Colorado s Unified Improvement Plan for Schools for

Transcription

1 Colorado s Unified Improvement Plan for Schools for Organization Code: 0480 District Name: BOULDER VALLEY RE 2 Official 2014 SPF: 3 Year Section I: Summary Information about the School Directions: This section summarizes your school s performance on the federal and state accountability measures. In the table below, CDE has pre-populated the school s data in blue text. This data shows the school s performance in meeting minimum federal and state accountability expectations. Most of the data are pulled from the official School Performance Framework (SPF). This summary should accompany your improvement plan. Student Performance Measures for State and Federal Accountability Performance Indicators Measures/ Metrics Federal and State Expectations School Results Meets Expectations? Academic Achievement (Status) TCAP, CoAlt, Lectura, Escritura Description: % Proficient and Advanced (%P+A) in reading, writing, math and science Expectation: %P+A is above the 50 th percentile (from baseline) by using 1-year or 3-years of data R Elem MS HS Elem MS HS % 72.21% % M % 30.53% % W % 49.57% % Overall Rating for Academic Achievement: Meets * Consult your School Performance Framework for the ratings for each content area at each level. Academic Growth Median Growth Percentile Description: Growth in TCAP for reading, writing and math and growth on ACCESS for English language proficiency. Expectation: If school met adequate growth, MGP is at or above 45. If school did not meet adequate growth, MGP is at or above 55. R Median Adequate Growth Percentile (AGP) Median Growth Percentile (MGP) Elem MS HS Elem MS HS M W Overall Rating for Academic Growth: Approaching * Consult your School Performance Framework for the ratings for each content area at each level. ELP CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 1

2 Student Performance Measures for State and Federal Accountability (cont.) Performance Indicators Measures/ Metrics Federal and State Expectations School Results Meets Expectations? Academic Growth Gaps Median Growth Percentile Description: Growth for reading, writing and math by disaggregated groups. Expectation: If disaggregated groups met adequate growth, MGP is at or above 45. If disaggregated groups did not meet adequate growth, MGP is at or above 55. See your School Performance Framework for listing of median adequate growth expectations for your school s disaggregated groups, including free/reduced lunch eligible, minority students, students with disabilities, English Language Learners (ELLs) and students below proficient. See your School Performance Framework for listing of median growth by each disaggregated group. Overall Rating for Growth Gaps: - * Consult your School Performance Framework for the ratings for each student disaggregated group at each content area at each level. Graduation Rate Expectation: At 80% or above on the best of 4- year, 5-year, 6-year or 7-year graduation rate. At 80% or above Best of 4-year through 7- year Grad Rate 66.7% using a 6 year grad rate Approaching Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness Disaggregated Graduation Rate Expectation: At 80% or above on the disaggregated group s best of 4-year, 5-year, 6-year or 7-year graduation rate. Dropout Rate Expectation: At or below state average overall (baseline of ). At 80% or above for each disaggregated group See your School Performance Framework for listing of 4-year, 5-year, 6-year and 7- year graduation rates for disaggregated groups, including free/reduced lunch eligible, minority students, students with disabilities, and ELLs. Does Not Meet 3.9% 2.2% Meets Overall Rating for Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness: Approaching Mean Colorado ACT Composite Score Expectation: At or above state average (baseline of ) Meets Accountability Status and Requirements for Improvement Plan Summary of School Plan Timeline October 15, 2014 January 15, 2015 April 15, 2015 The school has the option to submit the updated plan through Tracker for public posting on SchoolView.org. The school UIP is due to CDE for review on January 15, 2015 and should be submitted through Tracker. For required elements in the improvement plan, go to the Quality Criteria at: The UIP is due to CDE for public posting on April 15, 2015 through Tracker. Some program level reviews will occur at this same time. For required elements in the improvement plan, go to the Quality Criteria at: CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 2

3 Program Identification Process Identification for School Directions for Completing Improvement Plan State Accountability Plan Type Assignment ESEA and Grant Accountability Title I Focus School Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) Plan type is assigned based on the school s overall School Performance Framework score for the official year (achievement, growth, growth gaps, postsecondary and workforce readiness). Title I school with a (1) low graduation rate (regardless of plan type), and/or (2) Turnaround or Priority Improvement plan type with either (or both) a) lowachieving disaggregated student groups (i.e., minority, ELL, IEP and FRL) or b) low disaggregated graduation rate. This is a three-year designation. Competitive grant (1003g) for schools identified as 5% of lowest performing Title I or Title I eligible schools, eligible to implement one of four reform models as defined by the USDE. Priority Improvement - Entering Year 2 as of July 1, 2015 Not identified as a Title I Focus School Not awarded a TIG Grant The school has not met state expectations for attainment on the SPF performance indicators and is required to adopt and implement a Priority Improvement Plan. The plan must be submitted by January 15, 2015 for review. The updated plan must also be submitted to CDE by April 15, 2015 to be posted on SchoolView.org. Note the specialized requirements for identified schools included in the Quality Criteria document. This school is not identified as a Focus School and does not need to meet those additional requirements. This school does not receive a current TIG award and does not need to meet those additional requirements. Diagnostic Review Grant Title I competitive grant that includes a diagnostic review and/or improvement planning support. Not awarded a current Diagnostic Review and Planning Grant This school has not received a current Diagnostic Review and Planning grant and does not need to meet those additional requirements. School Improvement Support (SIS) Grant Title I competitive grant that support implementation of major improvement strategies and action steps identified in the school s action plan. Not a current SIS Grantee This school has not received a current SIS grant and does not need to meet those additional requirements. Colorado Graduation Pathways Program (CGP) The program supports the development of sustainable, replicable models for dropout prevention and recovery that improve interim indicators (attendance, behavior and course completion), reduce the dropout rate and increase the graduation rate for all students participating in the program. Not a CGP Funded School This school does not receive funding from the CGP Program and does not need to meet these additional program requirements. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 3

4 Section II: Improvement Plan Information Additional Information about the School Comprehensive Review and Selected Grant History Related Grant Awards Diagnostic Review, School Support Team or Expedited Review External Evaluator Has the school received a grant that supports the school s improvement efforts? When was the grant awarded? Has (or will) the school participated in a Diagnostic Review, SST or Expedited Review? If so, when? Has the school partnered with an external evaluator to provide comprehensive evaluation? Indicate the year and the name of the provider/tool used. Yes, the school was awarded a Counselor Corps Grant in August, The purpose of the grant is to support school improvement with defined counselor functions. No No Improvement Plan Information The school is submitting this improvement plan to satisfy requirements for (check all that apply): State Accreditation Title I Focus School Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) Diagnostic Review Grant School Improvement Support Grant Colorado Graduation Pathways Program (CGP) Other: School Contact Information (Additional contacts may be added, if needed) 1 Name and Title Diana Gamboa, Director, Online Learning; Head of School, Boulder Universal diana.gamboa@bvsd.org Phone Mailing Address 6500 Arapahoe Rd, Boulder, CO Name and Title Sumi Bitner, Manager of Student Services, Boulder Universal sumi.bitner@bvsd.org Phone Mailing Address 6500 Arapahoe Rd, Boulder, CO CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 4

5 Section III: Narrative on Data Analysis and Root Cause Identification This section corresponds with the Evaluate portion of the continuous improvement cycle. The main outcome is to construct a narrative that describes the process and results of the analysis of the data for your school. The analysis should justify the performance targets and actions proposed in Section IV. Two worksheets have been provided to help organize your data analysis for your narrative. This analysis section includes: identifying where the school did not at least meet minimum state and federal accountability expectations; describing progress toward targets for the prior school year; describing what performance data were used in the analysis of trends; identifying trends and priority performance challenges (negative trends); describing how performance challenges were prioritized; identifying the root causes of performance challenges; describing how the root causes were identified and verified and what data were used; and describing stakeholder involvement in the analysis. Additional guidance on how to engage in the data analysis process is provided in Unified Improvement Planning Handbook. Data Narrative for School Directions: In the narrative, describe the process and results of the data analysis for the school, including (1) a description of the school and the process for data analysis, (2) a review of current performance, (3) trend analysis, (4) priority performance challenges and (5) root cause analysis. A description of the expected narrative sections are included below. The narrative should not take more than five pages. Two worksheets (#1 Progress Monitoring of Prior Year s Performance Targets and #2 Data Analysis) have been provided to organize the data referenced in the narrative. Data Narrative for School Description of School Setting and Process for Data Analysis: Provide a very brief description of the school to set the context for readers (e.g., demographics). Include the general process for developing the UIP and participants (e.g., SAC). Review Current Performance: Review the SPF and local data. Document any areas where the school did not at least meet state/ federal expectations. Consider the previous year s progress toward the school s targets. Identify the overall magnitude of the school s performance challenges. Trend Analysis: Provide a description of the trend analysis that includes at least three years of data (state and local data). Trend statements should be provided in the four performance indicator areas and by disaggregated groups. Trend statements should include the direction of the trend and a comparison (e.g., state expectations, state average) to indicate why the trend is notable. Priority Performance Challenges: Identify notable trends (or a combination of trends) that are the highest priority to address (priority performance challenges). No more than 3-5 are recommended. Provide a rationale for why these challenges have been selected and address the magnitude of the school s overall performance challenges. Root Cause Analysis: Identify at least one root cause for every priority performance challenge. Root causes should address adult actions, be under the control of the school, and address the priority performance challenge(s). Provide evidence that the root cause was verified through the use of additional data. A description of the selection process for the corresponding major improvement strategies is encouraged. Narrative: Boulder Universal is a multi-district online school. The majority of the student body is comprised of students attending BVSD schools in grades 4-12th. We accept few out of district students, generally when their home district is not able to meet the student's needs in their online school. Our student body increases from an August enrollment of 125 full time online students to over 300 by the end of the school year. The majority of those arriving after October count participate in a concurrent enrollment with half their day in a traditional school environment. This is the second year of a reorganization including new leadership and increased staff in critical support areas. The UIP was developed in collaboration with staff using data-driven processes and analytics informed by the qualitative analysis of students unique needs, anecdotal information from staff, and parent input. Boulder Universal s combined D & F rate is currently 20.6%, this is comparable to other BVSD schools. Over the past year, we improved progress monitoring (instituting a midpoint deadline), instituted early identification of skill deficits, and a initiated a comprehensive Multi-Tiered Success Strategy program. We improved our graduation rate from last year, and although our drop-out rate increased, it remains below the State expectation. We believe that as our intensive work in the full MTSS and ICAP process continues, we will see increased graduation rates in the 4 and 5 year cohorts as well as decrease in our drop-out rate. While our scores in Academic Achievement have improved; we have only begun the work in validating our curriculum alignment and the CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 5

6 differentiation of instructional strategies that would support improvement in both Academic Achievement and Academic Growth Gaps. As we validate all of our courses we are ensuring materials and instructional delivery methods specifically address the needs of our disaggregated groups. Boulder Universal s composite ACT exceeds the Colorado state composite and is consistent with other BVSD schools. Although this is a metric we monitor, it is not our primary focus this year. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 6

7 Worksheet #1: Progress Monitoring of Prior Year s Performance Targets Directions: This chart supports analysis of progress made towards performance targets set for the school year (last year s plan). While this worksheet should be included in your UIP, the main intent is to record your school s reflections to help build your data narrative. Performance Indicators Targets for school year (Targets set in last year s plan) Performance in ? Was the target met? How close was the school to meeting the target? Brief reflection on why previous targets were met or not met. Academic Achievement (Status) Academic Growth Academic Growth Gaps Our target for school year was to increase our goal to meet the minimum expectation by the State, thus setting our goal at 73% proficiency in reading. Our goal for math was set at 31% just slightly above the State expectation. Our goal for writing was to meet or exceed 50%. To demonstrate Academic Growth Performance, AG must be below 60 but at or above 45. To demonstrate Academic Growth Performance, AG must be below 60 but at or above 45. MGP for Reading and Writing was targeted to be in the 45 th percentile. MGP target for Math for disaggregated groups was set for the 55 th percentile. Although we increased our reading proficiency, we did not meet our goal of 73%. Results were 5 ½ percentage points below the state expectation in reading. We did exceed the State s expectation on both math and writing. We exceed the State s expectation by over 6 points and exceeded our own goal with a result of 36.67%. We exceeded the State s expectation by 9.69% and met our own goal of exceeding 50%. Single year N does not capture growth data. Three year growth data indicates that growth in Reading and Writing meets the expectation. Single year N does not capture growth data. Three year growth data indicates that growth in Math does not meet the expected growth. Data for disaggregated groups continues to be insufficient for meaningful analysis for all sub-groups. Data for disaggregated groups continues to be insufficient for meaningful analysis for all The reading target was set at 73%, although low, this was the first time the goal was set at or above the State expectation and we did improve from the previous year and are approaching the State expectation. Academic Growth data and Academic Growth Gap data continue to present a challenge for us in that our sample set is small, thus producing large effects on data that inhibit informative analysis. We are adopting a different data analysis strategy that should more accurately inform our work. PSWR: Although our drop-out rate did increase, we remain below the State expectations. The actual number of students dropping out is the same as last year, the rate increase stems from a decrease in enrollment. We would expect a corresponding decrease, however, a deeper look at the students reveals that 2 students had previously dropped out and this was an attempt to recover them. Another four students were adjudicated for severe truancy in other District schools. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 7

8 Performance Indicators Targets for school year (Targets set in last year s plan) Performance in ? Was the target met? How close was the school to meeting the target? Brief reflection on why previous targets were met or not met. sub-groups. Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness Our targets for were to increase our graduation rate (64.5%) and to decrease our drop-out rate (1.9%). We did not set a goal for our ACT scores, as they are above the State expectation. We improved our graduation rate with an increase of 2.2% (66.67), however, we are not yet above the state minimum of 80% - and we are below our District average. Our ACT score did increase marginally with a.gain of.1. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 8

9 Worksheet #2: Data Analysis Directions: This chart supports planning teams in recording and organizing observations about school-level data in preparation for writing the required data narrative. Planning teams should describe positive and negative trends for all of the four performance indicators using at least three years of data and then prioritize the performance challenges (based on notable trends) that the school will focus its efforts on improving. The root cause analysis and improvement planning efforts in the remainder of the plan should be aimed at addressing the identified priority performance challenge(s). A limited number of priority performance challenges is recommended (no more than 3-5); a performance challenge may apply to multiple performance indicators. At a minimum, priority performance challenges must be identified in any of the four performance indicator areas where minimum state and federal expectations were not met for accountability purposes. Furthermore, schools are encouraged to consider observations recorded in the last year s targets worksheet. Finally, provide a brief description of the root cause analysis for any priority performance challenges. Root causes may apply to multiple priority performance challenges. You may add rows, as needed. Performance Indicators Description of Notable Trends (3 years of past state and local data) Priority Performance Challenges Root Causes Academic Achievement (Status) Reading scores have increased, however they remain below the State expectation. For two years we made only minor gains in Math; in the past year we made substantial gains. Identify the reading level of every new student prior to enrollment through previous literacy assessments or assign Reading Plus (Insight) assessment for placement. Carefully consider students who read below grade level; determine supports needed for successful course completion. Assign reading skill development with specific goals. Identify the numeracy level of every new student prior to enrollment through previous State assessments or assign college math readiness assessment for placement. Carefully consider students who have math deficiencies for math and science courses; determine supports needed for successful course completion. Assign independent math skill development with specific goals. Previously, the school lacked a means of understanding students' reading proficiency when they were enrolled. Many students had not taken their State assessments for several to many years, some as a result of illness/injury, and others for truancy. Given that online courses require independent reading, we determined that this metric was essential to student success in online courses. Additional reading skill development is now offered through the use of Reading Plus. The number of students assessed and placed last year was minimal as implementation, training, and assessment took more time than expected. This year we hired someone with more experience in this area. Similarly, the school lacked a means of identifying a student s level of mathematics skill proficiency at enrollment. Again, many students had not taken State assessments for multiple years. We located an assessment used by the Montana University System (UM, MSU, private, and tribal colleges) with strong results including readiness for college math and significantly reducing the need for remediation. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 9

10 Performance Indicators Description of Notable Trends (3 years of past state and local data) Priority Performance Challenges Root Causes Academic Growth Currently we do not have enrollment large enough to have useful growth data, particularly in target groups. Given that our enrollment is small and our participation rates are below 95%, aggregate data is not available for some groups, thus we need to establish data analysis sessions that allow us to identify aggregate needs. Over a three year period, we ve experienced small to moderate gains in reading proficiency, writing proficiency, and mathematics proficiency and have remained stable in science proficiency. Our assessment participation rates are highly affected by a single absence, refusal, or not counted. Academic Growth Gaps Our mathematics scores increased though the growth is marginal. We stand only 3 points above the state expectation. Our priority is to identify the gaps in mathematic skills on an individual basis and to develop an appropriate timeline for remediating skills alongside current math skill development. Without the data we are not seeing what is or is not working. We ve decided to take a different approach conducting a manual data analysis on each student, marking trends, and discerning appropriate resources and support to address deficiencies and identified areas for growth. Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness Although our graduation rate has increased, we have not met the State expectation. Our priority is to identify and address all elements leading to on-time graduation and to identify the critical areas that impact graduation (course completion, expanded time) to improve our graduation rate to be at or above 80%. Drop out recovery been assigned to another school more conducive to the need We set new expectations that all students would have a plan of study to graduate with their 4 year cohort and if necessary, would be required to attend summer school to meet the 4 year timeline. Over the previous three years, our ACT results remain within a half point range from one year to the next. We will provide all juniors with a reminder that ACT exams are available in all states and international locations. We continue to have high participation and high achievement rates for the ACT because the assessment is offered on multiple dates and is available in all states and locations world-wide. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 10

11 Section IV: Action Plan(s) This section addresses the Plan portion of the continuous improvement cycle. First, identify annual performance targets and the interim measures. This will be documented in the required School Target Setting Form on the next page. Then move into action planning, which should be captured in the Action Planning Form. School Target Setting Form Directions: Complete the worksheet below. Schools are expected to set their own annual targets for academic achievement, academic growth, academic growth gaps, and postsecondary and workforce readiness. At a minimum, schools should set targets for each of the performance indicators (i.e., Academic Achievement, Academic Growth, Academic Growth Gaps, Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness) where state expectations are not met; targets should also be connected to prioritized performance challenges identified in the data narrative (section III). Consider last year s targets (see Worksheet #1) and whether adjustments need to be made. For each annual performance target, identify interim measures that will be used to monitor progress toward the annual targets at least quarterly during the school year. Implications of Colorado Measures of Academic Success (CMAS) on Target Setting: During the school year, Colorado is transitioning from reading, writing and math TCAP assessments to CMAS PARCC English language arts and math assessments. These assessments measure related, but different content standards and are expected to have different proficiency levels. As a result, setting targets based on the percent of students scoring proficient and advanced may not be appropriate. Furthermore, CDE does not yet know if student growth percentiles and median student growth percentiles will be available for accountability, planning or reporting use. It is known that adequate growth percentiles will not be available next year for results. Target setting is still expected to occur in the UIP process during this transition period. However, some modifications in typical practice may be needed. Refer to the UIP Handbook and guidance documents on the UIP website for options and considerations. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 11

12 School Target Setting Form Performance Indicators Measures/ Metrics Priority Performance Challenges Annual Performance Targets Interim Measures for Major Improvement Strategy R 75% proficient & advanced 75% proficient & advanced Identify reading level of every student; assign guided and independent skill development and remediation. Guided and independent reading skill development using Reading Plus; teacher FTE for reading coordinator. Academic Achievement (Status) TCAP, CoAlt/, Lectura, Escritura, K-3 literacy (READ Act), local measures M W 35% proficient & advanced 50% proficient & advance 40% proficient & advanced 60% proficient & advanced Identify math skill level of every student; assign guided and independent skill development and remediation. Identification of struggling writers; extension for advanced writers. Guided and independent skill development and remediation using EdReady. Guided support for struggling writers using multiple media for planning and skill development. S > 50% Strong & Dist >50% Strong & Dist Purchased items for a mobile science lab. Purchase high quality application for online labs. Academic Growth Median Growth Percentile (TCAP & ACCESS), local measures R M W Currently we do not have enrollment large enough to have useful growth data, particularly in target groups. MGP for disaggregated groups will be in the 45 th percentile. MGP for disaggregated groups will be in the 45 th percentile. MGP for disaggregated groups will be in the 45 th percentile. MGP for disaggregated groups will be in the 55 th percentile. MGP for disaggregated groups will be in the 45 th percentile. MGP for disaggregated groups will be in the 45 th percentile. Conduct a collaborative review of the specific data for every student; identify the root cause for all changes in progress. Comprehensive review of all curricula primary focus on Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies courses. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 12

13 ELP MGP for ELD/ELL learners will be in the 45 th percentile. MGP for ELD/ELL learners will be in the 45 th percentile. Academic Growth Gaps Median Growth Percentile, local measures R Currently we do not have a formal MTSS system, we did employ RtI strategies, but the systemic approach of MTSS will reach more students before issues arise and use a databased problem-solving approach. All students will have a baseline score indicating reading proficiency and associated grade level. All students will be reading at or above grade level or demonstrate not less than 1 years growth. Target groups Minority students and ELD/ELL students. Through the implementation of a formal MTSS system, we will identify growth gaps, deliver appropriate supports, and monitor progress toward successful course completion and skill development. M All students will have a baseline score indicating mathematics proficiency and associated grade level. More than 75% of seniors will demonstrate college readiness in math. W Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness Graduation Rate Disaggregated Grad Rate Previously we did not have the counselor resources to develop and implement a robust ICAP and PSWR system specific to online students. When students are connected to their life beyond school, especially students of poverty and students of color, they have a much greater rate of graduating from high school and continuing Our graduation rate will meet or exceed 80%. Our graduation rate will meet or exceed 75%. Our graduation rate will meet or exceed 80%. Our graduation rate will meet or exceed 75%. Fully develop ICAP process and personalized learning plans. Target groups Minority students and ELD/ELL students. Corps Grant counselor; College Night event Corps Grant counselor, intensive support for every student with additional emphasis on target groups. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 13

14 their post-secondary education. Dropout Rate Our drop-out rate will be less than 3.9%. Our drop-out rate will be less than 2%. Advisory course and intensive counselor support, meeting with every senior. College visits. Intensive support career selection, post-secondary training needs, college readiness Mean CO ACT The composite ACT score will meet or exceed 22. The composite ACT score will meet or exceed 22. Application to identify college readiness in math; independent practice for ACT exam. Availability of an application that students can access 24/7 and is offered at no cost to student/family. Other PWR Measures All teachers and mentors will engage in PD regarding MTSS and ICAP. Develop a similar training for parents. Parents and staff will engage in PD regarding MTSS, ICAP, and PSWR. Parents and staff will collaborate to improve school s ability in these areas. PD on MTSS, ICAP, and data review of students. Develop a connectedness of PSWR tasks (ICAP), events (College & Career visits/fairs) and skill development in literacy and numeracy. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 14

15 Action Planning Form for and Directions: Identify the major improvement strategy(s) for and that will address the root causes determined in Section III. For each major improvement strategy, identify the root cause(s) that the action steps will help to dissolve. Then, indicate which accountability provision or grant opportunity it will address. In the chart below, provide details about key action steps necessary to implement the major improvement strategy. Details should include the action steps that will be taken to implement the major improvement strategy, a general timeline, resources that will be used to implement the actions, and implementation benchmarks. Additional rows for action steps may be added. While the template provides space for three major improvement strategies, additional major improvement strategies may also be added. To keep the work manageable, however, it is recommended that schools focus on no more than 3 to 5 major improvement strategies. Major Improvement Strategy #1: Identify reading levels of all students; assign guided and independent support for skill development; progress monitor Root Cause(s) Addressed: _Reading scores are below state expectation; growth over time is positive but marginal Accountability Provisions or Grant Opportunities Addressed by this Major Improvement Strategy (check all that apply): State Accreditation Title I Focus School Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) Diagnostic Review Grant School Improvement Support Grant Colorado Graduation Pathways Program (CGP) Other: Description of Action Steps to Implement the Major Improvement Strategy Timeline Key Personnel* Resources (Amount and Source: federal, state, and/or local) Implementation Benchmarks Status of Action Step* (e.g., completed, in progress, not begun) Hire experienced reading coordinator Nov May Identify reading proficiency level for every student Determine progress/remediation timeline per individual need Progress monitor, communicate progress, and adjust plan as needed Nov Dec Aug - May Aug late Sept Jan - Feb Sept - Oct March Oct & Mar Reading coordinator Judy Allison Judy Allison RC, Mentors, Counselors District FTE.125 November 1 st, 2014 Completed; hired reading coordinator, PD with District Literacy Coordinator. Software application and licenses Data support A Stogbaugh; samples from other schools PT conferences; access to data November 15 th, 2014 February 2, 2015 April 17th & 20 th P/T conferences Set students up with account To be determined per student Provide student and parent report of reading proficiency and growth. * Note: These two columns are not required to meet state or federal accountability requirements, though completion is encouraged. Status of Action Step may be required for certain grants. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 15

16 Major Improvement Strategy #2: Develop a connectedness of ICAP to PSWR by participating in the Colorado Counselor Corps Grant; increase graduation rate, decrease drop-out rate, and increase the number of students graduating in 4 years Root Cause(s) Addressed: Low graduation rate especially among target groups; rate is over 6 years Accountability Provisions or Grant Opportunities Addressed by this Major Improvement Strategy (check all that apply): State Accreditation Title I Focus School Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) Diagnostic Review Grant School Improvement Support Grant Colorado Graduation Pathways Program (CGP) Other: Colorado Counselor Corps Grant Description of Action Steps to Implement the Major Improvement Strategy Timeline Key Personnel* Resources (Amount and Source: federal, state, and/or local) Implementation Benchmarks Status of Action Step* (e.g., completed, in progress, not begun) Hire counselor for grant Aug Interview team Hire by Aug 15th Completed Develop the success plan portfolio to store all relevant ICAP & PSWR information Sept - Nov Christina McCann District core software application Google Apps Review document Completed Corps Grant Professional Development 7/31, 9/23, 10/10, Christina McCann Colorado Corps Grant mileage to attend meetings As directed by CCG Completed Attend Corps Grant Conference 11/5-7 Christina McCann Colorado Corps Grant travel As directed by CCG Completed Meet with every full-time BU senior to implement ICAP and set PSWR goals, identify resource needs to meet graduation plan Nov - Jan Christina McCann & Kelly Carlson Colorado Corps Grant Yr 2 Meet with all seniors at least once by 5/5/2015 All 9 th through 11 th grade by 5/22/2015 In progress Communicate progress ICAP, PSWR goals, graduation plan with parents By Jan Christina McCann & Kelly Carlson Colorado Corps Grant Yr 2 At Spring P/T conferences Purchase software to support ICAP & PSWR work for middle school students Dec 2014 Diana Gamboa Legal review and contract negotiation In progress CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 16

17 Meet with all other full-time BU students (9-11) to implement ICAP and set PSWR goals, identify resource needs to meet graduation plan Jan - May Christina McCann & Kelly Carlson Colorado Corps Grant Yr 2 Not yet begun Review progress and identify areas of growth and revision May Aug Christina McCann & Kelly Carlson Colorado Corps Grant Yr 2 Not yet begun Implement revised process with new students; set dates for communication and progress Aug Christina McCann & Kelly Carlson Colorado Corps Grant Yr 2 Not yet begun * Note: These two columns are not required to meet state or federal accountability requirements, though completion is encouraged. Status of Action Step may be required for certain grants. CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 17

18 Major Improvement Strategy #3: Establish a formal Multi-Tiered Success Strategy system to provide continuous improvement in instruction using a data-based problem-solving approach Root Cause(s) Addressed: School lacks a systemic, documented, data-based problem-solving approach to address the participation in assessment, aligned curriculum, and instructional strategies that support student achievement Accountability Provisions or Grant Opportunities Addressed by this Major Improvement Strategy (check all that apply): State Accreditation Title I Focus School Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) Diagnostic Review Grant School Improvement Support Grant Colorado Graduation Pathways Program (CGP) Other: Description of Action Steps to Implement the Major Improvement Strategy Timeline Key Personnel* Resources (Amount and Source: federal, state, and/or local) Implementation Benchmarks Status of Action Step* (e.g., completed, in progress, not begun) Conduct a data analysis review of every student (because N groups are too small to produce data on SPF report) Develop a process to review and align core curriculum to State and District standards Jan 5 th Aug & Dec All staff; teachers, mentors, counselors, admin Use PD day to conduct comprehensive data review Print data reports from state create place to track trends All teachers PD time Distribute overview; test with any current course; review & revise Review matrix for vetting curriculum Jan 5th All staff PD Teachers test the spreadsheet with single course. Access District CEDs & State standards for each content Determine the proficiency of every student for literacy and numeracy. Jan - April Nov - May Aug - Sept All teachers Reading Coordinator, Math Teacher, Counselor PD Tagging online lessons LMS vendor set up in LMS FTE Reading Coordinator for ;.15 for Contact LMS vendor for training to use tagging. Enroll all students in Reading Plus for Insight and in EdReady for college math readiness Not yet begun In progress Designing curriculum with differentiation first In progress Curriculum design with ELD/ELL learners in mind In progress CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 18

19 * Note: These two columns are not required to meet state or federal accountability requirements, though completion is encouraged. Status of Action Step may be required for certain grants. Section V: Appendices Some schools will need to provide additional forms to document accountability or grant requirements: Additional Requirements for Turnaround Status Under State Accountability (Required) Tiered Intervention Grantee (TIG) (Required) Title I Schools Operating a Schoolwide Program (Optional) CDE Improvement Planning Template for Schools (Version Last Updated: June, ) 19