |
Finish |
|
|
|
||||
|
Formulate a middle school structures team (MSST) |
Scott Peacock |
|
Scott Peacock |
5/07 |
6/07 |
|
Parents, students and staff |
|
|
Establish team meeting schedule |
Scott Peacock |
MSST |
Scott Peacock |
6/07 |
|
|
Smartboard, PGF, building release time |
|
|
Study early adolescent brain research |
Scott Peacock |
MSST |
Scott Peacock |
6/07 |
9/07 |
Research summaries, team discussions, feedback |
The Adolescent Brain: Reaching for Autonomy TBD |
|
|
Conduct staff dialogue sessions |
Scott Peacock |
MSST CMS staff CMS leadership team |
Scott Peacock |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Dialogues, staff feedback and input |
PGFs |
Staff feedback |
|
Study middle school structures |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
MSST |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Research summaries, team discussions, feedback |
Promoting Harmony: Young Adolescent Development and School Practices Other resources TBD |
|
|
Develop surveys |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
MSST |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
10/07 |
12/07 |
Survey results; MSST feedback |
Survey Monkey Model surveys MSST planning team |
|
|
Study middle school time constructs |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
MSST |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
11/07 |
12/07 |
Research summaries, team discussions, feedback |
This We Believe in Action Other resources TBD |
|
|
Develop recommendations |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
MSST CMS staff |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
1/08 |
1/08 |
Staff feedback, dialogue sessions |
PGFs, building release time, TLS director, special services director, Superintendent, HRS director, and Business director |
|
|
Present recommendations to CMS staff |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
MSST CMS staff |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
1/08 |
1/08 |
Staff feedback, input Student feedback Parent feedback |
PTO Students Staff LID and PGF |
Constituent feedback |
|
Training and curricular support for implementation |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs |
CMS staff CMS leadership team MSST |
Scott Peacock Carolyn Coombs CMS team leaders |
2/08 |
6/08 |
Staff feedback, team assessments of needs |
Building leadership team Building teams MSST LID PGFs District level departments |
Team feedback Staff feedback |
School-wide Strategy: Encourage academic success and independence through a pyramid of interventions at the classroom and school level that draws on the partnership between teachers, parents and students.
Rationale: Struggling students need to be identified, supported, and held accountable for their academic success.
|
Activities |
Lead Person |
Others involved |
Person accountable |
Timeline |
Your plan for monitoring effectiveness |
Resources you will need/use |
Evaluation |
|
|
Start |
Finish |
|
|
|
||||
|
Identify the needs of the pyramid of interventions program for the 2007-08 school year |
Scott Peacock |
CST CMS staff |
Scott Peacock |
6/07 |
6/08 |
Teacher feedback CST feedback |
PLC Institute Pyramid of Interventions Conference |
CST process Student placement needs for 07-08 |
|
Identify and monitor students for intervention |
Scott Peacock Counselors |
CST CMS staff Counselors Parents Students |
Scott Peacock CST |
6/07 |
6/08 |
CST meetings Zero hour referral forms Student grades Parent/student feedback Staff input |
PGFs After school conferences Staff Skyward
|
Student pass/failure rate Attendance CST feedback
|
|
Provide services identified in the pyramid |
Scott Peacock Counselors |
Staff Students Parents |
Scott peacock |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Staff feedback Student grades Tracking student progress after exiting intervention programs |
Zero hour study hall supervisor Zero hour tutorial teachers All staff CST |
Staff feedback Student grades Tracking student progress after exiting intervention programs Student placements at end of school year |
|
Monitor student progress |
Scott Peacock Counselors |
All staff |
All staff |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Classroom performance/grades Conferences CST
|
Skyward Parent conferences CST |
Classroom performance review of students
|
|
Exit and/or continue services for individual students |
Scott Peacock Counselors |
All staff |
All staff |
9/07 |
6/08 |
Program/support options CST meetings Performance reviews |
CST Zero hour staff PGFs Skyward |
Classroom performance of students |
Team Goals:
Each team and/or elective area develops a goal and action plan for the year. These action plans focus on developing literacy and/or competency in a fundamental area of that discipline. The philosophy behind this approach is that assessment and student learning are most meaningful if they grow out of the concepts that define that discipline. Though goals are highlighted, action plans for individual teams are not included below, but are available for review.
Science—Increase the number of science students meeting standards on scientific inquiry by 10% each year as measured by the WASL.
History—The history department will develop assessments and activities that will focus students on meeting the following targets:
o Students will think critically about historical issues and express those ideas in appropriate written and verbal formats.
o Students will consider multiple viewpoints, form an educated opinion, and express that opinion clearly to their peers.
o Students will use primary source information to bolster their arguments in a variety of persuasive formats.
Choir— 60 percent of choir students will be able to sign an 8-measure exercise using numbers or solfege to accurately sing the correct pitches. Rhythms will consist of quarter notes, half notes, eighth notes and corresponding rests. The melody will include steps and skips outlining the tonic triad.
Band-- Band students will write 2-3 times per week during class in personal “rehearsal logs.” 75% will show master understanding of the concepts of “Quality of Sound” (tone quality, intonation, blend and balance) in their writings by correctly using those terms to evaluate performance recordings.
Life Fitness--80% of Life Fitness students will maintain an average of 85% or higher as measured by the new 2007-08 Life Fitness rubric.
Art— All art students will be able to draw a picture with three dimensional perspective by correctly using shading and two point perspective by the end of the quarter.
Spanish—Spanish students will increase their vocabulary and achieve at least 80% accuracy on their vocabulary assessments.
Health—All health students will assess themselves for each component of EQ, then choose four to create a goal for self improvement.
Industrial Technology-- 90% of Shop students will be able to identify tools in shop as well as know when and how to use them in different situations.
WASL and other data sources
WASL results as a percent meeting standard:
|
Mathematics |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|
Grade 7 |
53.3 |
45.8 |
45.1 |
55.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reading |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|
Grade 7 |
62.4 |
66.6 |
56.8 |
67.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Writing |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|
Grade 7 |
71 |
68 |
70.8 |
78.6 |
|
Mathematics |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|
Grade 8 |
N/A |
N/A |
44.8 |
53.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reading |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|
Grade 8 |
N/A |
N/A |
59.4 |
57.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Science |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
|
Grade 8 |
45.8 |
41.7 |
44.6 |
55.4 |
Other data you use
WASL data in the following areas:
· Special Education
· Low income
· Students scoring in each level
· Strands within each testing area (relative to state and district data)
· Released items and item analysis
· Individual WASL data in tested areas for current students based on previous year’s testing
· Classroom data based on previous year’s results
Level test data in the following areas:
· Reading and math
· Level test strand data
· Individual growth data for students from spring to spring in both strands and overall
Common assessments (Currently at different stages of development/implementation)
· Math unit tests
· 7th grade Language Arts writing common assessments
· 7th grade reading classroom-based assessments
· 8th grade writing common assessments
· 8th grade reading CBAs (in initial year of implementation)
· Rubric use in electives, health and fitness classes
· Rubric and standards-based assessment in the areas of Content Knowledge, Expression of Understanding and Social and Behavioral Skills that Support Learning.
Last updated: 02/01/2008