Willow Creek Elementary School

Willow Creek Elementary School

School Accountability Committee

November 17, 2011

Minutes

Attendance: Susan Martina (Kindergarten teacher), Melissa Bolin (parent), Eileen Watts (librarian), Natalie West (parent), Evan Faliveve (parent), Misti Black (second-grade teacher), Marcy Decolati (first-grade teacher), Bridget Haber Butler (parent), Chris Domino (tech), Michael Chipman (principal), Carla Johnson (parent), Lisa Lucas (parent), Sandra Wiley (fourth-grade teacher), SrinivasNallapti (parent), Heather Carroll (parent)

1.Welcome New Members

We were fortunate to have new members and went around the table introducing ourselves.

2.Approval of Meeting Minutes (September 15, 2011)

Correction to the attendance list: the “Sharon Rog” was Sharon Rodgers, first-grade teacher. Minutes were adopted with this correction.

3.District Accountability Update (DAC), Melissa Bolin

a.The November 2011 Meeting

1.Superintendent Mary Chesley gave a presentation entitled “The Culture of Learning.” This presentation was based on her message to administrators and teachers this fall.

2.The presentation was followed by small-group discussions on some questions concerning accountability and how it relates to our culture of learning.

3.Melissa commented that Ms. Chesley’smessage really resonated for her with our Veterans Day assembly and how strong that event’s connection was with the community.

b.At the October DAC meeting, we worked in small groups to review our own school’s Performance Framework. People at Melissa’s table were impressed with Willow Creek’s performance.

4.PTO Update, Lisa Lucas

a.The general meeting was on Tuesday. It was great to have students read their stories about Camp Cheley.

b.We’re at 105% of our fundraising goal. Since there is some extra money, PTO has awarded three extra grants: the purchase of DIBELS software (DIBELS is an assessment for literacy screening and progress monitoring given periodically to all students), replacement books for the Book Room, and increasing sets of books in the Book Room from 5 to 6 books per set.

c.The Hospitality Committee did a great job over Conference Week keeping teachers fed.

5.Principal’s Update, Michael Chipman

a.All data reporting is done online now, using the state’s Unified Improvement Plan template.

b.It’s hard for us to construct our plan for this year, since our results are so good and show that we are going in the right direction in all subjects. The goals that we created last year and are continuing to work on this year are succeeding.

c.Mike walked us through reading hisdata handout.

1.We started with the State Performance Framework (pages 1-2 of the packet). In terms of growth, we jumped 7 percentile points in growth on reading. Our math growth was top in the district. In writing, we jumped 16 percentile points. Academic growth for minorities is not quite as high as for our white students, although it is very close. This year’s performance in growth is a marked improvement over past performance, which explains why the three-year average does not make us look as good as current data. We also want to improve growth in writing for students needing to catch up. Note: This is a report based on the state’s performance framework, which includes Asian students in the minority category. Since our Asian students perform well, the state’s practice conceals the size of the gap for our brown and black students.

2.The School Growth Summary, pages 3-4, breaks down the CSAP growth in finer categories, including gender. For the most part, we have erased the gender gap in almost every category. The one discrepancy was under Math for the “Percent Moving Up” category.

3.The CCSD Performance Summary, pages 5-12, is based on CCSD’s performance framework, which puts Asians and whites in the same data set when comparing minority performance.

4.The 5-Year Ethnic Achievement Gap Summary, page 13, shows that we have done a good job over the past five years in erasing gaps between minority students and white/Asian students. We have more than met our goal to have our groups be within 5 percentage points.

5.The rest of the packet is the CSAP Assessment Framework reports. These break out our performance on specific standards and skills.

d.Our district is currently Accredited, but we are extremely close to being Accredited with Distinction. Reaching that level is our district’s goal this year, and making it would mean we would be the only large school district in the state with a diverse population to be Accredited with Distinction, and may be the only diverse district in the nation to reach that kind of performance.

e.The two areas that Mike wants to work on are improving the performance of Students Catching Up and reading growth for students of color.

f.This year we are concentrating on academic vocabulary and combining that with more work in Thinking Maps.

6.Comments about Data Presentation

a.Parent: It’s frustrating to always concentrate on CSAP data. Why can’t we discuss other kinds of data?

Mike: At the February meeting, we will look at MAP data, and at the end-of-year meeting as well, in order to track in real time how our students are doing.

Parent: Can we look at data about those students who are seeing interventionists? What kind of growth are they showing?

Mike: Yes, we can compile that data from the district database and discuss intervention further.

b.Parent: Our Reading Interventionist only works with K–2, before CSAP is given. Is there something for the students 3–5?

Mike: Yes, we have some of those students getting interventions this year.

c.Parent: Can we get reports on K–2 students’ reading progress?

Mike: Yes.

d.Parent: Do we receive more money if we do well?

Mike: Schools that have large groups of low-income students get Title I federal funds, but no, we don’t get more money for doing well. The district is in budget-cutting mode due to state shortfalls. Willow Creek depends upon a large PTO contribution to fund our paraprofessionals.

e.Parent: Can we include other kinds of data in the UIP?

Mike: Yes, we can. We’ll bring some of that in this year.

f.How are students chosen for interventions? How do we decide what grade levels get interventions? What results are we getting?

Teacher/Mike: Teachers look at data every 6 weeks; Courtney Blume (Learning Disabilities teacher) looks at her data every two weeks.

g.Parent: It’s so frustrating that all parents pay attention to in general is CSAP.

7.Hearing from Concerned Parties

a.Parent: There’s a request from parents talking on the playground that the art teacher use standard-sized paper so that the kids’ work can be framed more easily.

b.Parent: I’m really concerned about traffic outside the school entrance. The cones last year kept drivers out of the left lane and made crossing safer.

Mike: The problem I am concerned about is people crossing in the middle. They need to go up to the designated crosswalks. It seems to be a bit better now that we start at 9:00 am. But basically, all the schools have badly designed drop-off areas.

c.Parent: I did the design for the Arvada Center’s production of How I Became a Pirate. Are the kids going?

Teacher: If it’s January 31.

Next Meeting: Thursday, February 16, 2012

Agenda Items:

Looking at other kinds of data