1 / 9

South Kitsap School District

South Kitsap School District. District Improvement Plan February 2, 2011. 2006-2007 & 2007-2008: SKSD did not meet AYP in math in the three grade level bands (elementary, middle, and high school)

wesley
Download Presentation

South Kitsap School District

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. South Kitsap School District District Improvement Plan February 2, 2011

  2. 2006-2007 & 2007-2008: SKSD did not meet AYP in math in the three grade level bands (elementary, middle, and high school) “Unfortunately, it’s easy to get in [sanction mode] and hard to get out.” (Bob Harmon, Assistant Superintendent, Special Programs and Federal Accountability, OSPI) To exit sanction mode, a district must meet AYP in 111/111 cells—for two years in a row Plan is Required and meets OSPI requirements Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP):A Historical Perspective in SKSD

  3. Compelling Track: Ensure High Levels of Learning for ALL Students A Successful Child is Whole: Safe, Challenge, Connected, Cared For, Healthy and Hopeful Collaboration is Key: As a Professional Learning Community our Systems will Ensure Success for Every Child Compliant/Action Track: Meaningful, Data-Driven District and School Action Plans Increase Success in Mathematics for All Students Increased achievement with Special Education and Low Income Students; Meet AYP as a District Continued Implementation of PRTI: Strategic and Systemic Interventions for our Neediest Students Student Success 10-11

  4. The “Umbrella Innovation” driving improvement in SKSD Professional Learning Communities “A PLC is composed of collaborative teams whose members work interdependently to achieve common goals linked to the purpose of learning for all.” (R. DuFour; 2006) SK District Improvement Plan

  5. Key Practice: Development of Priority Standards “The knowledge, skills, and dispositions that have endurance, leverage, and are essential for preparing students for readiness at the next level.” (Reeves; 2002) Priority standards involve the non-negotiable skills that students must acquire in order to be successful SKSD focus: development of District-wide priority standards, grades K-12, in mathematics and literacy Question #1:What do we want students to learn?

  6. Key Practice: Development of Common Assessments Formative in nature Assessments FOR, rather than OF, learning Identify students who need additional help Allows PLC teams to share best instructional practices Black and Wiliam’s study on the use of Common Formative Assessments: “Effect sizes ranged between .4 and .7, with formative assessment apparently helping low-achieving students, including students with learning disabilities, even more than it helped other students.” (Black and Wiliam, 1998b) Question #2:How do we know they are learning?

  7. Key Interests: Systemic support for our Level 1 and 2 students Shift in school cultures “When staff members see examples of success, they begin to believe that all students can be successful.” (DuFour, 2002) The System: Response to Intervention (RtI) Differentiated Instruction Intervention/Enrichment Blocks; “double dosing” support In SKSD, from Extended “Day” to Extended “Learning!” -After school to Intervention support for struggling students during the school day K-6: Intervention Blocks 7-12: Advisory/Tutorial Period Question #3:What do we do if they don’t learn?

  8. Mathematics Growth in Elementary: Measurements of Student Progress (MSP) Scores, Spring 2010: Grade: SKSD WA State Difference 3rd 74.5% 61.7% +12.8% 4th 62.6% 53.6% +9.0% 5th 63.3% 53.6% +9.7% 6th 64.7% 51.8% +12.9% Note: All 4 Title I Schools Met AYP Ongoing Focus on JH and HS Math Instruction Grade: SKSD WA State Difference 7th 50.3% 55.2% -4.9% 8th 50.6% 51.5% -0.9% 10th 39.5% 41.6% -2.1% Successes and Opportunities for Improvement

  9. Ongoing Professional Development Ongoing work with all secondary math teachers Training in the effective use of the “Origo” supplemental math materials (Math teachers, Special Education teachers and Para-professionals) Fall Math RtI Training in Seattle Mike Mattos in SKSD April 11 and 12 Tigard/Tualatin School District visitations involving HS and JH Math and Special Education teachers Improving as a K-12 System

More Related