1 / 11

Jenkins County School System

Jenkins County School System. One Small, Poor, & Rural County’s Guide for System Improvement Planning or OMG, What Do We Do Now That We’re SACS/AdvancED Accredited?. Why bother with change? We’ve made AYP.

gore
Download Presentation

Jenkins County School System

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. Jenkins County School System One Small, Poor, & Rural County’s Guide for System Improvement Planning or OMG, What Do We Do Now That We’re SACS/AdvancED Accredited?

  2. Why bother with change? We’ve made AYP. • Historically each school had functioned as its own entity without consideration of vertical articulation & system goals. • New superintendent with system vision • District SACS accreditation • Shared budget constraints

  3. SACS District Accreditation • Executive Committee with vertical Standards Teams • Received district accreditation March, 2010 • Recommendations: 1) Develop district level master plan & assure alignment 2) Clearly define stakeholder involvement process 3) Process for monitoring standards adherence & System Improvement Team development 4) Staff development on 7 AdvancED standards.

  4. What We Wanted the Process to Look Like: • Grounded in research and best practices • Have flexibility built-in so we could make adjustments and address issues as they arose • Have the process fit our needs and not us fitting the model • Concentrate on a sustainable process and not just adding programs • Process that stays in place regardless of the players • Focus on what we can control: climate, curriculum, instruction, & assessment • As inclusive as possible • System Improvement Plan that would drive resource allocation

  5. JCSS System Improvement Team System Team responsibilities (pulled from SAR & QAR findings): • Comprehensive needs assessment (student achievement data & perception data) • Generate Master Plan • Review/monitor implementation of MP using data, monitor implementation of strategies, and maintain evaluation data. • Monitor AdvancED standards adherence of district & schools: develop adherence instruments & maintain artifacts. • Review vision/mission of system; ensure schools are in alignment • Communications: system as a unit & not collection of schools • Ensure alignment of schools to system plan; develop checklist for schools to use in SIP planning; and monitor implementation

  6. JCSS SIT Planning Process Step One Gather data for past 3 yrs. (CRCT, GHSGT, EOCT, & GWA) Analysis: Proficiency Domain Subgroups Root Cause Analysis Hypothesis Written report back to SIT Artifacts Step Two ID concerns for goal-setting; ID strengths for acceleration Set long-term, strategic goals. Ensure goals are measurable & establish timelines Develop system strategies for each goal. Establish responsibilities, budget, artifacts, & evaluation criteria. Step Three System plan developed based upon content/area working groups data & recommendations SIP implementation with continuous monitoring by SIT/District.

  7. Reading Team Susan Purvis, Chair Dee Brinson, ES Lyn Rhodes, MS Annette Cobb, HS Brenda Burke, ELL Math Team Jean Gay, Chair Racheal Johnson, ES Erika Van Buren, ES Monica Broxton, MS Cindi Drake, HS Social Studies Team Jennifer Brinson, Chair Michelle Orvin, ES Laura Hart, ES John Paul Hearn, MS Stakeholders Team J. Chance, Chair Parent & Community reps Vertical teacher reps Technology Team B. Carter, Chair Content Chairs SpEd Team M.McNeil-Acree, Chair Nichole Moulton, BOE April Kea, ES Michael Daniel, MS Pam Luke, Connections Sgt. Major Hayward Thompson, ROTC Dinah Cobb, MS Kathy Ellis, GLRS ELA Team K. Neville, Chair Patricia Frye, ES Anita Williams, ES Rhonda Clark, MS Valen Miller, HS Science Team J. Nash, Chair Monica Brinson, ES Tony Baulos, ES Jamar Dunnum, MS Nancy Deal, HS Professional Learning Team To Be Determined

  8. Content Team Information Rationale for Content Team creation was to 1) To productively involve as many stakeholders as possible for successful buy in and move beyond the mindset of THEY are forcing US to do something else, and 2) Tap the expertise of our faculty and staff: they best know the students, standards, assessments, and community • Content Teams are Chaired by a member of the SIT Team with vertical membership from all three schools and district personnel. • Content Team members solicit input and feedback from colleagues at their site: grade and/or content specific • Content Teams have specific tasks for each meeting and the Chair reports their findings back to the SIT Team. The tasks have included Data Analysis, Goal & Strategy Setting, and Monitoring & Evaluation. • Teams are given tools to guide their work and discussion. • Content Teams will remain intact to monitor their portion of the SIT. • Content Teams will be included as we expand those participating in district walkthroughs.

  9. Challenges: • Develop the plan & work the plan • Master Plan that incorporates most of what Content Teams want & meets program requirements • Responsibility of meeting AdvancED requirements: mindset that is systemic in thinking, planning, & implementation • Monitoring standards compliance of system & schools: developing process, protocols, & procedures • Developing & archiving evidence electronically • Sustaining continuous improvement throughout the system

  10. Joining Communities & Schools for Success Nichole Moulton nmoulton@jchs.com Debbie Fountain dfountain@jchs.com

More Related