1 / 35

CREATING THE BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION

CREATING THE BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION. BOARD PRESENTATION SEPTEMBER 6, 2007. St. Louis Public Schools: The Pathway to Creating the Best Choice in Urban Education. Proficiency targets met on MAP. Increased attendance. ACT score at 21 or better.

olin
Download Presentation

CREATING THE BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION

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. CREATING THE BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION BOARD PRESENTATION SEPTEMBER 6, 2007

  2. St. Louis Public Schools: The Pathway to Creating the Best Choice in Urban Education Proficiencytargets met onMAP Increased attendance ACT score at 21 or better Increased AP class offerings in ALL schools Algebra I in grade 8 Advanced math in 5th grade Reading on grade level by Grade 3 Proficient reading skills in grades 1-2

  3. FOUNDATIONS FOR SUCCESS IN URBAN SCHOOL SYSTEMS • Focus on Student Achievement • Development of Accountability Systems • Focus on the Lowest Performing Schools • Adoption of District-wide Curricula and Instructional Approaches • Commitment to Central Office Support through Professional Development • Reform Driven from the Classroom by Defining the Role of Central Office • Commitment to Data-driven Decision Making • Reform Level to Level in Incremental Stages • Commitment to Intensive Instruction in Literacy and Math Excerpt from mdrc.org/publications/47/execsum.html

  4. PRECONDITIONS FOR REFORM IN URBAN SCHOOL SYSTEMS • School Board Role that Supports Improved Student Achievement Versus Day-to-Day Operational Issues • Shared Vision Between Chief Executive of the District and the School Board Regarding Goals and Strategies for Reform • Capacity to Diagnose Instructional Problems that the District can Solve • Focus on Revamping District Operations to Serve and Support Schools • Matching New Resources to Support the Vision for Reform Excerpt from mdrc.org/publications/47/execsum.html

  5. Expansion of curriculum department to provide site support for standards-based reform • Systemized process for aligning curriculum • Design & implement the curriculum-based lesson design tool for all content areas • Alignment of Career &Technical Education courses to the core content/curriculum • Alignment of elective courses; removal of obsolete offerings • Standards-based reform (OCR implementation P-5) • Aligned curriculum K-12 • No standards-based curriculum; site based selection • Disjointed curriculum- math/science/ art/music 2006-2007 2005-2006 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 2004-2005 How has the district addressed STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT? How has the district addressed STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT? How has the district addressed STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

  6. Realignment of course offerings (catalog)- last revision was 2003-2004 • Extension of summer & SES programs to meet enrichment, as well as remedial needs as implemented during the regular school year • Systemized timeline for textbook adoption • Textbook titles narrowed to 1500- core & elective • Vertical alignment of pd/ap/AVID to support the core curriculum • Alignment of textbooks- selected core classes • Supplement-al programs aligned to support the core • 5000 textbook titles- math/science adoption began in 2001; all other textbooks were adopted in 1992-95 • Site-based supplemental programs on an “as needed” basis 2005-2006 2006-2007 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

  7. Moving toward being a school district; not a district of schools • Magnet school revitalization • Early preparation for expanding preschool • Expansion of ESOL Newcomers’ Center • 8th grade Algebra offerings/5th grade advanced math offering • PLC Instructional model • Intervention programs in reading/math for secondary students • Comprehensive Literacy Plan for all • Dual-credit offerings to eligible students • Expansion of Foreign Language offerings, K-12 • All student access to a rigorous curriculum • Movement away from a district of schools • Programmatic examination to become a school district • District of schools; not a school district 2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-2005 FUTURE FORECAST How has the district addressed STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

  8. Benchmark Assessments, data delivery solved and enhancement including AYP groupings • SLPSTAT Scorecard at District and Building Level • MSIP Compliance Department evaluations presented monthly • “Critical Friend” Reviews • SIP Review Protocol • Data Repository – drill down to child • Benchmark Assessments, alignment corrected, but problems with data delivery • Attempt at Scorecard for schools • Benchmark Assessments initiated, but problems with alignment • Attempt at MSIP compliance monitoring • Terra Nova and MAP Testing • Program Evaluations • Data distributed but not widely used 2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-2005 FUTURE FORECAST How has the district addressed THE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS?

  9. Increased Human Resources • School Site Facilities • Instructional coaches • Focused Professional Development • Increased Accountability • MAP Instructional Strategy Training • School Performance Teams Expanded • School Performance Teams established • SES afterschool programs • School Improvement Funds • School-by-school instructional reform models • MAP Attack established 2006-2007 2005-2006 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed LOWEST PERFORMING SCHOOLS?

  10. Professional Learning Communities will drive the curricula and instructional approach decisions • Tighter alignment between the written, taught, and tested curriculum • Benchmark data revealed need for specific instructional processes • Standards-based reform process began • Open Court Reading at elementary • Research-based instructional strategies imbedded • Textbooks were driving the instruction • Site based instructional strategy selection 2006-2007 FUTURE FORECAST 2005-2006 2004-2005 How has the district addressed DISTRICT-WIDE CURRICULA AND INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACHES?

  11. Five District Focal Points • 1. Curriculum-based lesson design • MAP strategies • Data driven decision-making • Learning communities • Positive learning environment • District-wide Literacy focus • Instructional Coaching model (CORE) • Continued on-going content training • CIPD collaboration • Coaches discontinued • National Staff Development Council standards used • Focused on new curriculum • Program specific PD • Instructional Coaches at elementary • Program vs. People development • Focused on new programs and the pd specific to programming • Content Supervisors provided PD 2005-2006 2006-2007 2004-2005 FUTURE FORECAST How has the district addressed PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT?

  12. Systematize use of PD evaluation on-line • PD budget includes building budgets for SIP support with accountability measures • Initiated on-line PD evaluation • PD budget initiated building budgets in mid-year for SIP support • Paper evaluations reviewed by data specialists • Paper/pencil evaluation – not reviewed regularly 2006-2007 2005-2006 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT?

  13. High Quality Teaching and Learning plan developed • Development of long range professional development plan in progress • Coaches receive intensive literacy training • Expand literacy training to elementary and secondary teachers in incremental stages • District-wide PDC established • District PD Plan developed and approved • PDC not representative district-wide • No district adopted PD Plan • Professional Development Committee (PDC) existed under MAP Attack 2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-2005 FUTURE FORECAST How has the district addressed PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT?

  14. Fred Jones model for discipline, instruction and motivation piloted in 18 schools with on-going support • New teacher -mentor program revised • Fred Jones model initiated in Pilot II group of 24 schools (42 total schools) • All new teachers trained in the Fred Jones model • 5 year plan for Leadership Academy for Character Education to train all principals/leaders • Development of cohesive model for new teacher induction and mentoring • Site based models for discipline • New teacher induction fragmented • Site based models for discipline • New teacher induction was benefits related; not curriculum 2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-2005 FUTURE FORECAST How has the district addressed PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT?

  15. Initiated collegial work environment and collaboration to focus on student achievement focus for ALL SLPS employees • CIPD collaboration for support to schools • Focused Organizational Assessment conducted • District-wide strategic planning includes multiple cross-functional teams--short and long range goals addressed • Departments collaborate on scheduling and supporting principals and schools in all areas • New Strategic Plan being developed through cross-functional team process • Education Officers role restructured to instructional focus • Expectation that departments work in isolation resulting in duplication or mismatched services • Organizational Assessment with • “Transition Team” 2005-2006 2006-2007 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed DEFINING THE ROLE OF CENTRAL OFFICE?

  16. Initiated PD to support staff in technology and diversity • Initiated Office Professionals Committee • Central Office staff support SPTs • Implementing on-going PD for support staff • Implementing new, on-going training in Customer Service to staff • Initiating networking and mentoring for support staff • Limited PD for support staff • Central Office staff support School Performance Teams (SPTs) and School Opening • Central Office performed its role to the schools in isolation of its needs 2006-2007 2005-2006 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed DEFINING THE ROLE OF CENTRAL OFFICE?

  17. Most schools extracted data for use • All leaders trained in using data • Professional Learning Communities (PLC’s) in some schools • Data Repository • All School Improvement teams trained to use data so it’s drilled to individual students • All schools as PLC’s • Merged data to SIS System • Hired data specialist for each Cluster • Some leaders trained in a system of using data • Few PLC’s in the high school • Data requests made to accountability office from schools • Limited access to data • Data delivery not timely • No formal training on the use of data • No PLC’s 2006-2007 FUTURE FORECAST 2005-2006 2004-2005 How has the district addressed DATA DRIVEN DECISION-MAKING?

  18. District required only one comprehensive plan • All schools formed teams with cluster accountability structures • School-wide plans will be web-based and transparent for all owners • Systemized process with rubrics to assess and monitor the plans for all schools • District attempted the Data Dashboard with multiple plans • Some schools formed teams • Schools created multiple plans with no accountability • School plans were developed in isolation 2006-2007 2005-2006 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed DATA DRIVEN DECISION-MAKING?

  19. Expanded AP offerings- 78 sections; all schools • Stringent program evaluations of all content-specific and supplemental programs to determine district direction • Direct Instruction for middle grades • Standards-based aligned curriculum in grades 6-12 in all content areas • Standards-based AP vertical alignment to the core content 2005-2006 • Began Open Court in all elementary schools 2006-2007 2004-2005 FUTURE FORECAST How has the district addressed INCREMENTAL GROWTH?

  20. Secondary reading intervention- Language!- meeting the needs of fluency and comprehension • Algebra Intervention Program (8-9) • 5th grade math advancement • Double-dose in reading and math in selective middle and high schools based on allocations • Continued implementation of 3-tiered framework • Awarded Early Reading First grant- P3-preschool • Double-dose in reading and math for secondary students • 3-tiered framework for reading intervention • Awarded the Reading 1st grant • Site-based; various basal readers • Various school reform models for Needs Improvement Schools 2006-2007 2005-2006 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed LITERACY AND MATH?

  21. End-of-Course Exams, DESE mandate (English, Biology, and Algebra) • Identify reading/math diagnostic assessments for P-12 • Identify comprehensive writing program P-11 • Curriculum-based lesson design tool for all content-areas • Full implementation of READ 180 for grades 6-8 • KG intervention- Waterford, Tier 1 intervention • DESE mandated developmental reading minutes- 90 minutes uninterrupted • ImplementedDirect Instruction for grades 6-8 reading intervention • READ 180 (grades 4-12) for 1 year and halted • Implemented OCR 11/2004 • Step Up to Writing- all high schools; selected middle and elementary schools 2005-2006 2006-2007 FUTURE FORECAST 2004-2005 How has the district addressed LITERACY AND MATH?

  22. District-wide Strategies and Accountability Strategic focus on performance standards Administrator assigned and responsible for every performance standard MSIP Office ensures compliance with accreditation standards Performance targets set for every school MSIP action plan created and implemented at building level Monthly Principals’ meeting with Superintendent on accreditation strategies SLPStat scorecard evaluates progress at Building Level and Central Office Recognition of school performance through board meetings, press releases, Parent Assembly, SLPS newsletter, etc.

  23. SLPSTAT PROCESS Accountability measures for each school building and the District –data indicators and targets MAP Communication Arts and Math (all levels) Reading on Grade Level - Terra Nova (all levels) Fifth Grade Enrollment in Advanced Math ACT scores (high schools) Student Attendance (all levels) Advanced Placement Courses (high school) College Enrollment (high school) Drop out rates (high school) Graduation Rates (high school) Highly Qualified Teachers (all levels) Accountability measures and methods of assessment for each office/department.

  24. MISSOURI SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (MSIP) MSIP ensures that all schools meet certain basic standards. Districts are given accreditation status of Accredited”, “Provisional Accreditation”, and “Unaccredited”. Three types of standards are included in MSIP reviews Resource Standards – Basic requirements districts must meet Process Standards – Instructional and administrative process used in schools Performance Standards – Measure of student performance Third cycle reviews through 2004-05 included all three types of standards. Beginning in 2005-06, the Fourth cycle reviews used only performance standards to determine accreditation status In 2004-05, SLPS was determined to be “Provisionally Accredited” Based on 2005-06, SLPS was determined to be “Unaccredited” for the 2007-2008 school

  25. NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND (NCLB) An accountability measure for all public schools with the goal that all children will be proficient in reading and math by 2014 Specific annual targets were set to measure “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) in communication arts and mathematics. These targets apply to the total and to all subgroups of students – race, free/reduced lunch, IEP, LEP AYP is measured by the percentage of students scoring Proficient or Advanced on the state MAP test in communication arts and mathematics. Science targets will be set for the first time in Spring 2008 and will be considered in AYP measurements. Through the Spring 2004 administration of the MAP, grades 3, 7, and 11 in communication arts and grades 4, 8, and 10 in mathematics were included in AYP In 2006, grades were expanded to 3-8 and 11 in communication arts and 3-8 and 10 in mathematics. Science grade levels will be 5, 8, and 11 in Spring 2008 In 2006, attendance and graduation rate targets were included as “additional indicators” that must also be met to make AYP

  26. MAP – Communication ArtsPercent Proficient & Advanced

  27. MAP – MathematicsPercent Proficient & Advanced

  28. Missouri Lets Schools SlideU.S. Report Says…..

  29. Each year, the Title I Office identifies schools in “Needs Improvement” and sends letters to each parent explaining their rights • Hosted the SES Community Fair • “The state had not asked to see district letters that should have been sent to parents, explaining their children could be eligible for tutoring or transfers from failing schools.” SLPS The Article How has the district addressed POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE?

  30. NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE • A report published in March, 2005 by the Center on Education Policy, noted that schools in very large, urban LEA’s and middle schools in general are most likely to be identified for improvement under NCLB • The overall percentage of public schools failing to make AYP in 2003-04 was approximately 21-22% of all public schools. The percentage of schools for individual states ranged from 4% to 77% • Based on Spring, 2006 MAP scores, DESE has notified school officials that in the state of Missouri 102 additional buildings and 167 districts will be in “needs improvement” in 2007-08 • As the NCLB targets increase each year, more and more schools and districts will fail to meet AYP standards

  31. The Need to Stop Doing • Most of us have an ever-expanding “to do” list, trying to build momentum by doing, doing, doing…and doing more. And it rarely works. Those who built “good to great” organizations, however, made as much use of “stop doing” lists as “to do” lists. They had the discipline to stop doing all the extraneous junk. ---Jim Collins

  32. Site-based Reform Models CREATING THE BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION

  33. Safe and Orderly Environment Owner Engagement High Quality Teaching and Teaching Accountability Leadership SLPStat Scorecard BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION Focused Professional Development

  34. Creating the Best Choice in Urban Education "The one thing that great leaders do is rally people to believe in a better future." -Marcus Buckingham

  35. CREATING THE BEST CHOICE IN URBAN EDUCATION

More Related