Performance Indicators Measures/ Metrics 2012-13 Federal and State Expectations 2012-13 School Results Meets Expectations? Academic Growth Gaps Median Growth Percentile Description: Growth for reading, writing and math by disaggregated groups. Expectation: If disaggregated groups met adequate growth, MGP is at or above 45. If disaggregated groups did not meet adequate growth, MGP is at or above 55. See your School Performance Framework for listing of median adequate growth expectations for your school’s disaggregated groups, including free/reduced lunch eligible, minority students, students with disabilities, English Language Learners (ELLs) and students below proficient. See your School Performance Framework for listing of median growth by each disaggregated group. Overall Rating for Growth Gaps: * Consult your School Performance Framework for the ratings for each student disaggregated group at each content area at each level. Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness Graduation Rate Expectation: At 80% or above on the best of 5-year, 6-year or 7-year graduation rate. At 80% or above Best of 4-year through 7- year Grad Rate - Overall Rating for Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness: - - using a - year grad rate Disaggregated Graduation Rate Expectation: At 80% or above on the disaggregated group’s best of 4-year, 5-year, 6-year or 7-year graduation rate. At 80% or above for each disaggregated group See your School Performance Framework for listing of 4-year, 5-year, 6-year and graduation rates for disaggregated groups, including free/reduced lunch eligible, minority students, students with disabilities, and ELLs. - Dropout Rate Expectation: At or below state average overall. - - - Mean Colorado ACT Composite Score Expectation: At or above state average. - - - Accountability Status and Requirements for Improvement Plan Denver Public Schools Summary of School Plan Timeline October 16, 2013 All schools must upload UIP to the ARE website via the DPS Unified Improvement Plan Upload Tool December 13, 2014 All schools must upload their updated UIP to the ARE website via the DPS Unified Improvement Plan Upload Tool January 6, 2014 UIPs of turnaround and priority improvement schools (per CDE SPF) are sent by ARE to CDE for review. year year,
Worksheet #1: Progress Monitoring of Prior Year’s Performance Targets Directions: This chart supports analysis of progress made towards performance targets set for the 2012-13 school year (last year’s plan). While this worksheet should be included in your UIP, the main intent is to record your school’s reflections to help build your data narrative. Performance Indicators Targets for 2012-13 school year (Targets set in last year’s plan) Performance in 2012-13? Was the target met? How close was the school to meeting the target? reflection on why previous targets were met or not met. Academic Achievement (Status) The percentage of our students scoring proficient or advanced on the reading TCAP will be 79. The percentage of students scoring proficient or advanced on the reading TCAP was 79. High expectations for behaviors High expectations for reading instruction for example Guided reading instruction emphasized a purpose for reading. The purpose was communicated to students. Content/Language Objective work led to communicating goal and why goal was important for students. Used STAR data consistently to monitor and plan guided reading. Fidelity of school goals around reading. We still need to work as a school on differentiating – especially for HGT/GT. Academic Growth The median growth percentile for our students on the reading TCAP will be 65. The median growth percentile for our students on the reading TCAP was 57. Academic Growth Gaps The median growth percentile for our English Language Learners on the reading TCAP will be 62. The median growth percentile for our English Language Learners on the reading TCAP was 73.5. Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness N/A Worksheet #2: Data Analysis Directions: This supports planning teams in recording and organizing observations about school-level data in preparation for writing the required data narrative. Planning teams should describe positive and negative trends for all of the four performance indicators using at least three years of data and then prioritize the performance challenges (based on notable trends) that
the school will focus its efforts on improving. The root cause analysis and improvement planning efforts in the remainder of the plan should be aimed at addressing the identified priority performance challenge(s). A limited number of priority performance challenges is recommended (no more than 3-5); a performance challenge may apply to multiple performance indicators. At a minimum, priority performance challenges must be identified in any of the four performance indicator areas where minimum state and federal expectations were not met for accountability purposes. Furthermore, schools are encouraged to consider observations recorded in the “last year’s targets” worksheet. Finally, provide a brief description of the root cause analysis for any priority performance challenges. Root causes may apply to multiple priority performance challenges. You may add rows, as needed. Performance Indicators Description of Notable Trends (3 of past state and local data) Priority Performance Challenges Root Causes Academic Achievement (Status) The percentage of our students scoring proficient or advanced on the reading TCAP/CSAP has increased from 2011-2013 and is above the state’s expectation of 72. The percentage of our students scoring proficient or advanced on the writing TCAP/CSAP has increased from 2010-2013 and is above the state’s expectation of 54. The percentage of our students scoring proficient or advanced on the math TCAP/CSAP has remained stable from 2009-2013 and is the state’s expectation of 71. The percentage of our students scoring proficient or advanced on the science TCAP/CSAP has increased from 2009-2013 and is above the state’s expectation of 48. The percentage of our students scoring proficient and advanced on the math TCAP/CSAP has increased and decreased from (68, 71, 66, 66, 72) and was 5 percentage points below our 2013 target of 77%. We have not identified, planned, and or put into practice the use of critical academic language in teaching and do not provide enough opportunities for students to struggle with and explain and model their mathematical thinking. We do not know the developmental stages of mathematical thinking, how to identify students’ levels, or how to pair and implement the appropriate strategies to move students to the next developmental level. The percentage of our English Language Learners scoring proficient or advanced on the reading TCAP/CSAP has increased from 2011-2013 and is below the state’s expectation of 72.
School Target Setting Form Performance Indicators Measures/ Metrics Priority Performance Challenges Annual Performance Targets Interim Measures for 2013-14 Major Improvement Strategy 2013-14 2014-15 Academic Achievement (Status) TCAP/CSAP, CoAlt/CSAPA, Lectura, Escritura R M The percentage of our students scoring proficient and advanced on the math TCAP/CSAP has increased and decreased from (68, 71, 66, 66, 72) and was 5 percentage points below our 2013 target of 77%. The percentage of our students scoring proficient and advanced on the math TCAP will be 82. The percentage of our students scoring proficient and advanced on the math TCAP will be 87. DPS Interim Assessments will be 86% in mathematics. We will examine the percentage of students scoring proficient or advanced on the district mathematics assessment in October, January and May. We will examine the percentage of students who move up one or more proficiency bands in the district mathematics assessment given in October, January and May. We will examine the percentage of students who are proficient or advanced comparing TCAP to TCAP 2014. We will examine the percentage of students who are proficient or advanced on the Scholastic We will identify, plan, and put into practice the use of critical academic language in teaching provide opportunities for students to struggle with and explain and their mathematical thinking. We will know the developmental stages of mathematical thinking, how to identify students’ levels, and how to pair and implement the appropriate strategies to move students to the next developmental level.
Mathematics Inventory given in August, January and May. We will examine the percentage of students who are proficient or advanced as measured by goals in data teams. W S Academic Growth Median Growth Percentile (TCAP/CSAP & ACCESS) R M The median growth percentile for our students on the math TCAP/CSAP has increased from (36, 37.5, 59) yet was our lowest content area of growth in of the last five years. The median growth percentile for our students on the math TCAP will be 65. The median growth percentile for our students on the math TCAP will be 65. We will examine our median growth percentiles in mathematics overall, from teacher to teacher and by grade-to-grade in 4th and 5th grade using a two-year measure of TCAP and TCAP 2014. We will examine the percentage of students scoring proficient or advanced on the district mathematics assessment given in October, January and May paying attention to the growth in proficiency from October to May. We will identify, plan, and put into practice the use of critical academic language in teaching provide opportunities for students to struggle with and explain and model their mathematical thinking. We will know the developmental stages of mathematical thinking, how to identify students’ levels, and how to pair and implement the appropriate strategies to move students to the next developmental level.
scope and sequence of the common core. 3 classrooms will become PEBC classrooms” for Standards of Mathematical Practice.” Other teacher leaders and teachers will visit the classroom for learning labs to build common practices in instruction and use of data. December 2013 continuing through the end of the year. Putting Living Content Language Objectives in action: Teachers will define the unique aspects of Living Content Language Objectives Teachers will identify critical vocabulary that relates to each unit for students to explain thinking. Teachers will embed critical language in Content Language Objectives. Teachers will incorporate and the use of rigorous mathematical language in their content language objectives and mini-lessons with students. Teachers will develop common expectations of use of All teachers will begin using living content language objectives with students. Teacher leaders will model the process in learning labs and coach others in developing objectives in teams. Professional Development on teaching number talks. Students and teachers will interact with the Content Language Objective by referring to the objective during work and by using the vocabulary of the objective while they explain their thinking in independent/small group work. Student Solutions strategies based on developmental continuum. Professional Development November 1st-December 20th Walk through Observations /Lesson January 2014-June 2014
Various NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) articles. Teachers will use common tools for tracking objectives and SMART goals to understand student learning trajectories. Beginning January through the end of the year. DATA Team Deep Dive: Teachers will develop shared ownership of both process and purpose of data teams. Develop clear focus on a common core state standard for data cycle purposes. Develop common definition of standard proficiency and individual data analysis before meeting Agree on common tools for collecting student data and taking meeting notes. Teachers will reflect on current practice and analyze root cause of gaps in student learning with a focus on the Standards of Mathematical Practices. Teachers will be able to plan strategies based the continuum of standards to close gaps in student learning. Principal Compact Blue Facilitators, Linnea Krizan Awakening the Sleeping Giant by Marilyn Katzenmeyer Driven by Data by Paul Bambrick Santoya Standards based Toolkit DPS Scope and Sequence www.engageNY.com Teachers will complete a pre and post to measure their learning and planning in response to student data established via SMART goals. Teacher teams will pilot lesson plan template exemplars to define differentiated strategies for student learning. to Force to observe a model of data team processes and use this observation to set goals and objectives for the data process at Teller. January 2014 January 2014 September 2013-completed
Schedule school observations to experience exemplars of data teams/mathematics instruction in process September –June 2014 Community Engagement in Mathematics Instruction: Teachers will engage in a math instruction night with parents focused on building parent understanding of current pedagogical practices. Teachers and parents will engage in conversations and learning about the Standards of Mathematical Practices and how these new standards will impact student learning. TEC Teachers Principal Everyday Math Games CCSS resources for Parents Handouts for parents with standards, definitions of vertical expectations and examples of mathematical thinking that leads to defining the inquiry process for students. Mindset: Fixed vs. Growth by Carol Dweck Parents will take a pre/post survey to measure progress of understanding of Standards for Mathematical Practice Teachers and parents will engage in learning about and discussing the CCSS in mathematics and how mathematical thinking develops in students. Students and parents will engage together to learn strategies for math games, number talks they can do at home and extensions for performance tasks. January 16, 2014 April 2014 Aligning Everyday Math to the Common Core Summer 2014 Teacher Teams Compact Blue Teacher Leaders TEC Principal Common Core State Standards and Sequence Documents Reference Documents from NNE Schools and Unit by unit lesson sequences by grade level. Vertically aligned lesson sequence with solid indicators of proficiency. Development of common formative assessments. Summer 2014 January 2014-Summer 2014