Cherry Hill Elementary/Middle School SIG Monitoring Team’s First Onsite Visit Feedback
Baltimore City Public School System (BCPSS) Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG 2) Tier I School
2010 Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG II), section 1003(g)
SIG Monitoring Team’s First Onsite Visit Feedback for 2011-2012
Year 1
School: Cherry Hill Elementary/Middle School LEA: Baltimore City Public School System (BCPSS)Principal: Tracey Garrett LEA Turnaround Director: Beth Nolan
LEA Central Support Team Lead: Sonja Brookins Santelises SIG Team’s School Visit: September 29, 2011
Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG): The School Improvement Grant (SIG) Program, authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, provides funding through State educational agencies (SEAs) to local educational agencies (LEAs) with the lowest-achieving schools that have the greatest need for the funds and demonstrate the strongest commitment to use the funds to raise significantly the achievement of students. The United States Department of Education (USED) views the large infusion of Federal funds into the SIG program through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) as a historic opportunity to address one of the most intractable challenges for America’s education system: turning around or closing down our Nation’s persistently lowest-achieving schools. Maryland’s approved application reflects Secretary Duncan’s determination to ensure that SIG funds are used to implement one of four rigorous school intervention models—turnaround, restart, transformation, and school closure.
Maryland State Department of Education’s (MSDE) Monitoring of LEA Approved SIG II Application: As approved by USED, MSDE will monitor each LEA that receives a school improvement grant to ensure that it is implementing its intervention model fully and effectively in Maryland’s Tier I and Tier II schools. Both PGCPS and BCPSS must submit to MSDE a quarterly summary report of the LEA monitoring/oversight that has been completed and the progress the Tier I or Tier II schools have made towards achieving their goals. In addition, MSDE will perform onsite visits to these same schools. The primary function of the onsite visits is to review and analyze all facets of a school’s implementation of the identified approved intervention model and collaborate with leadership, staff, and other stakeholders pertinent to goal attainment. MSDE’s School Improvement Grant Monitoring Teams (SIG Teams) will conduct three onsite monitoring visits annually (Introductory/Start Up One Day Visit; Interim Midyear Two Day Visit; and End of Year One Day Visit) with the school leadership team and district level team composed of staff responsible for the technical assistance, administrative support, and monitoring.
SIG II Monitoring Team’s First Onsite Visit Purpose:
The Introductory Start-up Onsite Visit is the first opportunity for the SIG Monitoring Team to discuss BCPSS’ approved SIG Plan for Cherry Hill Elementary/Middle School with school and district staff to ensure that all school system stakeholders are familiar with and understand the approved SIG Plan. In addition, BCPSS was required to present an update on the system’s progress in the implementation of its approved plan for Cherry Hill Elementary Middle School. During this update, LEA and School Staff shared what has been implemented; what has been partially implemented; and what has not been implemented at this time. BCPSS also discussed potential changes it needs to make in the school’s approved plan for the first year of SIG. MSDE toured the building.
BCPSS Intervention models for SIG II Schools:
School / Intervention ModelBenjamin Franklin @ Masonville Cove High School / Turnaround Model
Frederick Douglass High School / Turnaround Model
Cherry Hill Elementary/Middle School / Restart Model
The following individuals participated in the SIG Team’s Visit on September 27, 2010:
· SIG MSDE Monitoring Team Leader: Mozelle Mickens
· SIG MSDE Monitoring Team Members: Lynne Muller, Mary Jo Harris, Michelle Goady
· Principal: Tracey Garrett
· Assistant Principal: Valencia Hernandez Porter
· Restart Partners: Chris Maher, Katherine Reed
· BCPSS Title I Coordinator Debbie Holley
· BCPSS Executive Director Roseann Armes
SIG Monitoring Team’s First Onsite Visit Feedback for Cherry Hill Elementary/Middle School:
· TABLE 1: Based on its first monitoring onsite visit, the SIG Monitoring Team determined overarching issues on BCPSS’ Approved SIG Plan. BCPSS must submit required responses to MSDE by the identified timeline.
Special Note: All required responses submitted to MSDE on or before December 30, 2011 must be submitted at the same time.
· TABLE 2: MSDE required each SIG Monitoring Team to ask the LEA and school specific questions related to its SIG approved plan. This table reflects what BCPSS shared verbally with the SIG Monitoring Team. The SIG Monitoring Team compiled information that was shared by the LEA and school in this table. This information will be reviewed and used by the SIG Monitoring Team during its second onsite visit.
· TABLE 3: MSDE developed a SIG Monitoring Tool based on the LEA’s approved plan for a specific school. This tool was used by the SIG Monitoring Team to determine the school system’s implementation of the approved plan. The SIG Monitoring Team compiled information that was shared by the LEA and school in this table. This information will be reviewed and used by the SIG Monitoring Team during its second onsite visit.
Cherry Hill Elementary/ Middle School(from the Baltimore City Public Schools SIG Executive Summary)
Cherry Hill Elementary /Middle is partnered with Friendship Schools, which brings extensive experience in school management in Washington, D.C. & Baltimore, with a focus on Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics (STEM) & academic rigor. Teachers will be asked to reapply for their jobs & one third of the teachers have been replaced with new staff. Friendship will focus on the professional development of staff, student supports & climate, & the academic offerings of the school, making Cherry Hill into a STEM themed school in which kids are challenged & thrive. Finally, Friendship has established a partnership with the Urban Teacher Center, to create a pathway that brings only highly effective teachers into the school system.
Table 1
SIG Monitoring Team First Onsite Visit’s Overarching Issues onBCPSS’ Approved SIG Plan for Cherry Hill Elementary/Middle School /
Issues / Required Response from BCPSS / Timeline /
1. The plan calls for a Director of Instruction position at the school which seems critical to the success of the proposed plan. / Provide an update on the resolution of the Director of Instruction position in writing. / December 30, 2011
2. The Needs Assessment indicated serious attendance and behavioral issues at the school last year. However during this visit, the principal indicated only 2 students had attendance issues and only 1 student had a behavioral issue – all students moved out of the attendance area during the summer which eliminated the need for proactive implementation of attendance and behavior plans. / Request to see first quarter documentation of attendance records. / January 15, 2012
Table 2
Overarching Questions for the District Central Support Team and the School Staff / SIG Monitoring Team Consensus FeedbackOn Overarching Questions from the 1st Onsite Visit at
Cherry Hill Elementary/ Middle School /
1. How have the LEA and the school ensured that all school stakeholders have been informed about the SIG approved plan for the school?
What future activities are planned to inform all stakeholders as the plan is being implemented? / · There were community forums.
· Parent liaisons were provided information about the School Improvement Grant to share with constituents.
· Information on the grant was included in literature that was sent home to parents.
· The Cherry Hill Coalition became involved in the school. It involves local churches and the University of Maryland. As they conduct parent meetings and Cherry Hill Coalition Meetings the principal will share information. As a partner there is discussion about building a community center in the area.
· Teachers have increased communication with parents.
2. What future activities are planned to inform all stakeholders as the plan is being implemented? / · There are plans to hold an open house.
· As parent meetings, Cherry Hill Coalition meetings and school counselor meetings are held, the principal will share information about the grant.
· Information about the grant will be shared in the monthly newsletter.
3. What documentation is being kept? / · Sign in sheets, attendance records, evaluation forms, meeting agendas, notes and notifications.
4. Describe the plans for the LEA to provide a rapid response to address immediate needs of the school. / · LEA has a newly organized Network model citywide. As part of the school reform initiative implemented this year principals should get immediate support. It consists of two turnaround networks. One is for K – 5 schools and one is for schools 6 – 12. Every principal is in a network. LEA, principals and operators have all been trained on the new approach.
5. Describe some visible improvements (quick wins) early in the school turnaround process. / · Selection, reselection, and hiring of staff.
· Higher expectations demonstrated to staff.
· More consistency throughout the building (For example– college focus, themes in classrooms, class rules, centers, etc.).
· Facility has been improved.
· Teachers learning to work with small groups of students.
· Physical layout of materials in the schools (Ex.: library books, books, supplies, etc.).
6. Describe any changes as of today that address culture and climate issues that impact teaching and learning. / · There is a College bound environment. Each teacher represents the college they attended at their classroom entrance. Guidance counselor provides college literature to students.
· The introduction of consistent student management has changed the culture. High expectations are communicated to students. The Restoration Center provides a space for students to take a short time out help correct inappropriate behavior.
· The consistent enforcement of the dress code has supported a positive climate.
· The front loading of the curriculum and other professional development created a greater sense of purpose.
· The full time karate teacher brings a positive influence and helps students with learning personal discipline.
· The physical changes in the building have helped the climate. For example, all the lavatories have been updated, there is a new gymnasium floor, the cafeteria has a new colorful entrance, there is a new SMART lab, and the science lab has been upgraded.
· There has been great collaboration with Baltimore City Public Schools.
7. What are the LEA’s and school’s plans to ensure that there will be a consistent focus on improving instruction? / · Classroom walk-throughs keep track of instructional focus.
· Professional development every other Wednesday has an instructional focus led by an instructional coach.
· Collaborative planning time is spent looking at student work and data. There is a standard way for teachers to review data.
· Teachers are talking to students about their data and students keep a daily data tracker.
· School system is implementing Data Links and is training principals regularly on its implementation and use.
· A collaborative leadership model is being implemented and administrators receive professional development on a regular basis.
· The network model provides direct support to the principal. The network liaison activates support throughout the system.
· Title I support looks at the school wide plan and ensures it is moving students in the right direction.
· DICE (Friendship School’s Instructional Framework) is being implemented.
· It is to be noted that human capital presents a special challenge. Although teachers were approved for three weeks of professional development, they were not paid in a timely manner.
8. Discuss the early lessons learned in implementing the Restart Intervention Model through School Improvement Grant. / · The timeline for implementation is very tight and can be overwhelming.
· Getting access to the funds has been difficult because it has been delayed. The operator floats the funds up front. Aggressive goals that are set can be hindered because of the budget timeline.
· The district has done this for a year so it has gone more smoothly.
· Principal leadership does not have to change at the school. The Restart Operator gives the leader a lot of autonomy because the principal has to lead the building.
· Look at every school as an individual school. Every school has strengths. Find out what is working and build on it.
· Complete transparency is essential between the operator and the leader.
· The principal must build the capacity of the assistant principal and other school leaders.
9. Discuss how the LEA has supported school leaders in their ability to make mission driven decisions regarding time and programs. / · Baltimore City provided training for the new instructional framework; the Chief Academic Officer’s Leadership Academy and MSDE RTTT provided the Education Effectiveness Academy which discussed the new common core standards.
· The network support has assisted school leaders. There is new autonomy to work with the vendor to do things differently. For example, they have provided staffing, tracking, and monitoring data. The school has the flexibility to be exempt from some district activities when they are in conflict with the needs of the vendor and the school.
· The Operator and the district co-supervise the principal.
· Fair student funding supports principal decision making.
· Baltimore City empowers principal leadership as part of their commitment to the school.
· It is noted that the Executive Director would like to have more communication with the Turnaround Office at the District.
10. Describe how the LEA has monitored the Restart Partner for this school up to this date.
What documentation is available of the monitoring?
What is the process for ongoing monitoring in the future? / · Baltimore City completed a Pre-implementation Survey for MSDE articulating the activities conducted prior to the school opening.
· Meetings are held with the Turnaround Director and the BCPSS budget director in Baltimore City.
· The Turnaround Director will make monthly visits although it has not started yet.
· Every turnaround school has a turnaround team that includes the Turnaround Director, a Network Director, a Title I Specialist, and school and community partners. A schedule for regular meetings has been set and a protocol has been developed. Cherry Hill will receive regular feedback from the team which will be reflective of the school plan and its priorities.
· BCPSS Turnaround department holds regular meetings with the operators.
11. Walk us through the process for ongoing monitoring in the future. / · Monthly monitoring from the LEA Turnaround Team.
· Monthly meetings with the principal and the Executive Director.
· BCPSS leadership academy.
· Triad meetings in which the Executive Director, principal and Network Lead are present.
· Title I will be monitoring as well on Title I components.
12. What documentation is being kept? / · Sign in sheets, meeting agendas, pre-implementation surveys, Title I compliance documentation, and regular program notes.
Table 3