Districtcna

Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report

Gerrish-Higgins School DistrictRoscommon, Michigan, United States

Prepared for the Michigan Department of Education

Submitted: Not submitted yet

Gerrish-Higgins School District

Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report: DRAFT COPY Page 2 of 34

Comprehensive Needs Assessment ReportContents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Purpose of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Structure of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Summary of Uses for the CNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

District Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Strand I - Teaching For Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Standard 1 - Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Standard 2 - Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Standard 3 - Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Strand II - Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Standard 1 - Instructional Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Standard 2 - Shared Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Standard 3 - Operational and Resource Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Strand III - Personnel and Professional Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Standard 1 - Personnel Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Standard 2 - Professional Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Strand IV - School and Community Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Standard 1 - Parent/Family Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Standard 2 - Community Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Strand V - Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Standard 1 - Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Standard 2 - Information Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30CNA - Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Report - Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33



Introduction

Purpose of the Report

The Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) was developed to be used as a tool to assist a school staff indetermining the strengths and challenges of their school. The CNA assesses the system processes and protocols ofpractice that are in place to support student academic achievement. Completion of these reports will also fulfillmany of the federal requirements for a comprehensive needs assessment prior to decisions regarding how federalfunds will be spent in a building or district.

Structure of the Report

The School Improvement Framework establishes a vision for school improvement. The Process Cycle for SchoolImprovement has four major components that cycle in continuous praxis. They are:

Gather Data Where are we now (status) and where do we want to be (goals)?

Study/Analyze What did the data/information we collected tell us?

Plan How do we organize our work so that it aligns to our goals and resources?

Do Staff implements the strategies and action steps outlined in the plan

Gather Data II Where are we now (status) and did we reach our goals?

While the SI Framework provides the vision for school improvement, the CNA is a tool that supports two of thefour areas of the School Improvement Process: Gather Data and Study. The following pages provide probingquestions to create dialogue about student and school data. They are designed to facilitate a deeper reflection intoa school's data/information and protocols of practice in order to identify areas of need. Data/information from theCNA can be used to write a school improvement plan that includes specific student achievement goals, objectives,and strategies designed by the stakeholders. A CNA should be conducted once every three to five years,coinciding with the school improvement planning cycle, and revisited annually.

Sources of data/information that serve the process of needs identification can include: School ImprovementFramework Rubric self assessment (which includes the EdYES! Performance indicators), the current schoolimprovement plan, information contained in the School Report Card, school's annual education report, andstudent test data from multiple sources.



The CNA consists of three sections

Student Data Analysis:

Assesses current student achievement data and information about the school. The resulting Student DataAnalysis Report can be used for school improvement planning purposes. The report includes: 1)Identification of Student learning goals, 2) Identification of possible contributing causes for gaps inachievement, and 3) Objectives to achieve student learning goals. This process is done as the first step ofthe CNA. The information links and template should be obtained from the NORMES website. The links areavailable on your homepage.

Instructional Processes and Practices Analysis:

Assesses the system processes and protocols of practice that are in place to support student academicachievement. The assessment focuses on all 90 of the Key Characteristics contained in the SchoolImprovement Framework Rubrics. Standard and Strand analysis reports have been included to organize theidentified strengths and challenges in system processes and protocols of practice. Completion of this sectionwill also provide information required to for the annual Education YES! Performance Indicators report.

Conclusions and Goals:

Provides a format to align identified student achievement challenges with system challenges.

Summary of Uses for the CNA

Guide the school's identification of additional resources (grants) to support its goals and objectives.Annually evaluate progress on the 40 Education YES! Performance Indicators.Annually review and/or evaluate all 90 indicators in the School Improvement Framework.Serve as the basis for all other needs assessments that may be required of the school.Form the basis of the school's professional learning plan as required by PA25.Identify areas of need to be included in the school's technology plan.Satisfy NCA requirement for a School Profile Report.Comply with federal grant requirements of aligning resources with identified needs through acomprehensive needs analysis.



District Information

District: Gerrish-Higgins School District

ISD/RESA: C.O.O.R. ISD

Public/Non-Public: Non-Public

Grades: PK,K,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12

District Code Number: 72010

City: Roscommon

State/Province: Michigan

Country: United States



Strand I - Teaching For Learning

The school holds high expectations for all students, identifies essential curricular content, makes certain it issequenced appropriately and is taught effectively in the available instructional times. Assessments used arealigned to curricular content and are used to guide instructional decisions and monitor student learning.

Michigan Department of Education began publishing both the school's self-rating and the evidence reported foreach indicator in 2005. The school's self-rating for each characteristic, and the evidence provided, is available tothe public on the School Report Card.

Standard 1 - Curriculum

Schools/Districts have a cohesive plan for instruction and learning that serves as the basis for teachers' andstudents' active involvement in the construction and application of knowledge.

Benchmark A: Aligned, Reviewed & Monitored

Indicators:

I.1.A.1 Aligned, Coherent and Inclusive Curriculum: The written curriculum incorporates the district'sexpectations for good instruction and essential content and affirms a common vision and understanding of thelearning standards under which the district operates. Based on state standards, it is structured around a set ofinterrelated programs for students and staff, guided by a common framework, and pursued over a sustained periodof time. The curriculum reflects a commitment to equity and diversity and its flexibility is designed to address thewide range of needs and abilities of all students.

Response: Getting Started

Partially Implemented

Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:The district has an aligned K-8 curriculum in the four core academic areas, as well as other areas.Evidence of progress to date includes: a formal written document and detailed grade level curriculummaps.The Scott Foresman Reading and Everyday Math programs K-8 directly align with the GLCE'sand MCF. All teachers are working toward using and aligning the written curriculum with fidelity.Insupport of the written curriculum, the Supervising Learning/Teacher Evaluation Process providesdocumentation of administrative support and teacher feedback, of the alignment of standards-based,cross curricular instruction in all four core content areas. The results support that standards-basededucation which is aligned and driven by the MCF and the GLCE's. Curriculum teams meet regularlyand continue to review and revise the process. Subject alignment for music, physical education andtechnology are also in place and aligned to the MI Frameworks and GLCEs where available. As a



participant of MiBLSi project, DIBELS benchmarks are also included in curriculum mapping.Extensive work has been done with the Human Sexuality Advisory Committee and the teaching ofHIV/AIDS mandated by the State of Michigan for the Health Curriculum. The District TechnologyPlan has been updated. Roscommon High School is in the process of implementing the new MichiganMerit Curriculum, realigning classes and classroom instruction to meet the demands of thiscurriculum. Freshman and sophomore level classes have been re-evaluated by staff to include bestpractices and to help students meet the states content expectations (junior and senior classes are in theprocess of realignment). RHS staff members have worked in Professional Learning Communities(PLC), within each discipline, to work on identifying power standards and aligning these standardswith the curriculum.

Benchmark B: Communicated

Indicators:

I.1.B.1 Communicated and Articulated Curriculum: The district places a high value on effective communicationand articulation of the curriculum. In order to communicate this curriculum to all stakeholders, a variety of two-way communication techniques are employed. The district facilitates a system-wide curricular dialog and clearlydefines expectations about essential content throughout instructional levels. This includes a cross-school review ofthe content and the identification and elimination of gaps and overlaps.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

The written district curriculum is easily cross-referenced through the use of grade level brochureswhich identify major content and themes taught at each grade level. These documents are sent home toparents annually, given to all new families when registering, and available to teachers. Performance-based report cards offer additional detail of curricular content, and examples of the cards are availablefor cross-grade reference. Grade level teams meet regularly in order to collaborate about curriculum,instruction, and to evaluate data. Data information cards are completed for every student, and passedon to the next year's teacher, thus providing a myriad of information at a glance. Many job-embeddedopportunities are in place for staff to work together collaboratively, both as grade level and cross gradelevel teams. District time is provided once a month for K-12 discussion of curriculum by content area.MiBLSi provides an avenue for professional development K-8 this year and K-12 next year, to helpcommunicate and articulate core curriculum in reading. In support to the written curriculum, theSupervising Learning/Teacher Evaluation Process provides documentation of administrative supportand teacher feedback, of the alignment of standards-based, cross curricular instruction in all four corecontent areas. The results support that standards-based education which is aligned and driven by theMCF and the GLCEs. Weekly departmental PLC meetings provide time for staff to continue workingof developing and, in some cases, modifying curriculum in order to meet state content expectations aswell as meet our overriding school goal of improving writing across the curriculum. Staff PD time hasbeen allocated to also include the teaching of reading strategies to students. Both reading and writingare areas of concern based upon MME results. Using data triangulation of teacher assessment, NWEA,and at the High School level MME/ACT results, teachers are able to generate appropriate interventions



for students. These interventions are based upon student abilities and we are continually working toimprove how teachers differentiate instruction within their classrooms. These practices and changesare communicated to stakeholders through dialogue and the school listserv.

Focus Questions

1. What in our systems and practices may be impacting our student achievement goals?

The work that the staff has been doing in differentiated instruction, reading strategies (for expository text),and writing prompts across each discipline will have the greatest impact on our students and theirachievement levels. We are in the infancy of our new MMC ideas, so student growth will only improve as weimprove our instruction.

Standard 2 - Instruction

Intentional processes and practices are used by schools and teachers to facilitate high levels of student learning.

Benchmark A: Planning

Indicators:

I.2.A.1 Systematic Planning for Quality Instruction: The district has a comprehensive vision for the delivery ofquality, culturally relevant instruction. District leaders work directly with school leaders to ensure a reflective andevidence-based approach to teaching practice. There is a common expectation throughout all instructional levelsthat research-based instructional strategies are collaboratively developed, observable in classroom practice andmeasured by their impact on student achievement.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

We are data driven in our district! The data that we compile drives our instruction. DIBELS, NWEA,SWIS, MIACCESS, MLPP, QRI, Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment (Pre-8), and report cardsalign with the GLCEs. Gap Analysis is used to define curricular areas of need. Special Education usesAIMS writing probes. We use MEAP results to help focus our writing, and evaluate which students goto extended day. Comprehensive curriculum maps have been compiled and are utilized for each gradelevel. Backward design units have been put together which incorporate higher level thinking skills.Written documentation of curriculum planning takes place during districtwide PD release time andgrade level meetings.Curricular mapping at each grade level follows a prescribed scope and sequencealigned to the state standards. Weekly collaborative sessions among grade level teams allows forreview of student data and an opportunity for ongoing discussion of student needs. Commonassessments, particularly in writing, are scored as a group. Results of summative assessments areconsistently recorded, and analysis of the data is used to plan future instruction. Cross district planning



is scheduled annually, and provides additional collaborative time in order to review pacing schedulesand curriculum equity from classroom to classroom. Input from teachers is key to the selection andpurchase of curricular support materials. Pilot programs are often used to field test researched basedprograms, and professional development offerings are sufficient to sustain the initiatives provided.(Everyday Math, Four Block Literacy, 6+1 Traits of Writing and Lucy Calkins are examples.)

Benchmark B: Delivery

Indicators:

I.2.B.1 Coherent and Effective Support for the Delivery of Instruction: The district provides a collaborativelydeveloped and implemented standards-based, system-wide framework of high quality instruction that includescommon instructional strategies in a real-world context. The emphasis is on challenging, rigorous and equitablepractices and support is provided to promote the success of all students. To achieve this shared vision ofinstruction, the district collaborates with staff to provide context- and research-based professional development.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

Grade level teams through out the district work in collaborative teams. The district provides onemonthly 2 hour late arrival day for whole building Professional Learning Communities (PLC) with twoof those arly relaease days being used for districtwide curricular area meetings. This provides regulardiscussion opportunity for teachers to have meaningful conversations about instructional strategies andclassroom practices as they apply to curricular units. Team planning results in shared responsibilityand greater equity of instruction from classroom to classroom. Professional development opportunitiesand professional learning community approaches are used to promote continuous changes inresearched based instructional practices. Regularly scheduled observations are assured by contract, andadministrative walk throughs are routine. Through the Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment Pre-8,we provide staff and schedule support for students who are targeted. We have a color coding systemwhich identifies benchmark (green), strategic(yellow), and intensive (red) students that reflectschanges within skill areas. Title I services change based on the color coding system. Curriculummapping provides scope and sequence, time lines and connections between units. Modifications aremade for students when necessary, and extensions are offered to those who require it. After schoolintervention programs and summer school opportunities offer additional support to struggling students,while in-class aid support is offered by highly qualified para-professionals. Teacher/student artifactsdemonstrate differentiated lessons and assignments through writing folders, lesson plans, and variousactivities. We continually adapt our curriculum to meet the ever changing Michigan Grade LevelContent Expectations in all subject areas!

Focus Questions


PLC meetings where the focus is on continual development of the curriculum has the strongest impact on



student achievement and learning.

Standard 3 - Assessment

Schools/districts systematically gather and use multiple sources of evidence to monitor student achievement.

Benchmark A: Aligned to Curriculum & Instruction

Indicators:

I.3.A.1 Use of Multiple Measures to Support School-wide Decision-making: The district is committed to the useof multiple measures to inform decisions at both the school and district level. Multiple sources of data are used toguide instruction, monitor student achievement, assure equity, provide accountability and determine resourceallocation.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

At both of the districts' elementary schools staff consistently uses formative, periodic benchmark, andculminating assessments to monitor student achievement and inform instruction. Assessment is anessential part of planning. We use MEAP, MI-ACCESS, & NWEA as our schools' Standardizedassessments. Daily Practice Aligned to Standardized Assessments: GLCE's, Everyday Math UnitTests, Writing Prompts/Rubrics, Accelerated Reader, Science & Social Studies Rubrics, Spellingstests, DIBELS progress monitoring, and formative assessments in Language Arts. BenchmarkAssessments: NWEA (Given 3 times a year), MEAP, Everyday Math Assessments, MLPP, DIBELS,QRI, Fitness Grams, Music Assessments, and Report Cards. Culminating Assessments: Science Fair,Science investigation journals, research project presentations, processed writing, projects, portfolio's,and performances. Our assessment data consistently drives instruction. At the secondary level, variousassessments are used as outlined in the lesson, including teacher-designed tests and quizzes, rubrics,authentic assessments, observation,etc. * Formal assessments (MEAP and NWEA) align withstandards & benchmarks, GLCE's. The NWEA is given three times a year to our students. This data isanalyzed and compared throughout the school year. Student results are used to measure our curriculumgoals.

Focus Questions


Using NWEA and MME/ACT data has been the driving force behind our curriculum choices and willcontinue to be used to show student growth and achievement.



Strand II - Leadership

School leaders create a school environment where everyone contributes to a cumulative, purposeful and positiveeffect on student learning.


Standard 1 - Instructional Leadership

School leaders create and sustain a context for learning that puts students' learning first.

Benchmark A: Educational Program

Indicators:

II.1.A.1 High Standards and Clear Expectations: There is a system-wide climate that supports student learningwith equity as a core value. Everyone in the district is united in purpose to assure that all students learn to highstandards in order to close achievement gaps. District leaders and school administrators set clear expectations anddecentralize responsibility for decisions through the provision of internal accountability measures.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

The building principals through out the district assume the role as leading by example through fullparticipation in the professional development opportunities sponsored by the local and intermediateschool districts. (i.e. MIBLSI (Academic and Behavioral), Professional Learning Communities). Thereis full participation by building leadership in suggested and mandated teacher trainings at the districtlevel such as MLPP, LETRS, DIBELS, Data Usage and Professional Learning communities. Onedistrict school leader has been trained as a state literacy trainer and works outside the district as aregional consultant. Another principal serves as district representative for the COOR IntermediateSchool District CCCPD advisory board which is responsible for professional developmentrecommendations at the ISD level. As part of participation in the MiBLSi grant (Pre-8 this year andPre-12 next year), building leadership teams guide schoolwide efforts for data analysis and schoolwide program development and implimentation as it applies to continuing school improvement. Thesuperintendent has also served in a leadership role to support curricumlum discussion in WorldLanguages at both the intermediate school district and state level. Utilizing our PLC groups forcommon planning has been the biggest key for us in not only targeting students, but also in targeting



focus areas within our curriculum. Within these PLC groups, content expectations and courserequirements are discussed as are common formative and summative assessment pieces. Also, we areable to pursue smaller PD opportunities through introducing various reading strategies, for example,and asking for teachers to try them in their classrooms and report back to the PLC about the impact thestrategy had on students. We have had staff-wide PD on expository text reading strategies, JohnCollins/Mark Dressel writing processes, utilizing NWEA results, as well as looking at the work ofMike Schmoker, Ruby Payne, and Paul Slocumb.

Benchmark B: Instructional Support

Indicators:

II.1.B.1 Culture of Collaboration: District leaders are continually seeking to build a culture of mutual respect,collaboration, trust and shared responsibility for system as well as school improvement. A common valuethroughout the district is that adults, as well as students, are continuous learners. As a result, ProfessionalLearning Communities exist at all levels of the organization.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

All members of staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.Collaborative decision making is part of the district culture. Major curricular purchases are made withinput from the teaching staff from each of the four buildings. Materials sufficient to teach curriculumare purchased, and programs with upgraded editions are provided as needed. Site based decisionmaking is at the center of the building culture thorugh the district whenever such a choice is possible.Major decisions are generally made as a result of full staff discussion using a consensus model. Thecommunity and parents have had a major voice in regards to the SCORE meetings that thesuperintendent has implemented over the course of the last three years. We continueto implementseveral positive changes as a result of this group. The Superintendent has also implemented a parentand a teacher committee. Both groups meet monthly to discuss needed changes and budget issues. Andagain, several positive changes have coem form both groups. We have continued to give teachers timeto visit and observe each other's classrooms. Teachers us the norms and ground rules they haveestablished for discussions, written reflections and after substantive discussions and specific protocolsfor discussion. Through everything above, a very healthy professional learning community hasemerged which is driven by data results. The above collaborative practices occur across grade levelsand content areas. Grade levels cross each other, as well as content areas through the UnderstandingBy Design (Backwards Design) process. Staff members design shared teaching units from a "Big Idea"process. Assessment instruments are devised first and Multiple Standards are incorporated across allContent Areas. Change has been continual within our high school as we work to adapt to the MMCrequirements. Key points for us include PLC work, formal administrative observations, informaladministration walk-throughs. We also are able to emply two-hour late-arrival or early-dismissal daysfor staff and PLC professional development opportunities. For us, the collaborative nature inherent inthe PLC allows us to constantly re-evaluate our curriculum maps and course requirements.



II.1.B.2 Instructional Program Coherence: In order to assure coherence across the entire system, district leadershave established a vision of powerful teaching and learning in collaboration with stakeholders. The districtprovides direction, assistance and resources to align, support, and enhance all parts of the system in seeking tosuccessfully achieve this vision.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

Our local MEA Teachers' Organization has demonstrated great support for following the vision ofeach one of our buildings through contract language they wrote. Teacher contracts contain languagelisting expectations for teaching standards appropriate with high expectations. The district and buildingmissions provide clear statements of goals of learning success for every student. Annual reports andgrade level brochures distributed to parents, clearly communicate desired student outcomes.Performance based report cards are correlated with state grade level content expectations. Surveysconducted as part of school improvement efforts have shown high levels of satisfaction by both parentsand students in matters connected to applying school rules fairly and consistently. The MissionStatement also appears on the district website and in the student handbooks of each building which arereviewed annually. The most recent revisions of these policy handbooks were completed within thepast year and included parent and community representation on the working committee. Change hasbeen continual within our high school as we work to adapt to the MMC requirements. Key points forus include PLC work, formal administrative observations, informal administration walk-throughs. Wealso are able to emply two-hour late-arrival or early-dismissal days for staff and PLC professionaldevelopment opportunities. For us, the collaborative nature inherent in the PLC allows us to constantlyre-evaluate our curriculum maps and course requirements. Change has been continual within our highschool as we work to adapt to the MMC requirements. Key points for us include PLC work, formaladministrative observations, informal administration walk-throughs. We also are able to emply two-hour late-arrival or early-dismissal days for staff and PLC professional development opportunities. Allstaff members in our district are active participants in school improvement work. We recentlycompleted a successful Quality Assurance Review (QAR) visit at the high school this past February.Common planning and common formative and summative assessments are also employed. We havealso recently revisited and reworked our schools vision and mission statements, making sure that allstakeholders were involved in the process and that both statements truly embody our schoolimprovement goals.

Focus Questions


The PLCs at all buildings are making a very postive impact on students achievemnent. It allows forprofessionakl dialogue and planning.

Standard 2 - Shared Leadership



Structures and processes exist to support shared leadership in which all staff has collective responsibility forstudent learning.

Benchmark A: School Culture & Climate

Indicators:

II.2.A.1 Coordinated Policies and Procedures: District policies and procedures are collaboratively developed,well understood and consistently and fairly implemented. The district's priority is on clear communication ofthese policies and procedures to assure the effective operation of the entire system, with an emphasis on equitablepractices and meeting the needs of the underserved.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

Our local MEA Teachers' Organization has demonstrated great support for following the vision ofeach one of our buildings through contract language they wrote. Teacher contracts contain languagelisting expectations for teaching standards appropriate with high expectations. The district and buildingmissions provide clear statements of goals of learning success for every student. Annual reports andgrade level brochures distributed to parents, clearly communicate desired student outcomes.Performance based report cards are correlated with state grade level content expectations. Surveysconducted as part of school improvement efforts have shown high levels of satisfaction by both parentsand students in matters connected to applying school rules fairly and consistently. The MissionStatement also appears on the district website and in the student handbooks of each building which arereviewed annually. The most recent revisions of these policy handbooks were completed within thepast year and included parent and community representation on the working committee. All membersof staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.Collaborative decision making is part of the district culture. Major curricular purchases are made withinput from the teaching staff from each of the four buildings. Materials sufficient to teach curriculumare purchased, and programs with upgraded editions are provided as needed. Site based decisionmaking is at the center of the building culture thorugh the district whenever such a choice is possible.Major decisions are generally made as a result of full staff discussion using a consensus model. Thecommunity and parents have had a major voice in regards to the SCORE meetings that thesuperintendent has implemented over the course of the last three years. We continueto implementseveral positive changes as a result of this group. The Superintendent has also implemented a parentand a teacher committee. Both groups meet monthly to discuss needed changes and budget issues. Andagain, several positive changes have coem form both groups. We have continued to give teachers timeto visit and observe each other's classrooms. Teachers us the norms and ground rules they haveestablished for discussions, written reflections and after substantive discussions and specific protocolsfor discussion. Through everything above, a very healthy professional learning community hasemerged which is driven by data results. The above collaborative practices occur across grade levelsand content areas. Grade levels cross each other, as well as content areas through the UnderstandingBy Design (Backwards Design) process. Staff members design shared teaching units from a "Big Idea"process. Assessment instruments are devised first and Multiple Standards are incorporated across all



Content Areas.

Benchmark B: Continuous Improvement

Indicators:

II.2.B.1 Culture of Collective Responsibility: The district holds all adults accountable for student learning and theattainment of high standards. Productive relationships are developed with all stakeholders and leadership isdistributed across these stakeholder groups. Therefore, the district expects individuals to be accountable for theircontributions to the collective result.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:All members of staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.Collaborative decision making is part of the district culture. Major curricular purchases are made withinput from the teaching staff from each of the four buildings. Materials sufficient to teach curriculumare purchased, and programs with upgraded editions are provided as needed. Site based decisionmaking is at the center of the building culture thorugh the district whenever such a choice is possible.Major decisions are generally made as a result of full staff discussion using a consensus model. Thecommunity and parents have had a major voice in regards to the SCORE meetings that thesuperintendent has implemented over the course of the last three years. We continueto implementseveral positive changes as a result of this group. The Superintendent has also implemented a parentand a teacher committee. Both groups meet monthly to discuss needed changes and budget issues. Andagain, several positive changes have coem form both groups. We have continued to give teachers timeto visit and observe each other's classrooms. Teachers us the norms and ground rules they haveestablished for discussions, written reflections and after substantive discussions and specific protocolsfor discussion. Through everything above, a very healthy professional learning community hasemerged which is driven by data results. The above collaborative practices occur across grade levelsand content areas. Grade levels cross each other, as well as content areas through the UnderstandingBy Design (Backwards Design) process. Staff members design shared teaching units from a "Big Idea"process. Assessment instruments are devised first and Multiple Standards are incorporated across allContent Areas. The building principals through out the district assume the role as leading by examplethrough full participation in the professional development opportunities sponsored by the local andintermediate school districts. (i.e. MIBLSI (Academic and Behavioral), Professional LearningCommunities). There is full participation by building leadership in suggested and mandated teachertrainings at the district level such as MLPP, LETRS, DIBELS, Data Usage and Professional Learningcommunities. One district school leader has been trained as a state literacy trainer and works outsidethe district as a regional consultant. Another prinicipal serves as district representative for the COORIntermediate School District CCCPD advisory board which is responsible for professionaldevelopment recommendations at the ISD level. As part of participation in the MiBLSi grant (Pre-8this year and Pre-12 next year), building leadership teams guide schoolwide efforts for data analysisand school wide program development and implimentation as it applies to continuing schoolimprovement. The superintendent has also served in a leadership role to support curricumlum



discussion in World Languages at both the intermediate school district and state level. Our local MEATeachers' Organization has demonstrated great support for following the vision of each one of ourbuildings through contract language they wrote. Teacher contracts contain language listingexpectations for teaching standards appropriate with high expectations. The district and buildingmissions provide clear statements of goals of learning success for every student. Annual reports andgrade level brochures distributed to parents, clearly communicate desired student outcomes.Performance based report cards are correlated with state grade level content expectations. Surveysconducted as part of school improvement efforts have shown high levels of satisfaction by both parentsand students in matters connected to applying school rules fairly and consistently. The MissionStatement also appears on the district website and in the student handbooks of each building which arereviewed annually. The most recent revisions of these policy handbooks were completed within thepast year and included parent and community representation on the working committee. All membersof staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.Collaborative decision making is part of the district culture. Major curricular purchases are made withinput from the teaching staff from each of the four buildings. Materials sufficient to teach curriculumare purchased, and programs with upgraded editions are provided as needed. Site based decisionmaking is at the center of the building culture thorugh the district whenever such a choice is possible.Major decisions are generally made as a result of full staff discussion using a consensus model. Thecommunity and parents have had a major voice in regards to the SCORE meetings that thesuperintendent has implemented over the course of the last three years. We continueto implementseveral positive changes as a result of this group. The Superintendent has also implemented a parentand a teacher committee. Both groups meet monthly to discuss needed changes and budget issues. Andagain, several positive changes have coem form both groups. We have continued to give teachers timeto visit and observe each other's classrooms. Teachers us the norms and ground rules they haveestablished for discussions, written reflections and after substantive discussions and specific protocolsfor discussion. Through everything above, a very healthy professional learning community hasemerged which is driven by data results. The above collaborative practices occur across grade levelsand content areas. Grade levels cross each other, as well as content areas through the UnderstandingBy Design (Backwards Design) process. Staff members design shared teaching units from a "Big Idea"process. Assessment instruments are devised first and Multiple Standards are incorporated across allContent Areas.

II.2.B.2 Continuous Improvement: The district is a learning organization committed to long-term improvement.As a result, it establishes a system-wide strategic plan, fueled by data, with clear goals and accountability forresults. All schools in the district are, in turn, learning organizations committed to long-term data-driven reformand all staff is held accountable for student achievement results.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:Through out the district we use disaggregated data from a variety of sources (MEAP,NWEA, MLPP,DIBELS, Everyday Math, NCA instruments, grade-level and department created assessment data) tomonitor student progress, and help sustain continuous improvement. Data-driven instruction hasbecome so completely embedded into the instructional process that it has become second nature for



staff members. They make instructional decisions for students based on several different sources ofdata on a daily basis. Through the use of district data systems available, student data can be comparedover time. State MEAP results and other standardized tests are used to identify learning trends overtime, as well as to point out the need for changes in instruction. Student progress is tracked throughoutthe school year in order to support the building goal of a full year of growth for every child. GradeLevel Content Expectations are used as a guide to assure that every child possesses the skills necessaryto be successful at the next grade level. School improvement efforts and annual Title I School-Wideneeds assessments are reviewed to measure growth and adjust focus when necessary. Supportprograms offer differentiated modifications and extensions for learners of all abilities.

Focus Questions


While all buildings are making continuos improvement the collaborative teams are still forming at the HighSchool Level.

Standard 3 - Operational and Resource Management

School leaders organize and manage the school to support teaching for learning.

Benchmark A: Resource Allocation

Indicators:

II.3.A.1 Accountability and Strategic Resource Allocation: The district's long range strategic plan allocatesresources in an equitable manner to assure adequate support for its educational programs and to meet the diverseneeds of its schools. Decisions are made in a transparent manner to assure accountability and equity in theallocation of resources.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:Professional learning opportunities offer a variety of choices but are always tied to the Title I Needsassessment. All Professional development most be research-based and tied to student need. Whilesome are mandatory, many others are optional. When the district requires participation, the offeringsoccur during the school day, or stipends are provided. Follow up activities are available to those whowish to learn more. Opportunities to participate in a variety of current topics are offered throughpartnerships with several Northern Michigan Intermediate School Districts. Additional opportunitiesare provided through the MiBLSi grant initiative (Pre-8 this year but Pre-12 next year). Staff is offeredthe opportunity to identify areas of professional development that they wish to explore as a district.Learning community opportunities are often offered locally for college credit. When teachers



participate in professional development instruction that takes them away from the classroom, thedistrict expectation is that teachers must identify (in advance of the conference) how the informationwill be shared with a other teachers in the district. Administration supports teachers who wish to spendtime in another classroom by providing substitute coverage in their classroom. State conferences thatrelate to school improvement are considered on a case by case basis again depending upon how theyrealte to the identified student need through the Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment. Newprograms are implemented with sufficient in-classroom support and time within the school week isprovided for collaborative discussion. Federal, state and local services and programs are effectivelycoordinated through the district consolidated application process tosupport our school-wide plan. Infact, Gerrish-Higgins is involved in a number of grants that the Business Manager, Shay Anderson;Superintendent and Director of 31a, Dr.Millie Park Mellgren; and Title I Director, Kathy Rees, havewritten with stakeholders through the consolidated application process. These groups have workedvery hard to coordinate the following grants. -Title I, Part A/D -Title II, Part A - Title II, Part D -TitleV -31a State At-Risk -ECE Kathy Rees is responsible for the Title I and Early Childhood grants. Dr.Park Mellgren, Superintendent, coordinates services for students formally identified to receive at-riskservices. Mrs. Anderson coordinates Title II, Parts A & D and Title V. Mrs. Anderson, Dr. ParkMellgren , and Mrs. Rees have coordinated their efforts to efficiently supply materials, professionaldevelopment activities, teacher stipends, release time and other support to the entire school district.The district professional development request form has been very helpful to coordinate those types ofopportunities. On the forms, staff members are first and foremost requested to identify the connectionof the professional development activity to NCA/School Improvement Goals. They are also required toobtain the approval of the project director if funding from one of the above grants is required. Mrs.Anderson, Dr. Park Mellgren, and Mrs. Rees adjust the source of the funding, with the purpose ofcoordinating all of the grants. For example, staff members who request to attend professionaldevelopment activities need to complete a plan of how they intend to share and use the informationthemselves, upon their return. Their goal is to make meaningful choices for professional development,which reflects a comprehensive, coordinated approach for educational reform. At the intermediateschool district level, Mrs. Mcnitt, Roscommon Elementary Principal is a member of the COORIntermediate Coordinating Committee for Professional Development(CCCPD). The CCCPD havecoordinated grant efforts and have offered extensive training sessions that are ongoing throughout theyear. School calendars provide opportunities for building teams to work on school improvement andcurricular considerations throughout the school year. Classroom instructional time is aligned withdistrict goals and care is taken to preserve sufficient blocks of uninterrupted learning time. Schedulesare planned around optimum student learning times whenever possible. Pull out programs andsupplemental curricular instruction are offered during times that are least invasive to the classroomlearning environment. Weekly common planning time is offered in a collaborative setting at eachgrade level, providing an additional two hours of group planning beyond contract requirements.Additionally, the district has seven late start days that provide fourteen more hours of time dedicated togroup collaboration between grade levels. Protocols have been established for these meetings, agendasare in place, and minutes are recorded with the principal. The work completed with the behavior aspectof the MiBLSi grant (pre-4 this year and Pre-12 next year) promotes the investment of time andsystems that result in less time spent on discipline, creating more time for student learning.

Focus Questions


Collaborative Decision making is still developing at the secondary levels where it appears to be more in placeat the elementary level.





Strand III - Personnel and Professional Learning

The school has highly qualified personnel who continually acquire and use skills, knowledge, attitudes, andbeliefs necessary to create a culture with high levels of learning for all.


Standard 1 - Personnel Qualifications

School/district staff qualifications, knowledge and skills support student learning.

Benchmark A: Requirements

Indicators:

III.1.A.1 Highly Qualified Personnel: The district recruits, hires and retains a highly diverse and qualified staff.The primary attributes considered in the hiring process include: extensive knowledge of content area(s);demonstrated use of effective research-based and developmentally appropriate instructional practices andexperience teaching a diverse population.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

All staff members through out the district are highly qualified as identified by No Child Left Behind.Ongoing professional development is available to teachers that focus on both content knowledge andbest teaching practices. Every teacher has had intensive support (including peer coaching) to teachEveryday Mathematics and the Lucy Calkins writing framework. In addition, grant initiatives (MiBLSi- Pre-8 this year and Pre-12 next year) focus on strategies to improve student behavior and readingskills. Staff members routinely demonstrate a high level of expertise and incorporate higher orderthinking in daily instruction. Building staff members have assumed a leadership role with a stateorganizations and committees, while another serves as a professional math consultant. The one of thebuilding principals in the district serves as district representative to the COOR ISD team that isresponsible for planning professional development. Many staff members assume leadership roleswithin the district and some have participated in state range finding and similar activities. Involvementwith the state MiBLSi (Pre-8 ths year and Pre-12 next year) grant has resulted in a team centeredapproach to ongoing teacher development through training, guidance, feedback, resources/tools. Acoordinated focus on action plans have resulted from current data throughout the year. The leadership



team uses collaborative time to disseminate this information to the building staff on a monthly basisand site based decision making is an essential part of the process. Professional development hasincluded: RTI, NWEA, MiBLSi, Non-bullying intervention, Junior Class Learning, MEAP, BackwardsDesign, LETERS, Project Read, DIBELS, MLPP, QRI, and EPLI training, Non-violent crisisintervention, four blocks, Road to the Code, PALS, KPALS, using data, independent professionalstudy and implementation of best practices, and staff led professional development (Project Read,Bullying Training, Positive Behavior Support meetings). New teachers are paired with MasterTeachers to honor their required three year mentoring requirement and are given research-basedprofessional development opportunities. By maintaining the PLC meetings, administration providesample opportunity for all staff to be involved in the school improvement process. Collegialconversations, through the PLC format and through the use of mentoring, maintain a high level ofprofessionalism and articulation of ideas.

Focus Questions


More development needs to take place in Recruitment of Highly Qualified.

Standard 2 - Professional Learning

Professional learning is conducted with colleagues across the school/district on improving staff practices andstudent achievement.

Benchmark A: Collaboration

Indicators:

III.2.A.1 Coordinated Professional Development Based Upon Common Principles: The system provides job-embedded, on-going, interrelated learning opportunities for all staff to improve their effectiveness. The intent ofprofessional development is to help build capacity and implement new skills system-wide emphasizing theirapplication in the classroom.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

Cross district teams meet regularly to discuss/refine curriculum delivery and mapping as a result oflate start release time offered monthly, and professional development time dedicated to this effort. Inaddition, collaborative planning is scheduled weekly through out all of the buildings in the district andparticipation is required at all grade levels and includes Special Education. This time is in addition tothe planning time assured by union contract. Monthly staff meetings are dedicated to schoolimprovement issues and most qualify as hours toward professional development. Peer coaching is used



to support our school improvement efforts in writing, and improved reading practices. Action researchopportunities are available to all staff members and have been incorporated into mandatory ISDsponsored professional development at the beginning of the school year. (This year two days werededicated to the work of Ruby Payne.) A building framework for professional learning communities isbased on recent professional development centered on this work.

Focus Questions


Collaborative Decision making is still developing at the secondary levels where it appears to be more in placeat the elementary level.



Strand IV - School and Community Relations

The school staff maintains purposeful, active, positive relationships with families of its students and with thecommunity in which it operates to support student learning.


Standard 1 - Parent/Family Involvement

Schools actively and continuously involve parents and families in student learning and other school activities.

Benchmark A: Communication

Indicators:

IV.1.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships: The district uses system-wide strategiesto listen to and communicate with parents/families. They are provided meaningful roles in the decision-makingprocess and the district promotes a culture of participation, responsibility and ownership. The collaborativerelationships that are developed reflect the needs and strengths of the district, its schools and parents/families.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

We are a school of limited diversity. The largest group would be economic status. Forty-eight percentis the population statistic used to qualify us as a Title I School-Wide site. All other categories ofdiversity combine to total less than 10%. While we do not have to consider families who speak anotherlanguage, we do have to be concerned about families without telephones or computers. Because ourschool encompasses a large geographical area, it is often difficult for parents to travel (high fuel costs)the distance necessary for face to face conversations. To best communicate with all of our families, wesend home many hard copy documents. Care is taken to assure that they are reader friendly.School/Parent/Family communication is conducted through Scoop Articles, Weekly CommunicatorArticles, Classroom Newsletters, Family Involvement Nights, Classroom phones, Parent Survey,Parent Workshops, District/School Website, Student-Led Conferences, Parent/Student Surveys, Title IParent Compacts, Home Visits, Classroom Volunteers, Child Studies/IEPs and Daily Planners areutilized at the secondary level. We also offer parents the opportunity to attend the Kirtland Children'sTheater Productions. Information is also available through our district, building and classroomwebsites. Parent Conferences are often scheduled in the evening so that parents do not have to leave



their jobs. Public transportation travel tokens are provided for parents who have no way to come toschool for meetings. Technology contact opportunities are offered through our building and districtwebsites, and through a ListServ, school information is communicated via the Internet. We offer openlines of communication with stakeholders via school e-mail, use of student planners and progressreports, and time available for parent-teacher conferences (three times per school year once atrimester). As a district, we also offer an after-school, extended day program to struggling students.rvwhich parents can sign up for on a voluntary basis.

Focus Questions


Communication Improvement is a continuos process which alway needs further development.

Standard 2 - Community Involvement

The community at large is supportive of and involved in student learning and other school activities.

Benchmark A: Communication

Indicators:

IV.2.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships: The district has developed on-going,system-wide strategies to listen to and communicate with its stakeholders. It has created and mobilizedcollaborative networks of these stakeholders to support the schools. They are given meaningful roles in thedecision-making process thereby promoting a culture of participation, responsibility and ownership.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:

We are a school of limited diversity. The largest group would be economic status. Forty-eight percentis the population statistic used to qualify us as a Title I School-Wide site. All other categories ofdiversity combine to total less than 10%. While we do not have to consider families who speak anotherlanguage, we do have to be concerned about families without telephones or computers. Because ourschool encompasses a large geographical area, it is often difficult for parents to travel (high fuel costs)the distance necessary for face to face conversations. To best communicate with all of our families, wesend home many hard copy documents. Care is taken to assure that they are reader friendly.School/Parent/Family communication is conducted through Scoop Articles, Weekly CommunicatorArticles, Classroom Newsletters, Family Involvement Nights, Classroom phones, Parent Surveys,Parent Workshops, District/School Website, Student-Led Conferences, Parent/Student Surveys, Title IParent Compacts, Home Visits, Classroom Volunteers, Child Studies/IEPs and Daily Planners areutilized at the secondary level. We also offer parents the opportunity to attend the Kirtland Children's



Theater Productions. Information is also available through our district, building and classroomwebsites. Parent Conferences are often scheduled in the evening so that parents do not have to leavetheir jobs. Public transportation travel tokens are provided for parents who have no way to come toschool for meetings. Technology contact opportunities are offered through our building and districtwebsites, and through a ListServ which parents can sign up for on a voluntary basis. TheSuperintendent meets with a group of parents monthly to discuss concerns and the implement change.Parents are also part of the development of the consolidated grant applications. Parents and communitymembers have also participated in teh SCORE meetings. This group has defined district needs andmany possitive changes have occured because of this group. Various forms of Parent Surveys are alsoutilized Pre-12 in order to obtain parent input of various topics and needs.

Focus Questions


Communication Improvement is a continuos process which alway needs further development. Stakeholder input is not consistently applied across all grade levels in our district.



Strand V - Data Management

Schools/districts have a system for managing data and information in order to inform decisions to improve studentachievement.


Standard 1 - Data Management

The school has policies, procedures and systems for the generation, collection, storage and retrieval of its data.

Benchmark A: Data Generation

Indicators:

V.1.A.1 Comprehensive, Accessible and Meaningful Data System: Through the use of multiple types andsources of disaggregated data, the system informs efforts to close achievement gaps. This data is readilyaccessible to stakeholders directly involved in data-based decision-making.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:We disaggregate our data obtained from NWEA, Work Keys, and the MME/ACT at the high school.MEAP and Data obtained through NWEA and Test Whiz is compared over time to establish learningtrends. Item analysis of MEAP question statistics, together with review of released testing items, areused to focus teaching practices appropriate to student needs. at the elmetnary level DIBELS fluencydata is used to identify Title I eligibility, for both in school and extended day programs. It allows forcomparison of local norms, state norms, and MiBLSi school project norms. DIBELS progressmonitoring is used to track student progress/improvement over time. User friendly graphicrepresentations of data are available with this program, and can be produced by both teachers andadministration. Individual student reading data is obtained through Quantitative Reading InventoriesGRades 4-8 that are administered and reported three times a year. A performance flow chart based oncurrent student data is used to determine the amount and frequency of assessment requirements foreach child. School Improvement Plans are reviewed annually and decisions are made based on thatdata. Building action plans are reviewed three times per year. Changes are implemented whenevernecessary to address identified needs. Teachers take part in data meetings three times a year. Thesesessions are led by the principal (and other support personnel) who are able to assist teachers as they



develop the skills necessary to analyze data within grade level and cross grade level teams. Individualgoals are established for all students who are below benchmark standards, and these goals are revisedas new data becomes available. Student and school information is collected, identified, and generatedthrough CA 60s, MLPP Reports, NWEA, SWIS, Everyday Math Assessment Reports, Test Whiz,DIBELS, QRI, and DRA. The Title I Comprehensive Data Collection and Results ImplementationProcess drives targeted skill areas. The supplemental support is fluid and responds and regularlychanges in direct response to data results. Through Collaborative Teams we use Gap Analysis Plans,Curriculum Mapping, Everyday Math Pacing Guides and the Title I Comprehensive Data Analysisprocesses to constantly up-date our instructional practices. We have collaborative planning time for 2hours each month. Title I supplemental services (K-8) are revised as the result of this data analysisprocess. The teams then apply the insights obtained through this process to develop curriculum in theirclassrooms. The climate for the Collaborative Planning Time is such that it promotes a safeenvironment for thinking out of the box and for taking positive risks. At the high school level coursedecisions, classroom instruction, and instructional strategies are made based upon the data and how wecan best help our students to achieve. Data also drives how each course is designed to meet statecontent expectations.

Focus Questions


Date collection, analysis and results application is not consistently applied across all grade levels in ourdistrict.

Standard 2 - Information Management

The school/district staff collaborates to derive information from data and use it to support decisions.

Benchmark A: Analysis & Interpretation

Indicators:

V.2.A.1 Systematic Support for Data Analysis: District leaders are experienced in data analysis and assist intraining school staff in data analysis techniques. The district provides a range of assessment tools and training inthe analysis and use of data for the purpose of reviewing student performance and school and systemeffectiveness.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:We use disaggregated data from a variety of sources (MEAP, NWEA, SWIS, MLPP, DIBELS,Everyday Math, grade-level and department created assessment data) to determine learning priorities,



monitor progress, and help sustain continuous improvement. this wealth of data is collected andreviewed. Individual student data is used to make decisions relative to differentiated opportunities forstudents of all abilities. A response to intervention program, helps to established a multi-level approachto intervention support/services. Instructional decisions are made both at the classroom and districtlevel, and evolve as a result of data collected through a variety of sources. Professional development ison-going and provides opportunities for teachers to incorporate improved teaching strategies supportedby research. Collaborative planning time (2.5 hours weekly) provides teachers the opportunity to havemeaningful dialogue about effective teaching. Good ideas are routinely shared as a result of thisprocess. Program changes based on data have resulted in changes across the curriculum. Thesechanges include both acquisition of new materials and incorporation of improved practices. Actionplans are created and revised by the instructional staff in partnership with the building principal. Weare data driven in our district! The data that we compile drives our instruction. DIBELS, NWEA,SWIS, MIACCESS, MLPP, QRI, Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment (Pre-8), and report cardsalign with the GLCEs. Gap Analysis is used to define curricular areas of need. Special Education usesAIMS writing probes. We use MEAP results to help focus our writing, and evaluate which students goto extended day. Comprehensive curriculum maps have been compiled and are utilized for each gradelevel. Backward design units have been put together which incorporate higher level thinking skills.Written documentation of curriculum planning takes place during districtwide PD release time andgrade level meetings.Curricular mapping at each grade level follows a prescribed scope and sequencealigned to the state standards. Weekly collaborative sessions among grade level teams allows forreview of student data and an opportunity for ongoing discussion of student needs. Commonassessments, particularly in writing, are scored as a group. Results of summative assessments areconsistently recorded, and analysis of the data is used to plan future instruction. Cross district planningis scheduled annually, and provides additional collaborative time in order to review pacing schedulesand curriculum equity from classroom to classroom. Input from teachers is key to the selection andpurchase of curricular support materials. Pilot programs are often used to field test researched basedprograms, and professional development offerings are sufficient to sustain the initiatives provided.(Everyday Math, Four Block Literacy, 6+1 Traits of Writing and Lucy Calkins are examples.)

Benchmark B: Applications

Indicators:

V.2.B.1 Informed Data-Based Decision-Making: System-wide curricular and instructional decisions are based ondata and research at all levels. The district structures the decision-making process so that disaggregated dataprovides the basis for a systematic analysis of instructional and organizational effectiveness, with the results ofthis analysis employed to improve student and system performance.



Implemented

Exemplary

Evidence:We are data driven in our district! The data that we compile drives our instruction. DIBELS, NWEA,SWIS, MIACCESS, MLPP, QRI, Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment (Pre-8), report cards alignwith the GLCEs and at the high school level MME/ACT. Disaggregated data provides the driving



force behind all decisions. . Gap Analysis is used to define curricular areas of need. Special Educationuses AIMS writing probes. We use MEAP results to help focus our writing, and evaluate whichstudents go to extended day. Comprehensive curriculum maps have been compiled and are utilized foreach grade level. Backward design units have been put together which incorporate higher levelthinking skills. Written documentation of curriculum planning takes place during districtwide PDrelease time and grade level meetings.Curricular mapping at each grade level follows a prescribedscope and sequence aligned to the state standards. Weekly collaborative sessions among grade levelteams allows for review of student data and an opportunity for ongoing discussion of student needs.Use of departmental PLC groups as well as K-12 curriculum meetings, along with a movementtowards building/district-wide PLC groups, establishes a solid foundation from which we can makesolid, appropriate curricular decisions.Common assessments, particularly in writing, are scored as agroup. Results of summative assessments are consistently recorded, and analysis of the data is used toplan future instruction. Cross district planning is scheduled annually, and provides additionalcollaborative time in order to review pacing schedules and curriculum equity from classroom toclassroom. Input from teachers is key to the selection and purchase of curricular support materials.Pilot programs are often used to field test researched based programs, and professional developmentofferings are sufficient to sustain the initiatives provided. (Everyday Math, Four Block Literacy, 6+1Traits of Writing and Lucy Calkins are examples.)

Focus Questions


Date collection, analysis and results application is not consistently applied across all grade levels in ourdistrict.



Goals

Content Area: Math

Student Goal Statement: To increase the percentage of student meeting expectations for the MEAP 2009testing period. In addition, increase students meeting benchmark according to the criteria set forth on theNWEA test.

Gap Statement: A percentage of students at the elementary level are not meeting grade level expectations inmath. For instance, 87% of the students in third grade met expectations in the MEAP according to the Fall2008 test. However in the Fall of 2008 at St. Helen Elementary 82% of the students in second grade were notmeeting benchmark according to the NWEA Assessment. In addition, 59% in 3rd, and 60% in 4th are notmeeting benchmark in math based on the current 08/09 NWEA assessments. At Roscommon ElementarySchool 2008 MEAP Scores showed Fourth grade students (skills acquired through third grade) scored 83%proficient. Post data trends indicated a decline in proficiency over the past three years of approximately 3%per year. At the middle school level, 17% of the students did not meet grade level expectations acccording tothe MEAP data from the Fall 2008 testing.

Cause for Gap: The AYP Math targets are: 3=67%, 4=65%, 5= 2%, 6=60%, 7=57% and 8=54%. At theelementary and middle school levels we have certainlly moved students out of the lower categories. Dataanalysis has revealed several students who's cut scores were very close to the next level. Interventions havebeen implemented to close the gap for these students to move them into the next level. The gap was identifiedby MEAP and NWEA results, students were identified and then strategies and services were implemented.The cause for the gap was the fact that without assessment data we were unaware of the exact needs that wentbeyond the Universal Intructional needs of our students.

Key Characteristics Impacted by Goal: None selected

Content Area: English Language Arts

Student Goal Statement: To increase the percentage of student meeting expectations for DIBELS testingduring the 2009/2010 school year. We can track this through the DIBELS progress monitoring process.

Gap Statement: A large percentage of students at the elementary level are not meeting grade levelexpectations in oral reading fluency. For instance, at 1st grade 46% of the students at RoscommonElementary School and 47% of the students at St. Helen Elementary School are not meeting benchmark inletter naming fluency according to the latest DIBELS test. In addition at 3rd grade, 49% of the students atRoscommon Elementary School and 59% of the students at St. Helen Elementary School are not meetingexpectations in oral reading fluency according to the latest DIBELS test. At Roscommon Middle Schoolaccording to the spring 2009 data, 54% of our students failed to meet the projected goal.

Cause for Gap: The AYP Targets for Reading are: 3=60%, 4=59%, 5=57%, 6=56%, 7=54%, and 8=53%. Atthe elementary and middle school levels we have certainlly moved students out of the lower categories. Dataanalysis has revealed several students who's cut scores were very close to the next level. Interventions havebeen implemented to close the gap for these students to move them into the next level. The gap was identifiedby MEAP and NWEA results, students were identified and then strategies and services were implemented.



The cause for the gap was the fact that without assessment data we were unaware of the exact needs that wentbeyond the Universal Intructional needs of our students.

Key Characteristics Impacted by Goal: None selected



CNA - Conclusion

1. As the district staff reviewed the school and district responses to questions asked about the system processesand practices, (key characteristics at the school level and indicators at the district level) what trends were noticedthat may have an impact on student achievement?

In reviewing our assessment data and reflecting upon the district curriculum and the instructional practicesthrough-out our district it is very apparent that writing needs to be greatly improved K-12. The Everday Mathprogram utilized K-8 works well but it needs to be monitored through a Pacing Guide to insure that everythingis covered in the spiral. If units do not get done then Mathematical Gaps are created. Our reading program hasbeen successful, however, our data indicates at 3rd and 4th grade in both of our elementary buildings that theCORE Curriculum needed to be more intentionally taught. At the Middel school level it has become apparentthat it is very difficualt for the teaching staff to complete and respond to data. Both Elmementary Buildings inour district made AYP and were awarded an "A" on our Michigan School Report Card and are on Step 0 inregards to AYP. The Middle School also made AYP, achieved a "B" on the Michigan School Report Card andare also on Step 0. However, the reflections in this section must be addressed in order for student achievementto continue to improve.

2. What did the district staff identify as over-arching system challenges that would need to be addressed at thedistrict level? At the building level?

Writing must be systematically and intentionally taught through out the district. St. Helen Elementary iscurrently Piloting for the district an Assessment/Instruction Writing Program called, "My Access". Studentstype in their narratives and are immediately given feed back based on the MEAP 6 point rubric. The programassesses the writing sample and scores it instantly. The students are then directed to very specific activities toaddress the types of errors they made in the writing sample. This was our first full year of Piloting the Programand we have obtained some fantastic results. As a district we have indentified that a need for assessing writingand responding to that assessemnt has been an over-arching sytem challenge for us. Roscommon Elementaryhas been using the Lucy Cawkins Writing materials and have even provided a Title I Teacher who goes in andmodels the lessons in every classroom once a week. Due to staff cuts the Middle School and High School areexperiecing tremendous instructional delivery difficulties. The budget is a real part of our world which greatlyhenders our efforts.

3. What process did the district used to complete the Comprehensive Needs Assessment for the district?

Each building team through out the district, consisting of multiple stakeholders, contributed to the DistrictComprehensive Needs Assessment Report. The actual assessment pieces were collected by the Title IStaff,however all staff contributed to administering the assessment instruments.



Report - Summary

Indicators GettingStarted

PartiallyImplemented

Implemented Exemplary

Strand I - Teaching For Learning Standard 1 - Curriculum Benchmark A - Aligned, Reviewed & Monitored I.1.A.1 Aligned, Coherent and Inclusive Curriculum Benchmark B - Communicated I.1.B.1 Communicated and Articulated Curriculum Standard 2 - Instruction Benchmark A - Planning I.2.A.1 Systematic Planning for Quality Instruction Benchmark B - Delivery I.2.B.1 Coherent and Effective Support for the Delivery of Instruction Standard 3 - Assessment Benchmark A - Aligned to Curriculum & Instruction I.3.A.1 Use of Multiple Measures to Support School-wide Decision-making Strand II - Leadership Standard 1 - Instructional Leadership Benchmark A - Educational Program II.1.A.1 High Standards and Clear Expectations Benchmark B - Instructional Support II.1.B.1 Culture of Collaboration II.1.B.2 Instructional Program Coherence Standard 2 - Shared Leadership Benchmark A - School Culture & Climate II.2.A.1 Coordinated Policies and Procedures Benchmark B - Continuous Improvement II.2.B.1 Culture of Collective Responsibility II.2.B.2 Continuous Improvement Standard 3 - Operational and Resource Management Benchmark A - Resource Allocation II.3.A.1 Accountability and Strategic Resource Allocation Strand III - Personnel and Professional Learning Standard 1 - Personnel Qualifications Benchmark A - Requirements III.1.A.1 Highly Qualified Personnel Standard 2 - Professional Learning Benchmark A - Collaboration III.2.A.1 Coordinated Professional Development Based Upon Common Principles



Report - Summary: Continued.....

Indicators GettingStarted

PartiallyImplemented

Implemented Exemplary

Strand IV - School and Community Relations Standard 1 - Parent/Family Involvement Benchmark A - Communication IV.1.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships Standard 2 - Community Involvement Benchmark A - Communication IV.2.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships Strand V - Data Management Standard 1 - Data Management Benchmark A - Data Generation V.1.A.1 Comprehensive, Accessible and Meaningful Data System Standard 2 - Information Management Benchmark A - Analysis & Interpretation V.2.A.1 Systematic Support for Data Analysis Benchmark B - Applications V.2.B.1 Informed Data-Based Decision-Making

Districtcna

Education

school data

school improvement process

school report card

school staff

report summary

student test data

performance indicators

student academicachievement