Schoolwide/School Improvement Plan 2016-2017
J. L. Newbern Middle
School Improvement Plan
Rick Thomas
School Year
2016-2017
Revision Date (November 11, 2016)
SCHOOLWIDE/SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TEMPLATE
School Name: J. L Newbern Middle School / District Name: Valdosta CityPrincipal Name:Ricky Thomas / School Year:2016-2017
School Mailing Address: 2015 E. Park Ave
Telephone: 229-333-8566
District Title One Director/Coordinator Name:
District Title One Director/Coordinator Mailing Address:
Email Address:
Telephone:
ESEA WAIVER ACCOUNTABILITY STATUS
(Check all boxes that apply and provide additional information if requested.)
Priority School ☐ / Focus School ☐
Subject Alert / ☐ / List Subject(s) / Sub-Group Alert / ☐ / List Subgroup(s)
Graduation Alert / ☐ / List Subgroup(s)
Principal’s Signature: / Date:
Title I Director’s Signature: / Date:
Superintendent’s Signature: / Date:
Revision Date: / Revision Date: / Revision Date:
Planning Committee Members: Must include parents on this committee
NAME / MEMBER’S SIGNATURE / POSITION/ROLESIP Components
*1. A comprehensive needs assessment of the entire school that addresses all academic areas and other factors that may affect achievement.Response:
- We have developed our schoolwide plan with the participation of individuals who will carry out the comprehensive schoolwide/school improvement program plan. Those persons involved were Valerie Smith (Assistant Principal), Calisa Anderson (Academic Coach), Tiffanie Warren-Williams (Academic Coach), Tonyour Alexander (Special Education Teacher), Tiffany Lampkin (ELA teacher), Dr. Sue Vansant Instructional Intervention Specialist), Reida Thomas (Parent), Lakassa Baker (Parent), Bridgette Coachman (Parent), Angel Kenney (Parent), Monia Thomas (Parent/AVID Teacher), Sylvia Thomas (Parent), Kayla Merritt (Parent), William Hollimon (Guidance Counselor), Jennifer Williams (Guidance Conselor), Tiffany Lampkin (Teacher), Oscar Lee (Teacher) and Rick Thomas (Principal). The ways they were involved were reviewing and analyzing data, identifying strengths and weaknesses, determining possible root causes, setting SMART goals, selecting actions and strategies, and deciding what artifacts and evidence would be used to determine the impact on student achievement
- We have used the following instruments, procedures, or processes to obtain this information demographic data, process data, perception data, student achievement data, our Comprehensive Needs Assessment, our Parent/Guardian Survey, the planning process for continuous improvement, our School Improvement Plan Rubric, our Title IIA Equity Plan, the Title I Requirements for an Existing School Wide Program, CCRPI Scores, CCRPI Indicators, CCRPI Achievement Gap information, CCRPI Student Growth and Performance Flags, and brainstorming. We also collected and disaggregated data for attendance and discipline. We are formatively using framework data to re-roster students for flexible groups and adjust instruction as indicated.
- We have taken into account the needs of migrant children by (or if you have no migratory students . . . these are the procedures we would follow should those students be in attendance . . . ) . . .JLLomax, Pinevale, VECA, and Valdosta High School-schools with Migrant students
- We have reflected current achievement data that will help the school identify the subjects and skills in which teaching and learning need to be improved. The data sources we utilized were report card data, GMAS summary data, GAA, CCRPI Indicators, STAR, and Lexile.
- We have based our plan on information about all students in the school and identified students and groups of students who are not yet achieving to the State Academic content standards and the State student academic achievement standard including
●Students from major racial and ethnic groups . . .
●Students with disabilities . . .
●Students with limited English proficiency . . .
- The data has helped us reach conclusions regarding achievement or other related data(attendance data, discipline data).
●The major needs we discovered were students were not performing at the grade-level Proficiency level on the GMAS in reading and math and discipline issues which prevent students from fully participating in an academic environment.
●The needs we will address are literacy, numeracy, and discipline referral patterns.
●The specific academic needs of those students who are to be addressed in the schoolwide program plan will be interaction with on-grade level informational and fictional texts, more relevant/challenging learning opportunities that reflect the levels 3 and 4 of the DOK and/or GMAS assessments for ELA, reading, and math.
●The ROOTCAUSE/s that we discovered for each of the needs were a majority of students who cannot read on grade level and/or have inadequate academic vocabulary to perforn well in either ELA, reading, or math and an inadequate amount of time/opportunity for students to engage in on-grade level, rigorous learning opportunities.
G. The measurable goals/benchmarks we have established to address the needs were :
●Ten percent of ELA and math students who are currently levels 1 and 2 will move up another level, and those students in levels 3 and 4 will either maintain or improve their current levels as reported by Spring 2016 GMAS to the Spring 2017 GMAS.
●Develop a culture and climate that is safe, has high expectations, ensures that rigorous learning occurs, and positive relationships are formed.
●Develop School-wide Professional Learning Communities.
*2. Schoolwide reform strategies that are scientifically researched based, directly tied to the comprehensive needs assessment and academic standards.
Response: Newbern Middle School employs many schoolwide reform strategies that are scientifically researched based and are directly tied to our comprehensive needs assessment and academic standards. Such strategies include Thinking Maps and other visual representation when appropriate for the purpose of differentiation, Learning Focused Schools Strategies, writing across the curriculum (constructed response, Writing to Win, etc.) AVID, our Student Progress Monitoring Program, REP math and ELA, the use of the Instructional Framework, implementation of Standards Based Classrooms and Instruction; implementation of a backwards design protocol for all units and lessons which include formative assessments, higher order thinking, explicit vocabulary instruction, and writing to learn; Extended Learning Time; Close Reading; Guided Reading; Implementation of GSE and the use of V Math and Language! for students with disabilities.
2(a). Schoolwide reform strategies that provide opportunities for all children in the school to meet or exceed Georgia’s proficient and advanced levels of student performance.
Response: Academic/content specific teachers, academic coaches, and the School Improvement Specialist will collaborate and use a variety of strategies and assessment tools to create common assignments and formative/summative assessments to be administered within teaching units.
Data teams will analyze data and use research- based strategies to improve and guide instruction. Teachers will re-teach content/skills using differentiated strategies to help students close achievement gaps.
The ways in which we will address the needs of all children in the school, particularly the needs of students furthest away from demonstrating proficiency related to the State’s academic content and student academic achievement standards are as follows:
●Continue implementing the Instructional Frameworks to provide Standards-Based Instruction to engage students in higher order thinking skills/questioning techniques and rigorous performance tasks in all content areas. NMS will implement the use of Thinking MAPS to increase the rigor in all classes.
●Develop common, Standards-based, unit assessments to be administered during each nine weeks. Data will be collected, tracked, and reported using our Student Progress Monitoring Program to guide instruction toward students’ mastery of Standards. Attendance and discipline data will also be tracked.
●Implement the AVID program school wide. Collaborative weekly planning meetings will be held. Teachers will analyze student progress monthly. Cornell note taking will be implemented in all classes. AVID elective classes will be implemented in the 6th, 7th, and 8th grade.
●Provide common planning time for teachers to collaborate weekly to engage in the five step protocol for clarity of GSE, to ensure that all students are actively engaged in a rigorous curriculum, design performance tasks that have a high degree of rigor and relevance, and examine student work. Teachers will analyze student progress on common assessments and performance tasks.
●Conduct midpoint walk-throughs with Leadership Team members each semester to monitor teacher performance. Results of these observations will be analyzed, shared with faculty members, and used to determine site-based professional learning.
●Implement a twice weekly 30 minute flexible learning time in the schedule to allow teachers extra time with students who are struggling to master content.
●Serve at-risk students who qualify for remedial services in academic REP math and/or REP ELA as a Tier 2 intervention to enhance comprehension of GSE concepts.
●Require at-risk students who are not successful during the day to participate in Study Island and or Read 180, which is a Tier 3 intervention. Students will be grouped based on academic needs. Learning goals will be set for students and progress will be monitored. Students will participate in Study Island during their core academic time on student classroom computers.
●Continue implementation of cross-curricula writing opportunities to help raise student achievement. Students will participate in writing in all content areas.
●Increase students daily interaction with a variety of texts through a focus on literary initiatives to encourage all students to participate in specific, intensive reading. The reading will include on-grade level fiction and non- fiction materials. These resources may include, but are not limited to AR, MyON, Scholastic News magazines, newspapers, newsela, teengagement, etc. Incentives will be provided for students as they work to meet this goal. Three times a year, students will be given a STAR Reading and a STAR Math test. STAR scores and Lexile scores will be used to determine reading levels and Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) scores of each student. ZPD is a range of readability levels from which a student should select books to read.
●Continue to implement a lab with ELA and Math software (V Math and Language!) to be used by special education students in lieu of attending one connections class. Reports will be tracked by the administration, academic coaches, and special education teachers to analyze the achievement data of these students and plan for further interventions.
●Increase teacher and student use of 21st Century modern technology (to engage students and enhance their learning) by training teachers to effectively use the promethean board in classrooms. Title I funds will also be used to replace antiquated hardware in teachers’ classrooms and in our school’s computer labs.
●Title I funded personnel will be used to reduce the class size for the 6th, 7th, and 8th grade. Justification for such reduction is based on research that suggests improved academic achievement for students in classes with lower teacher/student ratios, as well as needs expressed by stakeholders in our Comprehensive Needs Assessment.
●Title I funded academic coaches will be used to provide high quality professional learning and coaching to teachers as well as assist the administration and teachers with tracking student progress.
A Title I funded Parent Involvement Coordinator will be used to schedule, plan, and conduct various events at the school to get parents involved and assist parents in helping their students achieve.
2(b). Are based upon effective means of raising student achievement.
Response: According to Wright, Horn, and Sander’s study (1997),
…the most important factor affecting student learning is the teacher. …The immediate and clear implication of this finding is that seemingly more can be done to improve education by improving the effectiveness of teachers than by any other single factor. Effective teachers appear to be effective with students of achievement levels, regardless of the level of heterogeneity in their classrooms. If the teacher is ineffective, students under the teacher’s tutelage will show inadequate progress academically regardless of how similar or different they are regarding their academic achievement. (as cited in Marzano, 2001, p. 3)
For this reason, teacher accountability is paramount at NMS. Teachers are provided weekly job-embedded professional learning with the expectation of implementation in their classroom instruction. Implementation is documented in their lesson plans and reviewed by their area administrator on a weekly basis. In addition, teachers are expected to collaborate weekly to develop their lesson plans. Teachers are not expected to be mere clones of each other, however, they are required to deepen their knowledge and understanding of the verbiage in the GPS and GSE. With this knowledge and understanding, they are expected to develop common assessments and analyze their student learning data to identify their students’ overall strengths and weaknesses and to determine appropriate instructional strategies that will address those deficient areas.
Differentiation
NMS is committed to mastering the instructional strategy of differentiation. Differentiation means tailoring instruction to meet individual needs. Whether teachers differentiate content, process, products, or the learning environment, the use of ongoing assessment and flexible grouping makes this a successful approach to instruction (Tomlinson, 2000). Today's schools must accommodate students from different ethnic groups, language groups, cultures, family situations, and social and economic situations, with different interests and purposes for learning, and different abilities and styles of learning. In the face of all this diversity, schools can no longer operate as if one curriculum and way of teaching will fit most of the students. Instead, students can pursue a common set of curricular goals or learning standards, accomplishing them in different ways and sometimes to different degrees of mastery (National Institute for Urban School Improvement, Education Development Center, Inc, 2000).
There is no recipe for differentiation. Rather, it is a way of thinking about teaching and learning that values the individual and can be translated into classroom practice in many ways. Still, the following broad principles and characteristics will be established at NMS in order to provide a defensible differentiated classroom: make sure each student gets access to knowledge, skills, and information, individually tailored learning, use collaborative teaching arrangements, collaborate with families, agencies, and other community members, hold high expectations for student success, and build inclusive communities (National Institute for Urban School Improvement, Education Development Center, Inc, 2000).
Academic Writing Rationale/Text StructuresA major factor in NMS’s success is their commitment to writing every day in every class. Writing, particularly writing to inform, noted the U.S. Department of Education (2003), is “one of five top instructional practices for reducing achievement gap” (as cited in Thompson & Thompson, 2009). Furthermore, “Students use writing as a tool for learning, and they write for a variety of purposes and audiences…They understand and articulate how authors use a variety of techniques and craft in their writing, and they show evidence of the author’s craft in their own writing” (Georgia Department of Education, 2006, p.1)
Thinking Maps and AVID Rationale
Implementation of the Instructional Frameworks to provide Standards-Based Instruction will engage students in higher order thinking skills/questioning techniques and rigorous performance tasks in all content areas. The implementation of Thinking MAPS and the strategies employed in the Advancement Via Individual Determination, or AVID, program will help increase the rigor needed. Thinking Maps “is a language of eight visual patterns each based on a fundamental thinking process” (Hyerle and Yeager, 2007, p.2). “The Thinking Maps language for learning is effective as shown in three general areas of research: cognitive science, effective instructional practice, and brain research” (Hyerle and Yeager, 2007, p. vi). Cornell note taking, Costa, and Interactive notebooks are three strategies that will be implemented in the AVID program.
As teachers develop their units, they must be cognizant of the fact that students learn differently. Therefore, incorporating Thinking Maps and strategies used in AVID will address Gardner’s multiple intelligences thereby maximizing teaching and learning. “The theory of multiple intelligences assumes that students learn best with various learning strategies. It asserts that students are not monolithic learners dependent on textbooks. Depending on the student, learning best takes place by tapping into different senses” (Joseph, 2008, p.161). Instructional activities integrating the constructivist theory and brain-based research also enhance teaching and learning. The constructivist theory states that individuals construct meaning through various experiences, producing critical thinkers. These critical thinkers can adapt and make sense of our fast-paced society and the changes taking place. The strategies taught in the AVID program are designed to prepare and equip students with the knowledge and skills necessary for students to succeed in post secondary education.
In 2001, Marzano, Pollock, and Pickering, in their book, Classroom Instruction that Works, did a meta-analysis of all of the research on instructional strategies. These nine instructional practices have been proven to have a positive impact on student achievement. According to them, using instructional strategies like identifying similarities and differences, summarizing and note taking, reinforcing effort and providing recognition, homework and practice, cooperative learning, nonlinguistic representations, setting objectives and providing feedback, generating and testing hypotheses, and cues, questions, and advanced organizers coupled with effective classroom management and appropriate curriculum design can enhance the learning experience for students. However, Thompson and Thompson (2008) noted that “these are learning strategies, not teaching strategies. Students have to do them, not teachers” (p. 41).