reinventing your school board: coherent...

of 25

Reinventing Your School Board: Coherent Governance®

American Association of School Administrators February 18, 2011

Creating and sustaining excellence in board leadership

focused on student achievement

The Aspen Group Intl, LLC Linda J. Dawson and Dr. Randy Quinn, senior partners

P.O. Box 1777 Castle Rock, CO 80104 www.aspengroup.org

Dr. Jack Dale, Superintendent

Fairfax County Public Schools Fairfax, VA

of 25

Customary Board Policies Coherent Governance School Districts

Governance Culture:

1. Board Purpose 2. Governing Commitments 3. Board Job Description 4. Officer’s Roles 5. Board Committees 6. Annual Work Plan

Annual Work Plan Exhibit 7. Code of Conduct 8. Conflict of Interest 9. Addressing Violations

Board-CEO Relations:

1. Single Point of Connection 2. Single Unit Control 3. Staff Accountability 4. Authority of the Superintendent 5. Performance Accountability of the Superintendent

Operational Expectations/Parameters:

1. Global Operational Expectation/Parameter 2. Emergency Superintendent Succession 3. Treatment of Stakeholders 4. Personnel Administration 5. Budgeting/Financial Planning 6. Financial Administration 7. Asset Protection 8. Communicating with the Board 9. Communicating with the Public 10. Instructional Program 11. Student Discipline 12. Learning Environment 13. Facilities

Results:

1. District Mission 2. Student Achievement Goals

of 25

GC-3 Policy Type: Governance Culture

Board Job Description

The Board’s job is to represent, lead and serve the owners and to govern the district by establishing expectations for organizational results, expectations for quality operational performance, and monitoring actual performance against those expectations. The Board will: 3.1. Ensure that the Results are the dominant focus of district performance. 3.2. Advocate for the district and the students it serves. 3.3. Initiate and maintain constructive two-way dialogue with students, staff, parents and the citizens

as a means to engage all stakeholders in the work of the Board and the district. 3.4. Develop written governing policies that address:

a. Results: The intended outcomes for the students served by the district; b. Operational Expectations: Statements of the Board’s values about operational matters

delegated to the Superintendent, including both actions and conditions to be accomplished and those prohibited;

c. Governance Culture: Definition of the Board’s own work, the processes it will employ and

conditions within which it will accomplish that work; d. Board/Superintendent Relationship: The role relationship of the Superintendent and the

Board, including the specified authority of the Superintendent and the process for monitoring district and Superintendent performance.

3.5. Ensure acceptable Superintendent performance through effective monitoring of Results and

Operational Expectations policies. 3.6. Ensure acceptable Board performance through effective evaluation of Board GC and BSR

policies, actions and processes. 3.7. Appoint an independent auditor to conduct an annual external review of the district’s financial

condition and report directly to the Board. Monitoring Method: Monitoring Frequency: The Aspen Group Intl, LLC

of 25

B/SR-3

Policy Type: Board/Superintendent Relationship

Staff Accountability The Superintendent is responsible for all matters related to the day-to-day operation of the district, within the values expressed by the Board in policy. All staff members are considered to report directly or indirectly to the Superintendent. 1. The Board will never give direction to any employee other than the Superintendent. 2. The Board will not formally or informally evaluate any staff member other than the

Superintendent. 3. Except as required by law, the Board will not participate in decisions or actions involving the

hiring, evaluating, disciplining or dismissal of any employee other than the Superintendent.

Monitoring Method: Monitoring Frequency: The Aspen Group Intl, LLC

of 25

OE-8 Policy Type: Operational Expectations

Communicating With the Board

The Superintendent shall assure that the Board is fully and adequately informed about matters relating to Board work and significant organizational concern. The Superintendent will: 1. Submit required monitoring data (see policy B/SR-5–Monitoring Superintendent Performance) in

a thorough, accurate and understandable fashion, according to the Board’s annual work plan schedule, and including both Superintendent interpretations and relevant data to substantiate compliance or reasonable progress.

2. Provide for the Board in a timely manner information about trends, facts and other information

relevant to the Board’s work. 3. Inform the Board of significant transfers of money within funds or other changes substantially

affecting the district’s financial condition. 4. Assure that the Board has adequate information from a variety of internal and external

viewpoints to assure informed Board decisions. 5. Inform the Board of anticipated significant media coverage. 6. Inform the Board, the Board president or individual members if, in the Superintendent’s opinion,

the Board or individual members have encroached into areas of responsibility assigned to the Superintendent or if the Board or its members are non-compliant with any Governance Culture or Board/Superintendent Relations policies.

7. Present information in simple and concise form, indicating clearly whether the information is

incidental, intended for decision preparation, or for formal monitoring. 8. Treat all members equally and assure that all members have equal access to information. 9. Inform the Board in a timely manner of any actual or anticipated noncompliance with any Board

Operational Expectations policy or any anticipated failure to achieve reasonable progress toward in any Results policy.

10. Provide for the Board adequate information about all administrative actions and decisions that are delegated to the Superintendent, but required by law to be

approved by the Board. 11. Inform the Board in a timely manner of the administrative disposition of complaints presented to the Superintendent by the Board.

of 25

12. Inform the Board in advance of any deletions of, additions to or significant modifications of any instructional programs.

Monitoring Method: Monitoring Frequency: The Aspen Group Intl, LLC

of 25

R 1-4 Policy Type: Results/Student Achievement Goals

R.1 MISSION

Fairfax County Public Schools, a world-class school system, inspires, enables, and empowers

students to meet high academic standards, lead ethical lives, and demonstrate responsible

citizenship.

R.2 ACADEMICS

All students will obtain, understand, analyze, communicate, and apply knowledge and skills to achieve success in school and in life. Students will: 1.1. Achieve their full academic potential in the core disciplines of:

1.1.1. English language arts: 1.1.1.1. Reading. 1.1.1.2. Writing. 1.1.1.3. Communication.

1.1.2. Math. 1.1.3. Science. 1.1.4. Social studies.

1.2. Communicate in at least two languages. 1.3. Explore, understand, and value the fine and practical arts. 1.4. Understand the interrelationship and interdependence of the countries and cultures of

the world. 1.5. Effectively use technology to access, communicate, and apply knowledge and to foster

creativity.

R.3 ESSENTIAL LIFE SKILLS

All students will demonstrate the aptitude, attitude, and skills to lead responsible, fulfilling, and respectful lives. Working in partnership with school and family, students will: 2.1. Demonstrate sound moral character and ethical judgment:

2.1.1. Model honesty and integrity. 2.1.2. Take responsibility for their actions. 2.1.3. Keep their promises and commitments. 2.1.4. Respect people, property, and authority. 2.1.5. Exercise good stewardship of the environment. 2.1.6. Protect others’ health and safety. 2.1.7. Show respect and understanding for the interests and opinions of others. 2.1.8. Be capable of placing their own self-interests in perspective with the interests of

others. 2.2. Be able to contribute effectively within a group dynamic. 2.3. Develop the resilience and self-confidence required to deal effectively with life’s

challenges.

of 25

2.4. Possess the skills to manage and resolve conflict. 2.5. Be inspired to learn throughout life. 2.6. Courageously identify and pursue their personal goals. 2.7. Develop practical life skills including but not limited to: 2.7.1. Problem solving/critical thinking. 2.7.2. Work habits and ethics. 2.7.3. Financial competency. 2.7.4. Self-sufficiency. 2.7.5. Time management. 2.8. Make healthy and safe life choices.

R. 4 RESPONSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY

All students will understand and model the important attributes that people must have to contribute to an effective and productive community and the common good of all. Students will: 3.1. Know and practice the duties, responsibilities, and rights of citizenship in a democratic

society. 3.2. Be respectful and contributing participants in their school, community, country, and

world. 3.3. Understand the purpose, role, and means of interaction with the different levels of

government.

of 25

Eden Prairie, MN Annual Board Calendar, 07-08

GC-7E

E=External Monitoring Report I=Internal Monitoring Report RI= Reasonable Interpretation (literal interpretation, indicators and baseline information) M=Monitoring

MONTH GC BCR OE RESULTS LINKAGE BOARD DEVELOPMENT

OTHER BUSINESS

JAN ‘08

8 2.2 Writing (RI)

Board Team- building Retreat

Org. Mtg.

FEB ‘08

4, 1

MAR ‘08 7,8,9

6 (I)

2.2 Science (RI)

APR ‘08

10 NSBA

MAY ‘08

11 2.2 Social Studies (RI)

JUNE ‘07/’08

5

Adopt policies (07) Summat. Eval (07) Form. Eval (08) Candidate Orien.

JULY ‘07 XXXXX

XXXXX

XXXXX

XXXXXXXX

XXXXXX

XXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXX

AUG ‘07

2, 7

Parliamentary Procedure

SEPT ‘07 1,2,3

12

2.2 Reading (RI)

OCT ‘07

9, 6(E), 3 Wisdom Sharing

NOV ‘07 6,10

2.2 Math (RI) Form. Eval (07) Summat. Eval (08) Annual Retreat

DEC ‘07 4,5

1-5

New Member Orientation

of 25

Harrison School District 2 Operational Expectations Monitoring Document – OE-9

Disposition of the Board : Date: 5 Oct 2010 Re-monitoring: ______ ______In Compliance ______Not in Compliance ______Compliance with Noted Exceptions Summary statement/motion of the Board: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ President: ___________________ Superintendent: __________________ Certification of the Superintendent: I certify this report to be accurate Signed: _________________, Superintendent Date: _________________

OE-9: Communicating with the public

Superintendent

BoE

The Superintendent shall assure that the public is adequately informed about the condition and direction of the district.

In

Com

plia

nce*

Not

in

Com

plia

nce*

In

Com

plia

nce

Not

in

Com

plia

nce

Superintendent Interpretation:

• The Superintendent interprets the public to mean the District’s parents and community stakeholders.

• The Superintendent interprets adequately informed to mean that

the public receives communications from the District in a variety of ways about the District.

• The Superintendent interprets messages about the district’s condition to include information about the organization’s finances, academic results, climate or honors (awards and recognition).

• The Superintendent interprets messages about the district’s direction to include communication about the district’s action plan, programs, changes, innovations or initiatives.

of 25

Superintendent Indicators of Compliance:

• In a random survey sample of district residents, administered before 1 July 2011, at least 75% of the respondents will express they were “adequately informed” about the condition and direction of the District.

Board Comments:

OE-9.1 1. Assure the timely flow of information, appropriate input, and

strategic two-way dialog between the district and the citizens that builds understanding of the District’s condition and direction.

SUPERINTENDENT Interpretation: • The District interprets timely flow to mean that we, at least

quarterly, communicate to the public through a variety of mediums throughout the year.

• The District interprets appropriate input to mean that a useful and

accommodating means for hearing the thoughts, concerns, questions, and ideas of our staff, parents, and community members is in place. We are clear about how stakeholders can give input/feedback and how it can be most useful.

• The District interprets strategic two-way dialog to mean that we

engage the public, at least quarterly, in conversations around the District’s condition and direction to build understanding and relationships.

• The District interprets builds understanding and support to

mean that our communication efforts help stakeholders become informed about the district’s direction and progress, and hold a positive perception of the District.

SUPERINTENDENT Indicators of Compliance:

• In a random survey sample of district residents, administered before 1 July 2011, at least 75% of the respondents will express they were “adequately informed” about the condition and direction of the District and show support for district initiatives.

Board Comments:

OE-9.2 2. Prepare and publish, on behalf of the Board, an annual progress

of 25

report to the public that includes the following items: a. Data indicating student progress toward accomplishing the

Board’s Results policies. b. Information about school district strategies, programs and

operations intended to accomplish the Board’s Results policies.

c. Revenues, expenditures and costs of major programs and a review of the district’s financial condition.

SUPERINTENDENT Interpretation: • The District interprets publish to mean that it will make the “annual

progress report to the public” available via print and online.

SUPERINTENDENT Indicators of Compliance: • The communications department will create the “annual progress

report to the public” and make available to the public via print and online; including data on student progress (results policies), information about district goals, programs and operations, and budget information by 31 December 2011.

Board Comments:

of 25

Racine Unified School District Results Monitoring Report

R-2 (ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT- READING)

Date: August 16, 2010

SUPERINTENDENT CERTIFICATION With respect to Results Policy R-2 (Academic Achievement - Reading), the superintendent certifies that the following information is accurate and complete, and that the District is: Making reasonable progress toward achieving the desired results X Making reasonable progress with the exceptions noted Failing to make reasonable organizational progress We assert that the District is Compliant with Exceptions. The exceptions are that this work is in its initial stages, not completed because the achievement gap has not been closed, and will continue to be an ongoing priority. Signed: Date: Superintendent BOARD OF EDUCATION ACTION With respect to Results Policy R-2 (Academic Achievement - Reading), the Board finds that the organization and the Superintendent are: Making reasonable progress toward achieving the desired results Making reasonable progress with the exceptions noted Failing to make reasonable organizational progress Commendations and/or recommendations, if any: Signed: Date: Board President

of 25

Racine Unified School District RESULTS Monitoring Report

R-2 (ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - READING)

Purpose of the Results Monitoring Report: The purpose of this report with objective evidence is that reasonable progress is being made to achieve the Results identified by the Board in Policy R-2 (Reading). Policy Statement: Students will achieve academically at levels commensurate with challenging and yearly personalized learning goals. Each student will achieve at or above grade level in the following disciplines: ● Reading a. Kindergarten Benchmark: At or above the MAP National Norm 1st grade fall score b. Grade 3 Benchmark: Proficient/Advanced score in reading on the WKCE/WAA c. Grade 6 Benchmark: Proficient/Advanced score in reading on the WKCE/WAA ● Math a. Grade 5 Benchmark: Proficient/Advanced score in math on the WKCE/WAA b. Grade 9 Benchmark: Completion of Algebra with a Grade of B or higher; or, enrollment in Geometry ● Language Arts ● Writing a. Grade 4 Benchmark: At or above the District Writing Proficiency Score on the WKCE Extended Writing

Sample b. Grade 8 Benchmark: At or above the District Writing Proficiency Score on the WKCE Extended Writing

Sample c. Grade 10 Benchmark: At or above the District Writing Proficiency Score on the WKCE Extended Writing

Sample ● Science ● Social Studies ● Arts - music, visual art and drama ● Technology ● Physical Education Students will graduate career and/or college ready, having successfully completed career or technical programs; and/or, graduate with an ACT score at or above the state average (22) [North Star Benchmarks]. Priority is focused on reading, writing and math achievement as fundamental to any further achievement.

of 25

Interpretation: The Board of Education values that all students, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, or socio-economic circumstance, will read at the expected grade level in which they are enrolled or exceed grade-level standards. The Board believes that a child’s ability to read is an essential skill of learning and therefore gives it a high priority along with math and writing. The Board has adopted the North Star with three reading “stations” (6th grade, 3rd grade, and Kindergarten) identified as critical benchmarks in order for all students to achieve the North Star goals of career and college readiness. Assessments: The following assessments have been chosen by administration to inform an accurate picture of how our students are achieving in Reading. These assessments provide some of the important metrics necessary to monitor the progress of students on their trajectory toward becoming Career and/or College Ready, as envisioned by the North Star.

• WKCE/WAA at 3rd and 6th grades in fall of each school year • MAP at Kindergarten in spring of each school year

Definition of Assessments and Terms:

• Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) - Percent of students who need to score Proficient and Advanced in Reading and Mathematics as determined by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in adherence to the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation.

• Cohort Data - Tracking of student achievement among the same or roughly the same

students from year to year. Example – A comparison of 5th graders this year to roughly the same group of students when they were 4th graders.

• Economically Disadvantaged - An "economically disadvantaged" student is a student who is a member of a household that meets the income eligibility guidelines for free or reduced-price meals (less than or equal to 185% of Federal Poverty Guidelines) under the National School Lunch Program (NSLP).

• North Star: A vision of equity and excellence for RUSD student achievement. In spring 2009 a coalition of District stakeholders proposed that the North Star be the shared vision among all employees. This vision shows the pathway from Kindergarten to high school graduation including stations along the way that assure success for all students. Success upon graduation from high school is defined as career and/or college readiness.

• NWEA-MAP: The Northwest Evaluation Association-Measures of Academic Progress are adaptive, computerized student assessments designed to provide immediate feedback to teachers regarding a student’s current instructional level.

of 25

• RIT: Tests developed by NWEA use a scale called RIT to measure student achievement and growth. RIT stands for Rasch unIT, which is a measurement scale developed to simplify the interpretation of test scores. The RIT score relates directly to the curriculum scale in each subject area. It is an equal-interval scale, like feet or inches, so scores can be added together to calculate accurate class or school averages. RIT scores range from about 150 to 300 depending upon the scale and test season. They make it possible to follow a student’s educational growth over time.

• Scale scores – In the case of the WKCE, scale scores are the translation of raw scores into an equal-interval metric based on Item Response Theory (i.e. – some questions on the WKCE are more difficult/less difficult and should therefore be mathematically weighted) which allows for comparison and computation. The scaled scores for these tests are designed to allow for a comparison of performance across years and grade levels. The scale is a continuum from grade 3-8 and 10. This continuum allows each student’s progress towards meeting state performance levels.

• WKCE/WAA Combined Score - At a given grade level, this score represents the sum of the percentage of students who score proficient and advanced on the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam and the Wisconsin Alternate Assessment at each grade level in which the test is administered.

Data Analysis and Conclusions: The important measures for analyzing reasonable progress of our students in this report are achievement status (ex. – proficiency score) and achievement growth (ex. – one-year change in average scale scores). Also, we are interested in the degree of change in the achievement gap, especially between Black and White students. We observe that although we are making progress toward our North Star Targets for reading, the achievement gap between White Students and other demographic groups remains unacceptable. The achievement gap for Black students is of primary concern. Cabinet review of achievement gaps using the District North Star Scorecard and other data have led to action steps taken in collaboration with school staff. Area Superintendents and other Administrative Services Center staff have met with each high school principal and representatives from the school’s data team to share District-level observations, highlight concerns resulting from this analysis, and inform the work of each school’s data team later this summer at the Shared Leadership Academy. A similar process will be followed for middle schools. Reasonable Progress with Exceptions:

1. At the District level, all sixth grade reading groups met their first-year North Star targets. The All Students group met their second year target during this first year. Having met this two-year goal, the target for All Students was reset for the 2010-2011 school year for an increase over the 2009-2010 actual score. Overall, an increase of three percentage points in proficiency per year was targeted for All students and White students while an increase of six percentage points was targeted for Black, Hispanic, Limited English Proficient (LEP), low socioeconomic level (Low SES) students, and students with disabilities (SwD). The sixth-grade reading achievement gap between Black and White students was narrowed from approximately twenty-four percentage points to seventeen. See Table A.

of 25

2. Three of the third grade demographic groups met their targets. Three other groups improved over the observation period but not to the target level. However, the gap between Black and White students widened from approximately twenty-eight to thirty-three percentage points. See Table B.

3. None of the Kindergarten reading groups met their targets. However, five of seven Kindergarten groups improved their results. The achievement gap between Black and White students widened from approximately twenty-two to twenty-four points. See Table C.

4. Two-year WKCE cohort comparisons represent positive progress. When comparing the increases in the percent of students among cohort groups in grades 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, and 7-8 who scored in the Proficient or Advanced levels on the WKCE in reading, the percentage point increases are better than the state’s performance in Reading at all grade spans. See Table D.

5. In fall 2009, RUSD students achieved the AMO of 74% Proficient and Advanced in reading at grades 6, 7, and 8. See Chart 1.

6. One-year changes in WKCE scale score means from fall 2008 to fall 2009 are encouraging. Growth in scale score means from grades 3 to 4, 4 to 5, 5 to 6, and 6 to 7 for Black, Hispanic, and White students all exceeded the state mean changes. See Chart 2.

Challenges: The level of poverty among our students continues to increase and we know that economically disadvantaged circumstances remain a factor in students’ readiness to learn. During the 2009-2010 school year, there were 62.3% elementary, 56.8% middle, and 44.3% of our high school students who were identified as economically disadvantaged per their eligibility for subsidized lunch, compared to 57.7%, 52.1%, and 36.7% respectively the previous school year. The State Summary percentage during 2009-2010 was 37.2% eligible for subsidized lunch; during the previous year the State Summary was 33.6%. The Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) in Reading, the percent of students who score Proficient and Advanced established by the Department of Public Instruction as an accountability measure under the No Child Left Behind legislation, remained the same in 2009-2010 at 74% in Reading. This standard will rise again in Wisconsin during 2010-2011 to 80.5%.

of 25

Targets Identified in the North Star Scorecard: Annual targets are indicated in italic type. Over the first year of progress monitoring, we observe some areas where we have met or exceeded our targets. Those cells are indicated with green type. Areas for which the District did increase results but did not achieve the targeted level are indicated in blue type. Areas in which results either remained the same or decreased are in red type. In selected areas the District not only exceeded our targets but also exceeded targets established for the following year. In those instances the targets have been increased by adding three-percentage points to the actual 2009-2010 achievement for each of the next two growth periods. Those increased targets are underlined. Among North Star Achievement data, the numbers in parentheses are first the total N for that category followed by the N for the score which appears immediately above. See Table A, B, and C for North Star results.

Table A:

Grade 6 Vision: All students will read at the typical grade level in which they are enrolled or exceed grade-level standards.

Data-Based Problem Setting: We will improve the Reading achievement of 6th grade students from 72.5% to 84.8% proficient and advanced as measured by the WKCE Reading Test by June 2012.

Grade 6 Reading

Percentage of Students

Vision 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

All Students 72.5% (1330/964)

78.8% (1359/1071) 81.8% 84.8% 100%

White 83.3% (637/530)

86.5% (670/580) 89.2% 92.2% 100%

Black 59.6% (371/221)

69.6% (335/233) 71.6% 77.6% 100%

Hispanic 64.5% (307/198)

73.1% (327/239) 76.5% 82.5% 100%

LEP 55.4% (178/98)

63.0% (162/102) 67.1% 73.1% 100%

Low SES 61.6% (717/442)

70.3% (805/565) 73.6% 79.6% 100%

SwD 40.4% (184/74)

49.3% (210/103) 52.4% 58.4% 100%

of 25

Table B: Grade 3 Vision: All students will read at the typical grade level in which they are enrolled or exceed grade-level standards.

Data-Based Problem Setting: We will improve the Reading achievement of 3rd grade students from 64% to 73% proficient and advanced as measured by the WKCE Reading Test by June 2012.

Grade 3 Reading


Vision 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

All Students 64.0%

(1449/927)

67.8% (1381/936

) 70.0% 73.0% 100%

White 76.6% (642/492)

81.4% (617/502) 82.6% 85.6% 100%

Black 49.1% (387/190)

48.6% (368/179) 61.1% 67.1% 100%

Hispanic 57.0% (384/219)

62.3% (366/228) 69.0% 75.0% 100%

LEP 53.6% (261/140)

60.6% (254/154) 65.6% 71.6% 100%

Low SES 53.3% (824/439)

56.6% (881/499) 65.3% 71.3% 100%

SwD 38.1% (252/96)

39.6% (260/103) 50.1% 56.1% 100%

Table C: Kindergarten Vision: All students will read at the beginning 1st grade level or above by the end of Kindergarten.

Data-Based Problem Setting: We will improve the Reading achievement of all Kindergarten students from 24.6% reading at first grade level to 33.6% reading at first grade level as measured by MAP RIT score 1st grade national norms by June 2012.

Kindergarten Reading


Vision 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

All Students 24.6% (1396/344)

25.2% (1385/349) 30.6% 33.6% 100%

White 34.3% (682/234)

36.6% (628/230) 40.3% 43.3% 100%

Black 12.3% (398/49)

13.1% (403/53) 24.3% 30.3% 100%

Hispanic 17.4% (293/51)

15.5% (316/49) 29.4% 35.4% 100%

LEP 13% (181/24)

11.6% (216/25) 25% 31% 100%

Low SES 12.8% (822/105)

17.2% (885/153) 24.8% 30.8% 100%

SwD 12.2% (230/28)

15% (221/33) 24.2% 30.2% 100%

of 25

WKCE Cohort Comparisons with State Growth: While there is value in reviewing proficiency data for non-cohort groups as presented above, there is also value in considering cohort data. Two-year cohort group comparisons of WKCE results are provided. The Annual Measurable Objective in Reading for 2009-2010 was 74% proficient and advanced. Table D: WKCE READING COHORT GROUPS

RUSD RUSD RUSD STATE STATE STATE 08-09 09-10 Difference 08-09 09-10 Difference

% Prof & Adv % Prof & Adv 08-09 vs. 09-10 % Prof &

Adv % Prof &

Adv 08-09 vs. 09-10Gr

63

8 78

3 3 to 4 71 81 Gr

70

1 81

-2 4 to 5 71 79 Gr

71

7 81

3 5 to 6 78 84 Gr

71

8 83

3 6 to 7 79 86 Gr

-1

-2 7 to 8 76 75 85 83

WKCE Proficiency Comparisons with the State Average:

of 25

A simple comparison of fall 2009 RUSD reading proficiency with that of the state is provided below. Chart 1:

Scale Score Growth: While proficiency scores provide one view of progress, another way to monitor results regarding the achievement gap is reviewing scale score growth for reading. These data are presented in the format provided by the state in its Multi Dimensional Analytics Tool (MDAT), a component of the Longitudinal Data System. When compared with the entire state’s growth in reading scale scores from fall 2009 to fall 2010, the performance of RUSD Black, Hispanic, and White students exceeded that of the state average for these groups at all grades with the exception of grade 8 where only RUSD Hispanic students exceeded state growth. These data are provided below. Chart 2:

of 25

Capacity Building – Strategies for Improvement:

of 25

Among a wealth of current strategies for improvement of teaching and learning in RUSD, solidifying learning targets at every grade level, raising expectations for all children, and development of a Racine instructional framework will all figure prominently. These results are from the first full school year of the implemented elementary reading adoption that has focused on differentiated instruction with interventions for students experiencing difficulties. With this program's emphasis on robust vocabulary and a renewed focus on writing district-wide, the results on the WKCE in reading and writing are encouraging. Increased resources allocated to the RUSD program for early childhood students are anticipated to improve learning for these students. A review of curriculum and assessments will strengthen the use of data-driven improvement tools for early childhood students. The RUSD Summer School became the North Star Summer Academy this year. The revamped curriculum focused on reading and constructed response problems. Expansion of the number of Summer School sites allowed for participation by more students. The curriculum for the RUSD extended time program, Lighted Schoolhouse, is aligned with that of the District’s for reading intervention classes. In addition, Lighted Schoolhouse’s academic enrichment classes are aligned to the state standards in reading/language arts. This after-school program utilizes the results from the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessment, a computer-adaptive test, to identify the areas in which children need help in reading. Using this strategy, students who participate in the program have on average doubled their norm RIT growth when compared with students who are not in the program. Extended time, aligned curriculum, and utilizing MAP as a frequent and timely progress monitoring measure have been proven strategies for closing achievement gaps. The Chiwaukee Academy last August provided a focused start to the current school year. School-wide teams used data to identify areas in reading that became the core of their work with students. The North Star stations and the District Scorecard were used to further refine plans from the District level to the classroom level. The first six weeks of school-based efforts are reflected in the WKCE results included in the current R-2 report. However, this effort continued throughout the 2009-2010 school year. The 2011 Scorecard and R-2 will be representative of this year-long implementation of School Improvement Plans. There is still a long way to go, but staff within RUSD are seeing the power of collaboration in the results on the WKCE. At the August, 2010, Shared Leadership Academy at Chiwaukee, initial components of the instructional management system (IMS) will be ready. The IMS, an online resource, will allow staff to access curricular learning targets, identify appropriate assessment instruments and access essential student data through one interface. The technology refresh, replacement of all District computers, was an important element of this system. It will provide all teachers and staff instant access to these important student data, resulting in the realization of more targeted instruction for individual students.

of 25

CEO

Principal

Administrative Team and Central Staff

School Board

School Staff

Community/Owners

Strategy TeamProgram DesignAchievement MonitoringSchool Support

Governance TeamCommunity DialogSystem Values & Policy• Mission, Results• Operational

Expectations/ParametersCEO Accountability

Instructional TeamStudent AchievementProgram DeliverySchool-based Decisions

System-wide Accountability

Systemic Alignment

Coherent Governance: Systemic Alignment

reinventing your school board: coherent...

Documents