School Improvement Plan



School Name:  David Douglas High School Districts        Year:  2010-11 

Your browser may not support display of this image.
 

Learning Today for Living Tomorrow

MISSION STATEMENT

We believe that our primary mission is to provide a quality curriculum, including academics and school related activities, which offers each student the opportunity to develop intellectually, socially, physically, creatively and vocationally. 
 

2010-2012 District Continuous Improvement Plan (CIP) GOALS

Reading

By June 2012 we will reduce the number of students in all subgroups not meeting the standard

in reading by 10% each year as measured by OAKS.   

Writing

By June 2012 we will reduce the number of students in all subgroups not meeting the standard

in writing by 10% each year as measured by OAKS.   

Math

By June 2012 we will reduce the number of students in all subgroups not meeting the standard

in math by 10% each year as measured by OAKS.   

Behavior

Coming Soon  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

              School Improvement Plan 

Table of Contents 

Introduction and Purpose of the SIP

Timelines

The SIP Process:

Step 1: Building Readiness …………………………………………………………….4

Step 2: Collecting and Analyzing Data……………………………………………….6

Step 3: Set, Review, or Revise Measurable Goals……………………………………9

Step 4: Gather Research and Information around Best Practices…………………15

Step 5: identify Strategies to Meet Goals and Develop Action Plans…………….16

            Strategies……………………………………………………………….17

            Results Indicators……………………………………………………...18

            Action Plan……………………………………………………………..21

Step 6: Implement Plans and Monitor Progress……………………………………22

Step 7: Evaluate Effectiveness………………………………………………….…….23

Title I School-wide Compliance Items ……………………………………………...24 
 

*Attach a copy of Step 7 from last year’s SIP

Introduction and Purpose of the School Improvement Plan

The School Improvement Plan is the systematic documentation of the continuous best thinking of school leadership as a professional learning community. It’s structure as used in the David Douglas School District combines the latest research and best practice in data driven decision making in the area of education in order to ensure strategic planning for high student expectations and achievement. It involves collective action research in the highest technical form in an ongoing effort to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies whose purpose is to achieve academic excellence and success for all students in their K-12 learning experience. The chart below offers a pictorial representation of the process.

Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image. Your browser may not support display of this image.  

Timeline:

September 30  SIP Plan due

October 15  District Team/Peer review

October 31  Revisions/Final Draft Due 

Step I:  Building Readiness
 

Engage all stakeholders in active school improvement efforts.  Active school improvement means all stakeholders become part of the decision-making process.  All stakeholders have a responsibility to participate in, learn about and lead the school improvement effort. 

A.  School Improvement Plan Leadership Team

The school determines the membership of the SIP Leadership Team. It is recommended that this be a function of your building site council with the addition a few other key members. The following is a recommended list:

  • An ELL teacher
  • A Special Ed teacher
  • A Title I teacher
  • A Literacy Coach
  • A School Improvement Coordinator

If these people are not already members of site council, they will serve as a member of the School Improvement Plan Leadership Team only. 

  1. Planning Team - List the names of people involved in developing this plan. 
Parents:  
John May
Licensed Staff:

(include position)

Teachers:  Michael Givler, Bill Blevins, Kim Oswald, Josh Dill, Kamala Skipper, Sarah Dorn

School Improvement Coordinator:  Denise Pierson

Literacy Coach:  Amy Holman

Testing Coordinator:  Joe Talley

Grant Coordinator: Maureen Utz

Department Chairs:  Dan Wood, Greg Carradine, Joe Little, Ron Linn, Matt Fisher, Sandra Norwood, Rich Owen, Lon Morast, Michelle Wood, Amy Straw, John Riesenman, Linda Vancil 
 

Classified Staff:

(include position)

 
Anne Kemp- Site team 
Administrators:

(include position)

John Bier- Principal

Assistant Principals: Elise Guest, Sharon Webster, John Murray, Kevin Taylor, Mark Haner 

Special Programs Staff (i.e. Title, SPED, TAG, ELL, etc.):  
Others (Optional):

(district staff, students, community members, etc.)

 
 
 
 
 
 

B.  Communication 

  1. Describe the processes that will be used to include and inform the entire staff, parents, community and district of the school improvement planning team processes and actions.
 
The planning process was rolled out to Site Team and Division Chairs in May.  Subsequent meetings with both the Site Team and Division Chairs during the Spring led to the development of the SIP plan.  School Achievement goals were provided to staff on June 2nd early release.   

Achievement goals were provided to staff again during inservice week of 2010-11 school year. 

Final SIP goals were shared with Site team during the September and October meetings. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  1. Describe the multiple opportunities for informing and getting feedback from these

    groups. Include overview and chronology of significant events.

 
Staff had opportunity to provide feedback to Division Chairs from June 2 until a Division Chair retreat in late June. 

Opportunities for further feedback from Site Team, DC’s, and the rest of our staff were provided throughout inservice week. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
Step 2: Collecting/Analyzing Data and Prioritizing Needs
 

Purpose: To review assessment data related to content areas, attendance, specific grades, and demographic data from your own school in order to gain insights about the strengths and weaknesses of your teaching and learning programs.

Collecting and analyzing data to look at the school’s challenges and strengths is truly best practice in identifying on what to work and how to direct your resources. There should be a clear connection between what the data indicates and what actions are being taken.

Note: You will be developing and/or revising two-three goals.   

Rationale: “School decision-makers need a deliberate process to guide them through the examination and analysis of data. Without this, they may be apt to substitute strongly held opinions for the fact-based conclusions that would be derived from review of the actual data.”

    • Dr. Douglas Reeves
 

Process:

1. Collect and review all the reports that are currently available. This should include:

  1. School Improvement Plan (SIP) from the previous year
  2. School Profile Overview
  3. State Report Card
  4. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) report
  5. Behavioral information from ESIS or other reports such as the SET, BOQ
  6. Information obtained on the ODE website on state assessment results found at the following URL (Historical data is posted. http://www.ode.state.or.us/data/schoolanddistrict/testresults/reporting/PublicRpt.aspx
  7. Data Dashboard
  8. Other building-wide assessments or evaluations (DIBELS, DRA, PSAT, PET-R, SRI, etc)

2. Determine which student data and focus area (e.g. writing, math, attendance) is to be viewed with greater detail and which student sub-group populations (e.g. LEP, Special Ed, Economically Disadvantaged, Hispanic, TAG, etc.).

3. Begin filling in the Focus Area Analysis form with the specific data determined above.

4. As you fill in this form, ask the following questions:

  1. What trends, strengths and/or areas of concern do you find?
  2. Which subgroup has a significantly higher or lower score than the “Total Population” group? Which two groups are the closest?
  3. Do achievement level gaps exist between student sub-groups?
  4. Is there a relationship between behavior and academics?
  5. What specific strategies are your teachers currently using to impact improved student achievement? How do you know it is working?
  6. What comparisons can you make among content areas? If there is a weakness in reading and writing, and does this weakness impact other content areas?
  7. What is the biggest surprise?
 
 
 
 
 
 

    School Profile Overview

2005 to 2010 

Use AYP Report and School Report Card to complete

School Year Enrollment ELL SPED Free & Reduced Attendance Total # of

ODRs

% of students Receiving ODRs
2005-06 2,648 19.3%   59% 91.2%    
2006-07 2,911 15.8%   61% 88.3%    
2007-08 2,939 15% 9.5% 62% 88.7%    
2008-09 2,959 13.6% 9.3% 64% 91.2%    
2009-10 2,928 14.2% 9% 66.8% 91.2%    
 
Ethnicity
School Year White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander Native American
2006-07 67% 6.5% 11.8% 13% 1.4%
2007-08 61.4% 8.7% 13.4% 14.2% 1.4%
2008-09 58.9% 9.3% 14.4% 15.9% 1.6%
2009-2010 50.6 8.6% 17.8% 17.7 .8%
 
School Year AYP Report Card Rating
2006-07 Did Not Meet Satisfactory
2007-08 Did Not Meet Satisfactory
2008-09 Did Not Meet Needs Improvement
2009-10 Did Not Meet Needs Improvement
 
Staffing Information
# of Classroom Teachers:  148
# of Certified Support Staff:  174
# of Classified Support Staff:  76
% of Highly Qualified Staff:  100
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Focus Area Analysis 

 
Focus Area:  Reading 

Data Used:  OAKS

 
Student Sub-category

(i.e. ELL, Hispanic, 3rd grade)

 
 
2006 to 2007
 
 
2007 to 2008
 
 
2008 to 2009
 
 
2009 to 2010
All students 52% 54% 55% 57%
Asian/Pacific Islander 65% 57% 55% 59%
Black 37% 35% 36% 27%
Hispanic 33% 30% 39% 43%
White 56% 63% 64% 66%
ESL 15% 9% 9% 6%
SWD 11% 12% 18% 23%
 

Perceived Strengths

•All student category has gained 5%
•Hispanic population has gained 13% in the past three years
•SWD population has gained 12% in the past four years
 
Conclusion of Results (Strengths) Why?
Our data clearly shows that the greatest gains have been in the areas of students with disabilities and our Hispanic students.  SPED data has likely increased due to a new rotational system that was put into place for students.  Rather than being sheltered in one classroom students move from teacher to teacher receiving more focused instruction.  We are unsure at this time why our Hispanic students have been showing such an increase.  One contributing factor might be that El Programo Hispana has been the best outside agency in terms of working with our students. 
 

Perceived Weaknesses

•Asian/Pacific Islander population has decreased by 6% in the last four years.
•Black population has decreased 10% in the last four years
•ESL population has decreased by 9% in the last four years
 
Conclusion of Results (Weaknesses) Why?
Our Asian/Pacific Islander and Black populations have shown a significant decrease over the past four years.  This is due to an increase in the number of students in each of these categories that have fewer English skills.  We have seen an influx of Asian students in particular who a lower level ESL.  This is also true of our Black population.  In the past three years in particular we have seen a rise in our population of true African students who are non-English speaking.
 
 

Prioritization of Needs

1.  Develop strategies that will raise scores for all students.
  1. Focus efforts on turning around our Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, and ESL populations in terms of achievement.
 
 
 

Focus Area Analysis 

 
Focus Area:  Writing 

Data Used:  OAKS

 
Student Sub-category

(i.e. ELL, Hispanic, 3rd grade)

 
 
2006 to 2007
 
 
2007 to 2008
 
 
2008 to 2009
 
 
2009 to 2010
All Students 38% 48% 43% 56%
Asian/Pacific Islander       61%
Black       32%
Hispanic       45%
White       61%
ESL       17%
SWD       19%

Perceived Strengths

•All Student category has increased by 18% over the past four years.
•White and Asian/Pacific Islander have exceeded whole school average
 
Conclusion of Results (Strengths) Why?
Writing was a school-wide focus for us last year and our test results showed improvement.
 

Perceived Weaknesses

• Couldn’t get a hold of any past subgroup data
•Black and ESL students are the lowest performing subgroups in writing.
•Overall number of students passing exam is still too low.
 
Conclusion of Results (Weaknesses) Why?
ESL students have difficulty with transitioning to English. 
 

Prioritization of Needs

Select and describe your highest priority areas needing improvement based on your Perceived Weaknesses for this Focus Area Analysis.
We need to continue to make writing an important part of what we do across the curriculum. 

Differentiation of instruction needs to continue to occur with our subgroup populations. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Focus Area Analysis 

 
Focus Area:  Math 

Data Used:  OAKS

 
Student Sub-category

(i.e. ELL, Hispanic, 3rd grade)

 
 
2006 to 2007
 
 
2007 to 2008
 
 
2008 to 2009
 
 
2009 to 2010
All Students 48% 40% 47% 48%
Asian/Pacific Islander 57% 57% 65% 61%
Black 29% 11% 19% 21%
Hispanic 32% 17% 31% 32%
White 53% 47% 52% 54%
ESL 21% 12% 22% 14%
SWD 18% 7% 11% 14%

Perceived Strengths

There are no real strengths
 
Conclusion of Results (Strengths) Why?
 
 
 

Perceived Weaknesses

All groups have either declined or stayed relatively the same for the past four years.
 
Conclusion of Results (Weaknesses) Why?
There is a lot of work that needs to be done with ALL of our students.
 

Prioritization of Needs

Select and describe your highest priority areas needing improvement based on your Perceived Weaknesses for this Focus Area Analysis.
We need to look at doing things differently.  A focus on individual student needs would probably be a first step.  We need to find out what our student’s weaknesses are so we can teach specifically to them (proficiency).    
 
Focus Area:  Science 

Data Used:  OAKS

 
Student Sub-category

(i.e. ELL, Hispanic, 3rd grade)

 
 
2006 to 2007
 
 
2007 to 2008
 
 
2008 to 2009
 
 
2009 to 2010
All Students Not Tested 52%% 45% 53%
Asian/Pacific Islander Not Tested 58% 51% 55%
Black Not Tested 27% 17% 21%
Hispanic Not Tested 26% 28% 43%
White Not Tested 61% 55% 60%
ESL Not Tested 18% 9% 5%
SWD Not Tested 42% 36% 43%

Perceived Strengths

•Our Hispanic students have seen a 17% increase in the past three years.
•With the exception of ESL students all subgroups improved their scores by at least four percent over the 2008-09 school year.  Science has really focused on their standards over the past few years.
 
 
Conclusion of Results (Strengths) Why?
At this point we are not sure why our Hispanic subgroup numbers have increased so dramatically.  Possible reasons may include increased outreach with families and the greater presence of outside agencies working with our Hispanic students. 

Scores increased the past year not only because of great instruction and interventions, but also because we tested two months later this year.  This additional instruction made a difference!

 

Perceived Weaknesses

•ESL subgroup has plummeted 13% in the past three years
•Black subgroup test scores have dropped 6% in three years.
•All other subgroups have essentially stayed the same.
 
Conclusion of Results (Weaknesses) Why?
While our achievement record for the Black subgroup has never been great, we have seen a decrease over the past three years.  It is felt that this is due in part to the increasing number of students we are getting directly from African countries.  Many of these students have had little or no formal education in their own country, which puts them at a disadvantage. 

ESL numbers continue to drop largely due to the increased number of beginning level students we have been getting over the past three or four years.  

Differentiation of instruction needs to occur in all disciplines and at all levels.

 

Prioritization of Needs

Select and describe your highest priority areas needing improvement based on your Perceived Weaknesses for this Focus Area Analysis.
We need to continue to work on developing curriculum/strategies to help our ESL population increase achievement. 

There is a strong need to continue developing curriculum that contains the latest strategies for all of our students.   

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Focus Area Analysis 

 
Focus Area:  Student Engagement 

Data Used:  DDHS Distribution of Office Discipline Referrals (percentage of students with 0-1/2-4/5+ referrals)

 
Student Sub-category

(i.e. ELL, Hispanic, 3rd grade)

 
 
2006 to 2007
 
 
2007 to 2008
 
 
2008 to 2009
 
 
2009 to 2010
Asian 97/2/1 96/3/1 95/4/1 96/3/1
Black 90/8/2 79/11/9 71/15/14 80/13/7
Hispanic 95/3/2 85/12/3 90/7/3 93/5/3
ELL 96/3/1 85/12/4 90/8/2 93/5/2
SPED 90/5/5 84/12/4 90/8/2 93/5/2
 

Perceived Strengths

•The total number of students receiving zero to one referral has increased from 2007- 2010.
•Data collection processes for evaluating Office Discipline Referral trends has become streamlined.
  • In total, over 90% of all DDHS students earn zero to on discipline referral.
 
Conclusion of Results (Strengths) Why?
Scots’ PRIDE was implemented school-wide in 2007-08.  The data reflects a positive trend with an increase in students receiving zero to one referral.  This increase in the “green zone” is congruent with school-wide PBS practices.
 

Perceived Weaknesses

Black and SPED students continue to receive the most referrals with 20% earning two to four and five or more.
•Ten percent of students receive two to four referrals per year.
•Up to five percent of DDHS students earn five or more referrals per year.
 
Conclusion of Results (Weaknesses) Why?
Many teachers have not been trained or are not able to implement effective behavior management strategies to address escalating student problem behaviors that result in Office Discipline Referrals.
 
 

Prioritization of Needs

Prioritize professional development opportunities for teachers to access trainings that focus on effective, research-based behavior management strategies. 
 
 

Prioritization of Needs Process

1. Describe the process used to identify your priorities and how you involved all stakeholders.
 
 
Data was reviewed by Division Chairs during a retreat last spring.  It was at this meeting that we identified our strengths weaknesses and developed strategies to target our specific needs. 

We then presented our findings to staff during inservice week. 

Since inservice week, teachers have been working in PLT’s.  Their initial task has been to look at our data.  From the data we will be able to identify our students specific needs.  We will then develop curriculum using proven strategies that will increase student achievement. 

Members of the Scots’ PRIDE team and DDHS administrators have evaluated and discussed DDHS Distribution of Office Discipline Referral data.  Through evaluation, involved staff members identified areas that can be addressed through the Scots’ PRIDE program, continued implementation of a PBS system, and provision of professional development opportunities. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

Step 3: Set, Review or Revise Measurable Goals
 

High quality school improvement planning includes developing strategies that address specifically identified issues.  Goal setting is a critical step.  Writing good goals will make the school improvement efforts much easier to monitor and re-evaluate or adjust along the way. The key here is to make sure the goals are student centered and SMART. This means they must be/identify:  

Specific to a targeted subject area, grade level and student sub-group

Measurement instrument to be used and the element examined must be measurable

Achievable percentage gains or increases in terms of expected change

Relevant subject areas – Is the goal tending to an urgent need?

Time-bound when assessment will take place as well as timely in terms of identified need  

Identify your most important objectives for student achievement based on the challenges your team identified through your analysis of the data (Step 2) and the determination of your prioritized needs analysis (Step 3). It is critical that goals are easy to read and limited to a maximum of five, but three to four is preferable.  

“The problem is not the absence of innovations but the presence of too many disconnected, episodic, piecemeal, superficially adorned projects (or goals).”

      -Michael Fullen, Leading In A Culture Of Change (2001) 

“If we take pains to keep the goals simple and to avoid setting too many of them, they focus the attention and energies of everyone involved. Such goals are quite different from the multiple, vague, ambiguous goal statements that populate many school improvement plans.”

    - Mike Schmoker, “First Things First: Demystifying Data Analysis”, Educational Leadership, February 2003 

Use the worksheets on the following page to create your SMART goals. Your School Improvement Plan should include two to three goals 

For SMART goals in the areas other than academic content standards (e.g. goals related to behavior, attendance, course placement, participation in advanced placement courses, etc.) the same definition of SMART applies, but the wording will be different. Example: By the end of the 2010-2011 school year, reduce the number of major discipline referrals in the school by 10% and by the end of 2010-2011 another 5% as measured by eSIS.

 

SMART Goals  

Specific to a targeted subject area, grade level and student sub-group

Measurement instrument to be used and the element examined must be measurable

Achievable percentage gains or increases in terms of expected change

Relevant subject areas – Is the goal tending to an urgent need?

Time-bound when assessment will take place as well as timely in terms of identified need  

Goal 1: Reading

During the 2010-2011 school year, DDHS students’ taking the OAKS reading exam will improve their performance as follows:

DDHS Reading Targets 2009-2010 2010-2011
All Students 57% 64%
Asian/Pacific Islndr 59% 66%
Black 27% 34%
Hispanic 43% 50%
LEP 6% 13%
Economically Disadvantaged 47% 54%
White 66% 73%
SWD 23% 33%
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Goal 2: Writing

During the 2010-2011 school year, DDHS students’ taking the OAKS writing exam will improve their performance as follows:

DDHS Writing Subgroups 2009-2010 Results 2010-2011 Targets
All Students 52% 61%
Asian/Pacific Islander 61% 70%
Black 32% 41%
Hispanic 45% 54%
LEP 17% 26%
Economically Disadvantaged 49% 58%
White 61% 70%
SWD 19% 29%
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Goal 3: Math

During the 2010-2011 school year, DDHS students’ taking the OAKS math exam will improve their performance as follows:

DDHS Math Subgroups 2009-2010 Results 2010-2011 Targets
All Students 48% 59%
Asian/Pacific Islander 61% 70%
Black 21% 32%
Hispanic 32% 43%
LEP 21% 32%
Economically Disadvantaged 40% 51%
White 54% 65%
SWD 14% 24%
 
 

Goal 4:  Science

During the 2010-2011 school year, DDHS students taking the OAKS science exam will improve their performance as follows:

DDHS Science Subgroups 2009-2010 Results 2010-2011 Targets
All Students 53% 62%
Asian/Pacific Islander 55% 64%
Black 21% 30%
Hispanic 43% 52%
Economically Disadvantaged 43% 52%
LEP 13% 22%
White 60% 69%
SWD 43% 53%
 
 

Goal 5:  Behavior

During the 2010-2011 school year, DDHS students who earn two to four referrals will decrease from 6% to 4% while the number of students who earn zero to one referral will increase from 90% to 95%. 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Step 4:  Gathering Research and Information around Best Practices
 

Determining the best research-based practices, programs, and strategies is a critical component of the school improvement process.  It is important to maintain focus on learning about the program or practice that is most effective in meeting the intended goals. The instructional program strategies should be based on incorporating information obtained from a review of the research literature, visits to other programs, and/or information from staff development activities and technical assistance providers. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Provide research and findings for each goal.    

Goal Area Sources: Summary of Findings
Reading Penny Pavlava 
 

Oregon Literacy Framework 
 
 
 
 
 

Raising Reading Achievement in Middle and High Schools by Elaine K. McEwan

Reading every day is important.  Reading needs to take place across curriculum. 

Student performance data are analyzed and summarized in timely, meaningful formats and routinely used by grade or department-level teams to evaluate and adjust instruction as needed for all students. 

Literacy instruction at all levels is prioritized and protected from interruption. 

Reading across all disciplines is important. 

Use reading to learn in all disciplines.

Create a reading culture in your school. 

Ten Variables that can be changed to raise reading achievement:

  1. Your educational paradigm 
  2. How goals are set
  3. How teachers teach
  4. The curriculum and how it is chosen
  5. The alignment of the curriculum
  6. The amount of time allocated to the teaching of reading
  7. Where strategic reading is taught
  8. How learning is assessed
  9. Expectation for students
  10. How professional development is provided.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Writing
Linda Christensen 
 
 
 

Content-Area Writing by Harvey Daniels, Steven Zemelman, and Nancy Steineke 
 
 

Active Literacy Across the Curriculum by Heidi Hayes Jacobs

  1. Writing across curriculum is essential.
  2. In English classes emphasis on learning to write.  In other classes focus can be on writing to learn
 
 
  1. Chapter 2 of this book talks about the philosophy of writing to learn and also provides many examples.
  2. Book is filled with writing strategies that are useful for all curriculum areas.
 
 
 
 
  1. Students need to learn how to edit and revise their papers independently.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Math Scappoose High School visitation- Spring 2010 
 

Proficiency based training conducted by Mark Springer- Math teacher at Scappoose High School

Learned about proficiency based math instruction 
 
 
 

Learned the benefits and how to’s of employing proficiency based math instruction. 
 
 
 

Science 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Penny Pavlava 
 
 

Raising Reading Achievement in Middle and High Schools by Elaine K. McEwan 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Content-Area Writing by Harvey Daniels, Steven Zemelman, and Nancy Steineke

  1. Reading needs to take place daily. 
  2. Reading across the curriculum is important.
  3. Received training on developing and grading reading work samples.
 
    Strategies for raising reading achievement:
  1. Identify the instructional and environmental variables that need to be changed in your classroom or school, and develop a plan to change them.
  2. Teach the students who can’t read how to read.
  3. Teach all students how to read strategically.
  4. Motivate students to read larger amounts of text as well as more challenging text while also being accountable for understanding and remembering what they have read.
  5. Create a reading culture in your school or district.
 
  1. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) states:  “ Learning requires the student’s engagement in four activities, all intended to result in thinking: reading, listening, doing, and writing.”
  2. The National Science Education Standards indicate that secondary students should be able to “communicate the problem, process, and solution.  Students should present their results to students, teachers, and others in a variety of ways, such as orally, in writing, and in other forms…”
Behavior Northwest PBIS network 

Geoff Colvin 

Cory Dunn 
 
 

Love and Logic

PBIS is recognized as a multi-tiered, effective, research-based practice for creating a safe, predictable learning environment with clearly defined expectations and consequences. 

Colvin’s work in decreasing aggressive student behavior is at the forefront of behavior management experts.

Dunn’s work in discussing the special, emotional needs of each student personalized the large, comprehensive high school community and or approach to discipline. 

Love and Logic is recognized as a source for immediate, user-friendly strategies for teachers to implement.

 

      Step 5.   Identify Strategies to Meet Goals and Develop Action Plans
 

The School improvement Action Plan highlights what the goal is, how it will be measured, what the steps are for reaching the goal, what the timeline is, and what resources will be needed. 

The School Improvement Action Plan is based on the results of the data review and the solutions/strategies selected.  The Action Plan will serve as an effective tool for integrating goals, strategies to achieve the goals, and the timeline and resources needed to accomplish the goals.  It should also assist in the implementation by clarifying who will provide leadership for each component of the plan, and how progress will be monitored and evaluated. 

 

For each goal, brainstorm the strategies that could be implemented to increase the likelihood of achieving that prioritized goal. Each strategy should be an adult action that is specific and measurable. They are what the teacher, school team/department will do.

 

Brainstorming Guidelines

The purpose of brainstorming is to produce as many good ideas or strategies as possible in a fast-paced, positive setting. It is often the first step in a focused, productive improvement meeting.

 

1. Clearly state the goal in writing for all to see.

2. A recorder writes down each strategy on a flip chart or white board for all to see.

3. Each person on the team, in consecutive order, has the opportunity to contribute one idea or strategy.

4. Each team member has the option to say, “pass” when it is his or her turn to contribute.

5. Each person’s suggestion should be made as clearly and succinctly as possible – in 20 seconds or less.

6. There should be no criticism or discussion of ideas or strategies.

7. The recorder can seek clarification to ensure accurate recording of each idea or strategy.

8. Expect to “piggyback” or build on each other’s ideas. Some of the best strategies are generated this way.

 

Examples of specific strategies might be:

    • Increase the percentage of teachers who use classroom assessment information to provide frequent feedback to their students regarding academic progress.
    • Increase the number of writing samples used across the curriculum, specifically in Science and Social Science classes.
    • Increase the percentage of classes outside of Language Arts and Math that include a focus on writing and/or problem solving.
    • Increase collaborative scoring using a common writing rubric.
    • Increase the percentage of grade level and subject area teams functioning in data teams or professional learning teams.
 

Determine Results Indicators for Strategies

 

What evidence (results indicators) can we gather on a regular basis throughout the year to determine if the strategies are proving effective in increasing student performance (accountability factor)? Each strategy will include one or more results indicators and these will be documented in the Action Plans of the SIP.

Results indicators identify:

  1. whether the strategy is actually being implemented and how you will know (“Evidence of Implementation”).
  2. if the strategy is having the intended effect on student learning and improved performance (“Evidence of Impact”).
 

Examples:

Strategy (What Adults Will Do) Evidence of Implementation Evidence of Impact
Increase the percentage of parents who participate in parent teacher conferences
  • Communication sent home
  • Sign in sheets
  • Improved academic and behavior performance as measured by classroom assessments and attendance reports
Increase the # of double-dose math opportunities for students through math intervention classes 
  • Schedule - math intervention class
  • Roster of students receiving services
  • Increased competency in regular math class as evidence by formative assessments
Increase collaborative scoring using a common writing rubric
  • Grade level teams meet 3 times per year
  • Creation of common writing rubric
  • Improved writing performance as measured by ongoing formative writing assessments
 
 

The Rest of the Action Plan

 

Person(s) Responsible

Generally this identifies the position or group of people responsible for implementing the identified strategy (e.g. math department, all Language Arts teachers, the assistant principal, the Counselor, the Title I teacher, etc.). Occasionally, there is a specific individual that is responsible for the strategy and must be named for clarity, but this is not generally the case. Of course, the principal of the building is the person ultimately responsible for carrying out the SIP for their building, but built-in accountability in the Action Plans will allow for further follow-up and perhaps form the basis for professional growth goals for the individuals responsible.

 

Dates

The dates or range of dates should be when the strategy will take place. It should include a clear beginning and end. When possible include forum (e.g. “monthly staff meetings, “February Early Release)

 

Resources Required

General or estimated amounts of money and funding sources are required. The source of funds or human resources assists in creating budgets and may involve other individuals, departments and/or agencies. Examples of building funds could be: Title I, Curriculum Days, and Professional Growth allocations.

 

Instructions: Your Action Plan should be evidenced-based. Complete a separate table for each SMART Goal. 

 
 
SMART GOAL:  Reading  
 
Strategy/Activity

Specific and Measurable Adult Activity

What evidence-based strategy/activity will be implemented?

Evidence of Implementation

Monitoring

Is what you said you would do being done? What evidence do you have?

Evidence of Impact

Evaluation

What evidence do you have that the change you wanted has occurred?

Person Responsible

Who will provide oversight for implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the strategy?

Start Date

What is the projected start date?

End Date

What is the projected end date?

Estimated Costs

What are the anticipated costs?

Fund Source

What sources of funding will be used for the activity (more than one source may be listed)?

Increase of differentiation strategies in Science classrooms Use of strategies evident during observations by administrators D/F data should show improvement DDHS Administration

School Improvement Coordinator

Mid October Six dates during school year Sub costs for science teachers x 6 release days District funds
Reading work sample trainings 40 Trained teachers will develop reading work samples More reading will take place in classrooms.  D/F data should improve.  Reading OAKS scores should improve. DDHS Admin.

School Improvement Coordinator

Mid October training set Further training dates TBA Sub costs for teachers District funds and/or SLC grant
PLT work will incorporate reading strategies throughout curriculum. Teachers will develop curriculum rich in reading strategies. Same as above DDHS Admin.

SIP coordinator

Late Arrival Wednesdays   None None
Reading Camps to target specific strategies for OAKS testing Parents and students contacted regarding camps.

Counselors met with 105 nearly met Juniors.  Thirteen SPED students participated in a pull-out camp

More students will pass OAKS exams Maureen Utz and Joe Talley

Nate McGory

Kim Oswald

Dan Caccavano

Jessica Classen

October 11 and 12

Spring Camps- TBA

  Teachers will be paid at hourly rate. SLC grant
 
 
 
 
 
SMART GOAL:  Writing  
 
Strategy/Activity

Specific and Measurable Adult Activity

What evidence-based strategy/activity will be implemented?

Evidence of Implementation

Monitoring

Is what you said you would do being done? What evidence do you have?

Evidence of Impact

Evaluation

What evidence do you have that the change you wanted has occurred?

Person Responsible

Who will provide oversight for implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the strategy?

Start Date

What is the projected start date?

End Date

What is the projected end date?

Estimated Costs

What are the anticipated costs?

Fund Source

What sources of funding will be used for the activity (more than one source may be listed)?

Continue OWP work- teach writing curriculum developed this summer.  Lesson study/debriefs as well. 60 teachers will implement curriculum developed in summer Measurement on assessments developed by teachers Linda Christensen

Sharon Webster

John Bier

Denis Pierson

Dependent on when curriculum is taught   $60,000 SLC
OWP groups present cross curricular strategies during State inservice day 100 teachers attended sessions Afternoon work groups developing curriculum using learned strategies. Linda Christensen

DD Admin.

Dependent on when strategies are used   none None
Lesson Study 15 teachers will participate in round one of observation cycle. We hope to see peer observations spread.

Afternoon work groups will develop curriculum based on what they learned

Linda Christensen

DD Admin.

Denise Pierson

October 19 first observation

Second – November

16

Others-TBA

  $1,600 SLC Grant

Marylhurst Grant

State prompt writing tests- in English Fall and Spring writing tests implemented Will provide writing data to entire staff.  Improved student writing and achievement Linda Christenson

DD Admin.

Denise Pierson

Week of September 20-24 2nd test spring of 2011 $5,000 District funds
Grade 9-10 English PLT- focusing on conventions/sentence fluency Working with Penny Plavala, develop curriculum threaded with conventions/ sentence fluency strategies District writing prompt scores as well as State writing scores will increase. Sharon Webster

John Bier

Penny Plavala

Weekly PLT time.  

Penny P. training- December

  $1,200 SLC
 
 
 
SMART GOAL: Math  
 
Strategy/Activity

Specific and Measurable Adult Activity

What evidence-based strategy/activity will be implemented?

Evidence of Implementation

Monitoring

Is what you said you would do being done? What evidence do you have?

Evidence of Impact

Evaluation

What evidence do you have that the change you wanted has occurred?

Person Responsible

Who will provide oversight for implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the strategy?

Start Date

What is the projected start date?

End Date

What is the projected end date?

Estimated Costs

What are the anticipated costs?

Fund Source

What sources of funding will be used for the activity (more than one source may be listed)?

Proficiency training-  Summer 2010 5 Pre-algebra and Algebra teachers employing proficiency based curriculum D/F data should show improvement

OAKS scores improved

DDHS Administration

SIC- Denise Pierson

September June $1,500 SLC Grant
Application of Ren and Carniege learning training Pre-algebra will implement computer based learning models D/F decrease

More students will be algebra ready

Math Instructors

DD Admin.

Training occurred in August Programs will be used all year $1,000 SLC
PLT work Common assessments will be used.  Data will drive instruction. Decrease in failure rate.  

Increased OAKs scores

DD Admin.

SIC

Late Arrival Wednesdays   None None
Math department instructional trainings Curriculum will align with standards.  Development of common assess./ interventions Decrease in failure rate  

Increased OAKS scores

Math Instructors

DD Admin.

Math department release days during the year.   $6,000 District funds
SMART GOAL:  Science  
 
Strategy/Activity

Specific and Measurable Adult Activity

What evidence-based strategy/activity will be implemented?

Evidence of Implementation

Monitoring

Is what you said you would do being done? What evidence do you have?

Evidence of Impact

Evaluation

What evidence do you have that the change you wanted has occurred?

Person Responsible

Who will provide oversight for implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the strategy?

Start Date

What is the projected start date?

End Date

What is the projected end date?

Estimated Costs

What are the anticipated costs?

Fund Source

What sources of funding will be used for the activity (more than one source may be listed)?

Differentiation of instruction by Science department. Teachers are using multiple strategies in daily instruction/ D/F data should show improvement DDHS Administration Multiple training dates during the year.   Sub costs for science teachers x 6 release days District funds
Reading work sample training Trained teachers will develop reading work samples Increase in OAKS scores Science instructors

DD Admin.

SIC

Trained Spring 2010 Implement during school year None None
PLT work will incorporate reading strategies throughout curriculum. Multiple strategies will be evident in instruction Increases OAKS scores Science Instructors

DD Admin.

Development during late arrivals Implement during school year None None
PLT work- development of common assessments Use of common pre- and post tests Less D/F grades

Increased OAKS scores

Science instructors

DD Admin.

SIC

Development during late arrivals Implement during school year None None
PLT work- Develop instruction towards targeted science standards State required standards will be focused curriculum Increase Science OAKS scores Science Instructors

DD Admin.

Dev. During late arrivals Implement during school year None None
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SMART GOAL:  Behavior  
 
Strategy/Activity

Specific and Measurable Adult Activity

What evidence-based strategy/activity will be implemented?

Evidence of Implementation

Monitoring

Is what you said you would do being done? What evidence do you have?

Evidence of Impact

Evaluation

What evidence do you have that the change you wanted has occurred?

Person Responsible

Who will provide oversight for implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the strategy?

Start Date

What is the projected start date?

End Date

What is the projected end date?

Estimated Costs

What are the anticipated costs?

Fund Source

What sources of funding will be used for the activity (more than one source may be listed)?

Continued implementation of “Green Zone” practices. School-wide eval. Tool; BoQ Set, BoQ DDHS Administration

Scots’ PRIDE leaders

PBS TOSA

Oct. 2010 June 2011 None None
Love and Logic training Log of trained teachers Observed implementation of strategies Site team October 2010 June 2011 Training costs Site Team funds
Refined data collection systems Frequent data collection evaluation Data represents actual discipline issues DD Admin.

Scots’ PRIDE leaders

September 2010 June 2011 None None
Exploration of “yellow zone” intervention strategies Scots’ PRIDE training calender

Meeting notes

Decrease in referral numbers DD Admin.,

PRIDE team,

PRIDE TOSA

November 2010 June 2011 None None

 

 
Step 6:  Implement Plans and Monitor Progress
 

All the effort that went into building awareness, reviewing data, deciding on best practices, and creating goals and action plans leads to the implementation phase.

The SIP Leadership Team should determine the process it will use to monitor progress and the implementation of the plan’s strategies throughout the year.  They should decide on a monitoring timeline for this to take place.

 

The worksheet below may be helpful as a guide for the monitoring process.

 

Goal:

Targeted Strategy:
Has the strategy been implemented?
    • Not Implemented
    • Partially Implemented
    • Implemented Fully
What evidence of impact and implementation has been collected?
Reflections:
Suggested adjustments or next steps:  
 
 

Goal:

Targeted Strategy:
Has the strategy been implemented?
    • Not Implemented
    • Partially Implemented
    • Implemented Fully
What evidence of impact and implementation has been collected?
Reflections:
Suggested adjustments or next steps:  
 
 
Step 7:  Evaluate Effectiveness (complete in late May)
 

Evaluating the impact of the action plan brings the process to full circle. Continuous and sustainable improvement means there are always new ways to improve.

 

Goal:  Writing

  1. Did we meet our goal? If no, why not? Yes
 
 
  1. State the progress made toward the achievement of each goal. Include areas where improvements were made and areas where improvements are still needed.
Strengths- made writing important throughout the whole school.

Continue- to emphasize writing importance, infuse strategies across curriculum, continue involvement with the Oregon Writing Project.

 
 

Goal:

  1. Did we meet our goal? If no, why not?
 
 
  1. State the progress made toward the achievement of each goal. Include areas where improvements were made and areas where improvements are still needed.
 
 
 

Goal:

  1. Did we meet our goal? If no, why not?
 
 
  1. State the progress made toward the achievement of each goal. Include areas where improvements were made and areas where improvements are still needed.
 
 
 

School Wide Title I Schools Only

 

High Quality On-Going Professional Development

Describe how the school will ensure high quality, on-going professional development based on scientifically-based and best practice researched strategies for teachers, principals, instructional assistants, and if appropriate, student-services personnel, parents and other staff as per NCLB 1119. This should reiterate professional development strategies included in the Action Plan plus other professional development activities not included

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Measure to Include Teachers in Decisions Regarding the Use of Assessments to Improve Learning

Measures to include teachers in the decisions regarding the use of the Oregon State Assessment System and other assessments to improve the achievement of individual students and the overall instructional program (e.g. using data to inform instruction); academic assessments described in NCLB 1111 to provide information on and to improve the achievement of individual students and the overall instructional program.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Activities and School Wide Reform Strategies to Ensure Assistance to Low Achieving Students

Describe the activities to ensure that students who experience difficulty mastering the proficient or advanced levels of academic achievement standards required by NCLB 1111(b)(1) are provided with effective, timely additional assistance. Describe the activities and the process used for identification and services.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Integration and Coordination of Multi-Level Services

Describe the integration and coordination of federal, state and local services and programs including all titles in NCLB, violence prevention, nutrition, and house programs, Head Start, adult education, vocational and technical education and job training NCLB 1114(b).

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Comments