Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

Englewood-Gresham Elementary Network 6450 S Lowe Ave Chicago, IL 60621 ISBE ID: 150162990252294 School ID: 610019 Oracle ID: 23991

Mission Statement

Our Mission is to incorporate a rigorous academic program, emphasizing inquiry-based instruction. We have structured a safe nurturing learning environment for our learning community that accepts and respects the diversity of all, while promoting academic excellence.

Strategic Priorities

1. Common Core Instruction: Teachers will integrate Common Core and IB Standards with small group instruction including strategic intervention and enrichment groups to extend differentiated

2. Climate and Culture: We will set school-wide expectations at the beginning of the school year. We will engage parents and community members to provide total aligning of behavioral and social-emotional strategies.

3. Attendance: We will decrease our current percentage of student absence and tardies.We will include all stakeholders in meeting this demand. Improve attendance in Pre-K grades.

School Performance Goals

Literacy Performance Goals

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

SY2011 SY2012 SY2013 SY2014

80.0 70.0 60.0

70.0 63.0 56.0 46.3

73.0 79.0 85.0 58.1

Early Literacy

Gr3-5 Reading

Gr6-8 Reading

38.9 45.0 50.0 55.0 Gr8 Explore

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

80.0 70.0

Math Performance Goals

SY2011 SY2012 SY2013 SY2014

80.0 72.0 65.0 55.2

75.0 80.0 85.0 67.2

Early Math

Gr3-5 Math

Gr6-8 Math

25.0 30.0 35.0 5.6

Gr8 Explore

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

Continuous Improvement Work Plan 2012 - 2014

Overview

The Continuous Improvement Work Plan (CIWP) is a stream-lined, strategic planning process for schools that also meets the state and federal requirements of a school improvement plan. The CIWP uses previous goal and priority setting completed by the schools from the Scorecard metrics, School Effectiveness Framework and Theory of Action. Please see the CIWP Planning Guide at cps.edu/CIWP for detailed instructions on completing the tool.

School Name

To get started, please select your school's name from the drop down list:

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

Developing a CIWP Team

A CIWP team consists of 6 ? 12 committed stakeholders that act as the steering committee for the entire CIWP planning process. The principal should serve as the chairperson of the CIWP Team, appointing other team members from the school and community, which can include members from the ILT and/or LSC. These CIWP Team members should have strengths in collaboration and consensus-building. While the CIWP Team needs to remain small, it should include people with a variety of perspectives.

CIWP Team

Veronica Nash Nicole Hampton Angela Mckinney Karen Jones Pamela Smith Jamillah Bradley Barbara Krantz Crystal Andrews Pamela Roberts Shantel Lyons Gwen Butler Yahaira Medina

Name (Print)

Title/Relationship

Principal Special Education Faculty LSC Member Other Assistant Principal Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher LSC Member LSC Member LSC Member

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

CIWP Team Page 2 of 27

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

Elementary Goal Setting

Instructions: Your school's data is organized by Scorecard categories. Using your current performance data and your SY2012 goals, determine the SY2013 & SY2014 performance goals for each metric. Note: ISAT scores include all students in the aggregates, including English Language Learners.

Academic Achievement

Pre-K - 2nd Grade

SY2011 Score

Early Literacy % of students at Benchmark on DIBELS, IDEL

3rd - 5th Grade

Grade Level Performance - Reading % of students at or above grade level on Scantron/NWEA Keeping Pace - Reading % of students making growth targets on Scantron/NWEA

6th - 8th Grade

Grade Level Performance - Reading % of students at or above grade level on Scantron/NWEA Keeping Pace - Reading % of students making growth targets on Scantron/NWEA

8th Grade

Explore - Reading % of students at college readiness benchmark

NDA 46.3 71.6 58.1 78.7

38.9

SY2012 Goal

60.0

56.0 75.0

73.0 83.0

45.0

SY2013 Goal

70.0

63.0 80.0

79.0 87.0

50.0

SY2014 Goal

80.0

70.0 85.0

85.0 90.0

55.0

SY2011 SY2012 SY2013 SY2014

Score

Goal

Goal

Goal

Early Math % of students at Benchmark on mClass

NDA

Optional in 2012

70.0

80.0

Grade Level Performance - Math % of students at or above grade level on Scantron/NWEA

Keeping Pace - Math % of students making growth targets on Scantron/NWEA

55.2 71.6

65.0 75.0

72.0 80.0

80.0 85.0

Grade Level Performance - Math % of students at or above grade level on Scantron/NWEA

Keeping Pace - Math % of students making growth targets on Scantron/NWEA

67.2 83.3

75.0 88.0

80.0 90.0

85.0 95.0

Explore - Math % of students at college readiness benchmark

5.6

25.0 30.0 35.0

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

ES Goals Page 3 of 27

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

Elementary Goal Setting

Instructions: Your school's data is organized by Scorecard categories. Using your current performance data and your SY2012 goals, determine the SY2013 & SY2014 performance goals for each metric. Note: ISAT scores include all students in the aggregates, including English Language Learners.

Climate & Culture

All Grades

Attendance Rate Average daily attendance rate

SY2011

SY2012 Goal

SY2013 Goal

SY2014 Goal

94.8 96.0 96.2 97.0

State Assessment

All Grades

% Meets & Exceeds

ISAT - Reading % of students meeting or exceeding state standards

ISAT - Mathematics % of students meeting or exceeding state standards

ISAT - Science % of students meeting or exceeding state standards

SY2011 SY2012 SY2013 SY2014

Score

Goal

Goal

Goal

76.2 79.0 83.0 86.0

85.4 86.0 88.0 90.0

82.9 83.0 84.0 85.0

Misconducts Rate of Misconducts (any) per 100

SY2011

SY2012 Goal

SY2013 Goal

SY2014 Goal

8.2

5.0

4.0

3.0

All Grades

% Exceeds

ISAT - Reading % of students exceeding state standards

ISAT - Mathematics % of students exceeding state standards

ISAT - Science % of students exceeding state standards

SY2011 SY2012 SY2013 SY2014

Score

Goal

Goal

Goal

16.2 20.0 24.0 28.0

22.3 25.0 28.0 31.0

14.3 16.0 18.0 20.0

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

ES Goals Page 4 of 27

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

School Effectiveness Framework

Instructions: Evaluate your school from 1-4 on each of the Effective Practices of the School Effectiveness Framework in the drop down box under "Evaluation". Cite evidence from observations, any available data, surveys, etc. NOTE: 2= Typical School and 4 = Effective School TIP: When entering text, press Alt + Enter to start a new paragraph.

Typical School

Goals and theory of action

? The school has established goals for student achievement that are aimed at making incremental growth and narrowing of achievement gaps. ? The school has a plan but may have too many competing priorities.

Effective School

Evidence

Evaluation

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

3

? The school has established clear, measurable goals for The school has established a theory of action to help address student

student achievement aimed at aggressively narrowing the performance needs to narrow achievement gaps , improve

achievement gap and ensuring college and career readiness instruction and ensure academic success.

of all students-- at the school, grade, and classroom levels. The school conducts quarterly PM Sessions to analyze data as

? The school has established a clear theory of action or

necessary to meet instructional goals.

strategic plan that outlines the school's priorities (derived The school implements deep dives with teachers to monitor

from analysis of data) and key levers along with the

academic progress through data analysis. Observations will be

anticipated impact when implemented with fidelity.

centered on improving instructional deficiencies as evidenced by

data (ie, class assessments,quick checks, quizzes, ISAT, etc.)

DIMENSION 1:Leadership

Principal Leadership

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

3

? Professional learning is organized through whole ? Principal creates a professional learning system that

Principal creates a professional learning system that evaluates

staff development but it is not tightly linked to what evaluates teacher need and interest and builds

teacher need and builds opportunities for professional growth in

happens in teacher team meetings or 1:1 coaching opportunities for growth in content knowledge and

content knowledge and leadership capacities.

cycles.

leadership

Principal clarifies a clear vision for instructional best practice.

? Principal monitors instructional practice for teacher ? Principal clarifies a vision for instructional best practice, Principal establishes and nurtures a culture of college and career

evaluations.

works with each staff member to determine goals and

readiness to support needs of students in understanding and

? School-wide or class specific vision is not

benchmarks, monitors quality and drives continuous

reaching these goals. Administrators will monitor student work to

consistently focused on college and career readiness.. improvement.

ensure that the level of expectation demonstrates depth of

? Principal provides basic information for families on ? Principal establishes and nurtures a culture of college and knowledge consistent across grade level and content.

school events and responds to requests for

career readiness through clarity of vision, internal and

information. Families and community are engaged external communications and establishment of systems to

through occasional school-wide events such as open support students in understanding and reaching these goals.

houses or curriculum nights.

? Principal creates a system for empowered families and

communities through accurate information on school

performance, clarity on student learning goals, and

opportunities for involvement.

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

SEF Page 5 of 27

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

School Effectiveness Framework

Instructions: Evaluate your school from 1-4 on each of the Effective Practices of the School Effectiveness Framework in the drop down box under "Evaluation". Cite evidence from observations, any available data, surveys, etc. NOTE: 2= Typical School and 4 = Effective School TIP: When entering text, press Alt + Enter to start a new paragraph.

Typical School

Teacher Leadership

? A core group of teachers performs nearly all leadership duties in the school. ? A few voices tend to contribute to the majority of decision-making at the ILT and teacher team levels. ? Teacher learning and expertise is inconsistently shared after engagement in professional learning activities.

Effective School

Evidence

Evaluation

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

3

? Each teacher is invested in the success of the school

All teachers are invested in the successes of the school through

through leadership in one or more areas, including (but not leadership in the following areas:

limited to):

-ILT membership -Grade/Course team lead

ILT membership RTI team

- RtI team

Family Liaison

-Committee chair or membership -Mentor teacher -Curriculum team

CIWP team Union representation Full School Day Team

-Coach

IB Grade Level Teams

-Family liaison -Data team -Bilingual lead

PBIS Coordinators and Team Mentor Teacher Data Team

-SIPAAA/CWIP team -Union representative -Grant writer

Extra-Curricular Lead Teacher Teachers feel comfortable with having open dialogue with colleagues

? Each teacher has equity of voice in grade/course, ILT and and administrators.

whole staff meetings ? Each teacher is encouraged to share learning about effective practice from PD or visits to other schools

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

SEF Page 6 of 27

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

School Effectiveness Framework

Instructions: Evaluate your school from 1-4 on each of the Effective Practices of the School Effectiveness Framework in the drop down box under "Evaluation". Cite evidence from observations, any available data, surveys, etc. NOTE: 2= Typical School and 4 = Effective School TIP: When entering text, press Alt + Enter to start a new paragraph.

Typical School

Effective School

Evidence

Evaluation

Instructional Leadership Team (ILT)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

3

? The ILT represents some or most grade levels or departments, but may not include critical areas of

? The school's ILT is assembled based on the combination of ILT team consists of educators from each grade level strand knowledge and expertise needed to make decisions for all including special education, ancillary and educational support staff.

expertise, like special education, bilingual education students and staff.

The ILT team regularly gives professional development to staff that

or counseling. ? The ILT splits time and focus between improving

? The ILT leads the work of improving teaching and learning includes modeling strategies, analyzing data and improving the

school-wide

school culture.

teaching and learning and solving day-to-day

? The ILT leads the school's approach to professional

The ILT team reviews and analyzes qualitative and quantitative

operational concerns.

development ? whole staff PD, teacher teams, and coaching. school data where they review and school-wide goals, and create

? The ILT organizes some whole staff professional ? The ILT facilitates two-way communication and engages all action plans as needed with the teacher teams on ways to improve

development activities. Development at the teacher staff in participating in decision-making that advances the instruction.

team or teacher level is not coordinated by the ILT. ILT school's strategic focus.

The ILT team meets weekly to develop IB units/planners assessments

decision-making is carried out in isolation, or without ? The ILT engages in regular reflection upon its own team , inquiry-based instruction while implementing a cooperative

a clear process for staff-wide engagement.

processes and effectiveness and takes actions to improve its approach to learning , with a focus on a global education.

? ILT engages in changes to practice in response to functioning and progress towards school-wide goals.

voiced concerns. ? ILT analyzes student test data if new data is available.

? The ILT regularly analyzes qualitative and quantitative data to monitor the implementation of school's plan and make adjustments accordingly

Monitoring and adjusting

? Data for district assessments is occasionally analyzed at the school level, typically when new reports are made available. Analysis may lead to instructional practice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

4

? The school has a systematic approach to analyzing data relative to the school's theory of action on an ongoing basis--at the school level, department/grade level, and classroom level--in order to make adjustments to their focus and to target support for particular teachers and students.

The school implements a monitoring and adjusting system through performance management sessions where each teacher presents his/her student data which focuses on student's strengths and weaknesses. During the PM sessions teachers present their classroom data and the school analyzes it as well as give suggestions for making improvements. The school as a whole compares our school data to that of other schools in the network area. Admin will review gradebook weekly to look for evidence of student's progression.

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

SEF Page 7 of 27

DIMENSION 2: Core Instruction

2012-2014 Continuous Improvement Work Plan

Joshua D Kershaw Elementary School

School Effectiveness Framework

Instructions: Evaluate your school from 1-4 on each of the Effective Practices of the School Effectiveness Framework in the drop down box under "Evaluation". Cite evidence from observations, any available data, surveys, etc. NOTE: 2= Typical School and 4 = Effective School TIP: When entering text, press Alt + Enter to start a new paragraph.

Typical School

Effective School

Evidence

Evaluation

Curriculum

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

3

? Curricular pacing/scope and sequence is most often ? Each grade level or course team has a year-long scope and Grade level strands writes MYP units and PYP planners with a focus determined by the pacing set forth in instructional sequence that maps out what Common Core or other state on the IB philosophy

materials or by an individual teacher.

standards teachers should teach and in what order in core Common planning time is provided so teachers can meet to discuss,

? Each teacher develops his/her own units of

subject areas.

analyze student work, and plan for next steps.

instruction or follows what is suggested by the pacing ? Each grade level or course team develops/uses common Curriculum maps are developed quarterly aligned with the IB scope

provided in instructional materials.

units of instruction aligned to the standards.

and sequence, Illinois State Standards, standardized testing results

? Text used for instruction exposes some students to ? Text used for instruction exposes all students to a grade- and common core standards.

grade-appropriate complexity and is heavily focused appropriate level of complexity and informational texts to at Special Ed teachers collaborate with general education teachers to

on fiction.

least the CCSS-recommended levels by grade band.

provide accommodations and modifications to meet the needs of all

? Short- and long-term plans do not consistently

? Short and long term plans include the supports necessary students.

differentiate by learner need.

to ensure that students with disabilities and ELLs are able to Common Core/IB curriculum will allow for students to develop

gain core content knowledge and skills.

strategies for their own learning and assessment across all content

areas.

Instructional materials

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>

3

? Core instructional materials vary between teachers ? Each grade level or course team has a set of instructional

of the same grade/course or are focused mainly on a materials that are aligned with standards.

single textbook with little exposure to standards-

? Instructional materials are supportive of students with

aligned supplemental materials.

disabilities as well as varying language proficiency levels of

? Instructional materials support a general curriculum ELLs (including native language and bilingual supports).

with little differentiation for student learning need.

The instructional materials that the school uses to drive instruction are aligned to the state standards and support the special needs student. IB instructional materials are aligned so teachers can activate inquiry learning as we us hands on science and math materials to demonstrate concepts through experiences and generating student questions to extend instructional tracks.

Reading Materials Survey: In addition to evaluating your school in this area, we encourage schools to begin inventorying grade level literacy materials by completing the survey at s/materialsurvey. While this is not a comprehensive inventory of your school's instructional materials, this will help you identify the additional literacy materials needed to help implement the Common Core State Standards in the upcoming school year.

Version 03/12

Date Stamp November 22, 2012

SEF Page 8 of 27

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download