Garrison Middle School SIG I Year 2 Monitoring Team’s Third Onsite Visit Feedback
Baltimore City Public School System (BCPSS) Date of SIG Team’s School Visit: May 10, 2012
Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG), section 1003(g), FY 09 Date Shared with BCPSS: June 28, 2012
SIG I Year 2 Monitoring and Fiscal Teams’ Third Onsite Visit Feedback
Maryland State Department of Education—Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG), section 1003(g)
School: Garrison Middle School LEA: Baltimore City Public School System (BCPSS)Principal: James Sargent LEA Turnaround Director: Kim Ferguson
Date of SIG Team’s School Visit: May 10, 2012 Date of SIG Fiscal Team’s Visit: June 8, 2012
SIG Team Members: Barb Scherr, Jeanne Paynter, Michael Ford SIG Fiscal Team Member: Geri Taylor Lawrence
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 (USDE) 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.
Purpose of the SIG Monitoring and Fiscal Teams’ Third Onsite Visit: As approved by USDE, MSDE, through SIG Monitoring Teams, will conduct three onsite monitoring visits annually in each LEA that receives a school improvement grant to ensure that the LEA is implementing its intervention model fully and effectively in Maryland’s Tier I and Tier II schools. The purpose of the SIG I Year 2 Teams’ third onsite visit is to provide each SIG school, with LEA guidance, an opportunity to showcase the successful implementation of two or three activities/strategies focused on instruction, use of data, and/or professional development, within the approved SIG plan. As an additional monitoring activity during this SIG I Year 2 third onsite visit, the SIG Monitoring Team will conduct interviews with four or five stakeholder groups. These groups must include SIG Principal; Teacher Leaders; Parents; Students; and School-based Lead Restart Partner (if applicable). In addition and on a different day, a MSDE SIG I Year 2 Fiscal Team will monitor the school’s SIG I Year 2 budget.
Table Organization of SIG I Year 2 Monitoring and Fiscal Teams’ Third Onsite Visit FeedbackTable 1 / Activity/Strategy #1 Observed by SIG Team
Table 2 / Activity/Strategy #2 Observed by SIG Team
Table 3 / Principal Interview Questions and Responses
Table 4 / Teacher Leaders’ Interview Questions and Responses
Table 5 / Parents’ Interview Questions and Responses (no parents were interviewed at Garrison)
Table 6 / Students’ Interview Questions and Responses
Table 7 / School-based Lead Restart Partner Interview Questions and Responses
Table 8 / SIG School Budget Expenditures for Garrison Middle School for School Year 2011-2012
TABLE 1 & 2 (combined)
Observed Activity/Strategy #1 /Strategy 2
MSDE Question / SIG Principal Response in black font and SIG Team responses in blue font.
1. Which intervention model requirement/component will the observed activity/strategy address? / Explicit instruction…”I do, you do”
Classroom management
2. What is the specific activity/strategy that will be observed that is aligned to this requirement? / Student engagement through academic interaction, teacher making transition from teacher to facilitator.
Explicit instruction by gradual release supported by biweekly PD.
3. How is the activity/strategy to be observed linked to the needs assessment in your SIG plan for the school?
4. Where are you in your timeline for the implementation of the observed activity/strategy? / The Math teacher gets it, has complete understanding.
Explicit instruction to facilitate active student engagement in their learning needs a lot of growth among all the teachers. A few teachers can manage students but may not have rigor in their instruction.
5. What is the current level of implementation for the activity/strategy as determined by the school? / Initial stages of implementation
6. What has been the impact of the activity/strategy to be observed on the school making progress towards its SIG goals? / Where its working…..it’s effective.
SIG Team Consensus / SIG Team Consensus Summary
a. MSDE SIG Team’s Consensus Summary of the observed activity/strategy during the Third SIG Onsite Monitoring Visit (bulleted summary of each observed activity/strategy) / We observed a 6th grade math lesson and 7th grade language arts class.
The teachers modeled the explicit instruction strategies and classroom management.
Explicit Instruction Observation:
In both classes, each teacher modeled for the students how to perform those tasks at hand. For example, the math teacher demonstrated for her students how to divide fractions. She broke down the process into multiple steps, and then had students practice similar division problems on their worksheet. The LA teacher was reviewing their assigned book. The task for the students was to discuss what they thought the author‘s purpose was in having each character solve a situation in a manner in which they did, and then the students had to discuss if they agreed/disagreed with the character’s decision and why. The teacher modeled key points regarding how the discussion should go, and then the students performed the task.
Classroom Management:
In both classes, each teacher demonstrated strategies for handling classroom behavior. For example, in the math class, when students needed their pencils sharpened, the teacher sharpened their pencil to avoid students from being disruptive by leaving their desk. The LA teacher made the students aware of their sidebar conversations and immediately addressed their behavior.
b. MSDE SIG Team’s Consensus Assessment of the level of fidelity of implementation of the observed activity/strategy during the Third SIG Onsite Monitoring Visit (bulleted summary) / SIG monitoring team observed significant improvement in classroom management with the implementation of explicit instruction strategies. More students were engaged. The teachers were observed to implement these strategies with high levels of fidelity.
TABLE 3
Principal Interview Questions
1. Describe the impact of the second year of implementation of the reform in the school. / · The current principal could not make a comparison because he was a first year principal.
· He didn’t have much to work with at the beginning of the year. Many documents were not available from the previous school year.
2. What is the school like now after the second year of implementation in terms of student achievement and instructional effectiveness? / · Some positive signs are emerging to show the school has potential to increase student achievement in reading. Math progress is unsure at this time.
· For instructional effectiveness, the teachers need to feel comfortable enough to release students so they buy into what is being taught.
· Principal realized this year that he needed to be present in PD to make sure everyone is saying the same thing. Since March, the principal has participated in PD so he can refer back to what is being taught in PD and can use as look fors in observations. AP and assistants also attend PD’s. Next year, the principal , AP, and assistant will attend all PDs for the entire school year.
3. Talk about your greatest successes in the second year of implementation of SIG. / · Principal believes the MSA results this year will be different in positive way.
· The relationship between principal and operator is great. Their knowledge and expertise complement each other. It provides for guidance and dialogue around instruction.
· The Principal feels empowered to handle personnel because of the relationship with Global Partnership EMO.
· There is personal attention to improving teaching skills of teachers.
4. What were the greatest challenges in the second year of implementation? / · There is a need for a paradigm shift for teachers to buy in.
· Instructional leadership team is functional but wants to move into cycles – where everyone is working together and having professional conversations and creating a professional learning community.
· Principal wants to get to the point where teachers use data to guide instruction and decide on interventions.
5. Which challenges have you overcome in the second year of implementation and how? / · Parent involvement remains challenging.
· For 8th graders, this is their 3rd principal since they began in the school.
· Budget is challenging. Fair student funding will result in the school losing more positions because of declining school population.
6. Discuss the lessons learned in the second year of implementation. What advice would you give to another school beginning this process of reform? / · School principal and leadership have to spend more time in the classroom (70% in classroom, 30% out of classroom).
· Principal and Assistant principal must participate in PD for teachers.
· Principal and APs must spend time in team meetings and be a part of the conversations with teachers, especially around data.
· Teachers must be more involved in decision making.
7. What would you like to tell us that we have not asked about the second year of implementation? / · The school must work on building the capacity of teachers.
· The school principal needs more input on school budget.
TABLE 3
Teacher Leaders’ Interview Questions /
1. Describe the impact of the second year of implementation of the reform in the school. / · Procedural things have carried over from year one and have been tightened up.
· Last year PBIS got going in the 2nd quarter. By end of year, Garrison “gold” incentive didn’t have much value due to funding issues. It is a bit stronger and more consistent this year.
2. What is the school like now after the second year of implementation in terms of student achievement and instructional effectiveness? / · This year the school is moving in right direction.
· Last year there was a larger school staff.
· This year data analysis is done more individually by teachers as opposed to last year when it was more handled by AP.
· During “Power hour” students are placed in 3 groups with reading, writing, and math focus and skills are retaught. Initially students were grouped based on MSA scores. When kids came back from the winter break, students were regrouped based on formative assessment data prior to break.
3. Talk about your greatest successes in this second year of implementation of SIG. / · This year is different with only one social studies teacher for 6 & 7 grade, teaching both grades. At midyear it was tough.
· Behaviorally children are better with more instruction as a result. The teachers are still fighting discipline problems because consequences are limited and you can only do so much.
· This year many interventions were up and running at the beginning of the year.
· Classroom management and consequences and having interventions in place helped this year.
· 6th grade had a fresh start and because of the small school size not all kids knew each other. This provided the opportunity for students to break some bad habits.
4. What were the greatest challenges in the second year of implementation? / · Student fair funding impacted the school. Since there is a decrease in students, the staff had to shrink this year.
· Last year started out with no homeroom and students went right to first period class. This year, kids start with homeroom. This helps with kids who ride public buses to get to their first period on time.
5. Which challenges have you overcome in the second year and how? / · The school was able to get things started from day one.
· There are better routines for teachers and not as many schedule changes.
· Hall monitors have helped control halls, as well as, administrators in hallways helps with control.
6. Discuss the lessons learned in the second year of implementation. What advice would you give to another school beginning this process of reform? / · The lesson learned is to be consistent and reinforce what you expect .
· Focus on the school culture needs to occur throughout the school year.
7. What would you like to tell us that we have not asked? / · Home life is different for the students at Garrion. Grandparent care and foster care has increased.
· Kids’ behaviors have gotten worse over the past 3 or 4 years.
· The school lost students due to school choice.
· Many kids with behavior problems and special education stay or come to Garrison.
TABLE 6
Students’ Interview Questions /
1. Describe what the school was like last year. / · It is better this year than last, more fights last year.
· Hallways are better. Kids used to walk out of class but not anymore.
· Classrooms are the same but kids act okay.
2. What is the school like this year? What makes your school different from any other school you know? / · Kids walking out of classes.
3. What is the best thing you like about the school this year? / · This year we have trips. There were not too many trips last year. This year we went to the museum and Fort McHenry and learned about the civil war.
· We went on a skating trip. Coming up is Six Flags Amusement Park trip. 8th grade is going to Kings Dominion Amusement Park.
4. What has been the most challenging thing about school for you this year? / · MSA science was tough.
· Kids don’t listen to the science teacher. This student is going to Poly and wants to be a forensic scientist.
· Kids don’t pay attention….teacher can’t get through their lessons.
5. Which challenges have you overcome this year and how? / · Peer pressure is a challenge and friends want do bad things but I say no and walk away.
· Cutting class.
6. What advice would you give to your teachers and principal if they wanted to improve the school more? / · The school needs more hall monitors, only 3 for the entire school.