Kanawha County Schools
Letter of Intent for Funding Under Section 1003(g)
Of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA)
February 15, 2011
Introduction and Summative Detail
I. Requirement Explanation
Kanawha County Schools is pleased to submit the following Letter of Intent for grants to fund school
improvement activities for identified Title I/Title I eligible Tier schools under section 1003(g) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). As the only county school district in West
Virginia with five (5) existing 1003(g) SIG schools, it is our intent to apply for funding for Watts
Elementary, our only SIG 2 Tier I school.
As with the SIG 1 schools, Kanawha County Schools will implement the Transformation Model in
Watts Elementary. In accordance with the transformation model regarding the removal of the principal,
the principal of Watts Elementary was employed in August, 2009 and is therefore not subject to removal
sanctions under the Transformation Model. It is also the intent of Kanawha County Schools to submit a
grant application asking for Year I funding in the amount of $296,448.10, Year 2 funding for
$291,160.62, and Year 3 funding for $292,607.01 for Watts Elementary. Additionally, the LEA is
requesting $12, 878.20 for each of the 3 years of funding to provide teacher/leader effectiveness in the
form of tuition reimbursement and travel, materials and supplies for costs associated with LEA support.
Preliminary budgets for Watts Elementary and the LEA have been developed and are included with this
letter of intent.
Watts Elementary will receive allocations for high quality, job embedded professional development
through supplemental salaries and stipends; funds to retain staff through additional technology,
classroom materials and supplies; funds to attend required WVDE School Improvement conferences;
funds to employ much needed additional instructional personnel including one reading/language arts
and one reading/language arts/math interventionist; in-county travel reimbursement to visit other
successful, high achieving schools; funding for required extended time programs through salaries,
materials, and supplies; funds through supplemental salaries and substitutes to promote activities for
ongoing student achievement data analysis and synthesis, and; funds to support Professional Learning
Communities and related activities.
Kanawha County Schools will also reserve a portion of these funds to conduct district level activities
required by and permissible under the Transformational Model to assist each Tier school in raising
student achievement and transforming the schools from low performing to high performing. A summary
of these district level initiatives are listed below:

Assign (1) district level School Transformational Specialist to work collaboratively with Watts
Elementary on critical activities specified within the Transformational Model including, but not
limited to, using rigorous, transparent, and equitable evaluation systems that take into account
data on student growth; provide high quality, job embedded professional development;
implementing strategies to recruit, replace, and retain staff; promote the continuous of student
data to inform and differentiate instruction; establish schedules and strategies that increase
learning time; assist in designing and implementing ongoing mechanisms for family and
community engagement, and; ensure that the school receives ongoing intensive technical
assistance and related support.
1

Provide monetary incentives to reward school leaders, teachers, and other staff who have
increased student achievement and graduation rates through reimbursement of tuition for pursing
advanced degrees and credentials.

Provide high quality, job embedded professional development to district level staff in the
formation and implementation of the transformational model through participation in WVDE
sponsored trainings.

Provide necessary, permissible activities for district level support such as additional secretarial
support, travel reimbursement for LEA personnel, and consumable materials and supplies.
II. Time Line for Implementation
Upon receipt of the approval of Kanawha County Schools’ grant application for 1003(g) funds, a budget
supplement will be filed for district and the school allocations through the Kanawha County Schools’
Treasurer’s Office by the district Title I Office. It is anticipated that all of the fiduciary activities needed
to begin the implementation of the 1003(g) program at Watts Elementary will be completed by the
beginning of July, 2011.
Other activities as specified within the grant will begin implementation with the start of the 2011-2012
school year. Regular desk audits of expenditures of funds will be conducted throughout the year by the
Title I Director. Implementation of grant activities will be monitored by the assigned Transformation
Specialist and principal.
III. Oversight
Under the leadership of our superintendent, Dr. Ron Duerring, Kanawha County Schools has already
formulated a district level School Transformation Team. This team consists of the Superintendent, the
Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction (Dr. Tom Williams), the Assistant
Superintendent of Elementary Schools (Ms. Jane Roberts), the Assistant Superintendent of Middle
Schools (Dr. Melanie Vickers), the Assistant Superintendent of Secondary Schools (Mr. Mark Milam),
the two 1003(g) Transformation Specialists (Mr. George Aulenbacher and Dr. Paula Potter), and the
Director of Federal Programs – Title I (Ms. Pam Padon). This team meets as part of the KCS
Management Team three (3) Wednesdays per month throughout the school year.
All financial and regulatory oversight as it relates to the requirements of section 1003(g) of the ESEA will
be the responsibility of the Director of Federal Programs – Title I. All curricular and instructional
oversight will be the responsibility of the Transformation Specialists with guidance from the School
Transformation Team.
IV. Monitoring and Monitoring Effectiveness
While it is expected that it will be the responsibility of the School Transformation Team to monitor and
provide oversight to Watts Elementary, the primary, day-to-day monitoring of Watts Elementary will be
the responsibility of the assigned School Transformational Specialist. It is anticipated that Mr. George
Aulenbacher will be the assigned Transformation Specialist as Watts Elementary is a feeder school to
Stonewall Jackson Middle School, a school to which Mr. Aulenbacher has been assigned under the SIG 1
grants. In addition, the Kanawha County Curriculum Specialists as well as the Title I Curriculum
Specialists, the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, the Assistant Superintendent of
2
Elementary Schools and the Director of Federal Programs – Title I will continue to provide district level
support and monitoring to Watts Elementary.
Additionally, Watts Elementary will continue to participate in the monthly district level target school
team meetings along with other schools identified for improvement. These meetings are coordinated by
the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction and provide a forum for discussion of topics
related to school improvement.
Oversight and monitoring visits will occur on a weekly basis. The visitation schedule will be designed by
and will be the primary responsibility of the School Transformational Specialist. Documentation of
visits by the School Transformational Specialists will be reported to the School Transformation Team
member at Management Team meetings.
Additionally, the KCS Title I Data Analysis and Evaluation Specialist will be assigned to work with
Watts Elementary. This individual will assist school personnel not only in the analysis of student
achievement data through data mining and drill-down of data, but also to collect and analyze other impact
data such as discipline, attendance, parental and community involvement rates, etc.. Coordination of
scheduled visits to each Tier school will be aligned with visits conducted by the School
Transformational Specialist. This individual will also work closely with the Director of Counseling and
Testing, Dr. William Mullet, particularly in the areas of data analysis of student and school achievement
growth.
Monitoring and oversight must also be an explicit function that is fully embedded and operational at
each Watts Elementary. To accomplish this, Watts Elementary will be expected to utilize a team approach
consistent with their Professional Learning Community that focuses on specific areas of school
improvement such as a data analysis, curriculum and instruction, student/parent support, etc. Teacher
leaders will work with the building level administration and the School Transformational Specialist to
collaborate on activities, ideas, etc. The School Transformational Specialist will work with the district
School Transformation Team to relate issues and ideas to be acted upon on by the school.
V. Summary
Kanawha County Schools is strongly committed to helping all of our schools achieve greatness. Our
students, staff, parents, and community members are indeed our greatest assets. We applaud the principal,
teachers and staff that are committed to staying with Watts Elementary to impact student achievement.
While we recognize that there will be challenges with implementing the 1003(g) requirements, we
welcome them and will use them to our students’ full advantage.
3
District Capacity Index
Each LEA must complete a self analysis of the capacity it has to assist the low performing schools in the
implementation of the selected intervention. This will be determined utilizing a scale of 1-3 ranking from
poor (1), satisfactory (2) and commendable (3) for the following criteria:
LEA governance
State takeover district
Title I audit reports
Findings in areas
requiring a repayment of
funds
Satisfactory
2 points
Limited SEA
intervention
Findings in areas
noted-repayment of
funds not required
LEA overall
achievement ranking
Bottom
(5% = 3 districts)
Middle
(70% = 38 districts)
Top
(25% = 14 districts)
3
Approval of the district
strategic plan by the
SEA
Not approved by the SEA
Approved by the
SEA with revisions
Approved by the SEA
without revisions
3
0-50% of the Title I
schools met AYP.
51-75% of the Title I
schools met AYP.
76-100% of the Title
I schools met AYP.
3
The practice of PLCs
is deeply embedded
in the culture of the
school. It is a driving
force in the daily
work of the staff. It
is deeply internalized
and staff would resist
attempts to abandon
the practice.
3
A specific district
leadership team is
identified and one or
more persons are
assigned for
monitoring
implementation.
3
Criteria
Poor
1 point
(entire plan, not just the Title
I section)
Percentage of Title I
schools that met AYP
in the last testing cycle
Development of schools
as professional
learning communities
Identification of district
leadership team and
assignment of
responsibilities
The school has not yet
begun to address the
practice of a PLC or an
effort has been made to
address the practice of
PLCs, but has not yet
begun to impact a critical
mass of staff members.
No district leadership
team nor identified
person assigned for
monitoring
implementation
A critical mass of
staff has begun to
engage in PLC
practice. Members
are being asked to
modify their thinking
as well as their
traditional practice.
Structural changes
are being met to
support the transition.
Lacks specific
identification of
personnel for the
district leadership
team and for
monitoring
implementation.
4
Commendable
3 points
Points
Earned
No SEA intervention
3
No findings in the
fiscal area
2
Criteria
School Leadership
Team
Poor
1 point
Satisfactory
2 points
School leadership team
members are identified
on the district and school
level, but little evidence
is produced to document
whether the requirements
of NCLB Sections 1116
and 1117 have been met.
School leadership
team members are
identified on the
district and school
level and evidence is
produced to
document whether
the requirements of
NCLB Sections 1116
and 1117 have been
met.
Commendable
3 points
School leadership
team members are
identified on the
district and school
level and include a
wide range of
stakeholders (e.g.,
parents;
representatives of institutions
of higher education;
representatives of RESA or
representatives of outside
consultant groups)
Points
Earned
3
Evidence is produced
to document whether
the requirements of
NCLB Sections 1116
and 1117 have been
exceeded.
Total Points
23
Districts must obtain a score of 20 out of 24 possible points to demonstrate capacity to provide adequate
resources and related support to each Tier I, Tier II and Tier III school identified in the LEA’s application
in order to implement fully and effectively the selected intervention/activities in each identified school.
Kanawha County Schools has a District Capacity Index Score of 23 total points.
5
Watts Elementary – Needs Assessment
WESTEST/WESTEST 2 Achievement Data
Watts Elementary School is the only SIG 2 1003(g) Tier I school identified for Kanawha County.
Although Watts met Annual Yearly Progress as defined by the WVDE, student performance on the
WESTEST fluctuated in the all subgroup in both Reading/Language Arts and Mathematics for the school
year periods 2003 -04 through 2007 – 08. Beginning with the 2008 – 09 school year and through the
2009 – 10 school year, WESTEST 2 data shows a decline in student achievement scores in both
reading/language arts and mathematics. The table below shows these variances for the all subgroup.
Highlighted areas indicate increased scores from the previous year.
Percent Proficient Trend Data – All Subgroup
School Year
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Reading/Language Arts
65.85
76.05
70.12
76.25
71.95
47.61
15.87
Change
Baseline
+10.20
-5.93
+6.13
-4.30
WESTEST 2
-31.74
Mathematics
62.19
56.33
67.53
52.43
59.25
36.50
16.92
Change
Baseline
-5.86
+11.20
-15.1
+6.82
WESTEST 2
-19.58
The table below shows student performance levels on WESTEST 2 for the 2009 – 10 school year for all
subgroups.
WATTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - Need Improvement
KANAWHA COUNTY
Number
Met
Number
Met
Met
Enrolled Number Participation Percent
Part.
Group Enrolled
Assessment Subgroup
on Test Tested
Rate
Proficient Rate
for FAY
Standard Standard
Week
Standard
Mathematics
All
67
79
77
97.46
16.92
Yes
No
White
41
51
50
98.03
22.50
Yes
NA
Black
25
27
26
96.29
4.16
NA
NA
NA
1
1
1
100.00
100.00
NA
NA
NA
Hispanic
Asian
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Indian
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
MultiRacial
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Pacific
Islander
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NA
Spec.
Ed.
11
11
11
100.00
9.09
NA
NA
Low
SES
57
67
65
97.01
16.36
Yes
No
LEP
1
1
1
100.00
0.00
NA
NA
6
NA
Reading/Language Arts
All
67
79
74
93.67
15.87
By
Average
No
White
41
51
47
92.15
18.42
By
Average
NA
Black
25
27
26
96.29
8.33
NA
NA
NA
100.00
100.00
Hispanic
NA
NA
NA
Asian
*
1
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
Indian
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
MultiRacial
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Pacific
Islander
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NA
Spec.
Ed.
11
11
9
81.81
0.00
NA
NA
Low
SES
57
67
63
94.02
13.20
By
Average
No
LEP
1
1
1
100.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
Passed Attendance Rate = 96.8
With the second year of WESTEST 2, the WVDE developed a ‘Growth Report’ for each school. The
table below shows the growth report for Watts Elementary School as compared to Kanawha County and
State totals.
Grade
Percent Proficient - WESTEST 2 Data Only
Mathematics
2009
Modified
Percent
2009
Proficient Percent
Proficient
Reading/Language
2010
Percent
2009
Modified
Percent Improvement Percent
2009
Proficient
Proficient Percent
Proficient
2010
Percent
Percent Improvement
Proficient
Watts Elementary School
03
12.50%
8.33%
18.18%
9.85%
33.33%
04
37.50%
16.67%
05
48.15%
25.93%
03
62.16%
37.25%
42.13%
4.88%
04
64.72%
41.43%
46.29%
4.87%
05
64.78%
44.31%
48.58%
4.27%
8.33%
17.24%
8.91%
8.70%
-7.97%
50.00%
8.33%
8.33%
0.00%
14.29%
-11.64%
40.74%
22.22%
14.29%
-7.94%
67.43%
41.64%
45.96%
4.33%
65.60%
43.18%
42.37%
-0.81%
66.35%
42.53%
46.08%
3.54%
Kanawha County
State Totals
03
65.60%
37.78%
44.39%
6.60%
64.72%
40.28%
44.46%
4.18%
04
64.35%
41.68%
42.39%
0.71%
63.54%
38.77%
40.27%
1.50%
05
62.33%
41.55%
44.86%
3.31%
64.68%
40.32%
43.17%
2.85%
7
Retention Rates
For the 2009 – 10 school year, Watts Elementary had the following retention rates. Only student in
Kindergarten and Grade 1 were retained.
Kindergarten
2 of 25 students retained or 8.0%
1st Grade
6 of 37 students retained or 16.21%
Overall
8 of 169 students retained or 4.734%
WESTEST 2 Participation Rates
The most recent WVDE NCLB data show Watts having the following participation rates on WESTEST 2:
Area
2008 - 09
2009 -10
Trend
Math
100%
97.46%
Down -2.54%
Reading
100%
93.67%
Down -6.33%
Benchmark Data
Acuity
Watts Elementary most recent Acuity benchmark testing of students in grades 3, 4, and 5 using the CTB
McGraw-Hill Acuity platform was between January and March, 2010. The results show the following
performance levels by grade and subject areas:
Reading/Language Arts
Grades/Tiers
Tier I
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
3rd Grade (N=2/32)
50%
50%
0
0
4th Grade (N=16/21)
19%
38%
38%
6%
5th Grade (N=17/19)
12%
12%
53%
24%
Mathematics
Grades/Tiers
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
3rd Grade (N=8/32)
25%
25%
13%
38%
4th Grade (N=15/21)
33%
60%
7%
0
5th Grade (N=21/24)
19%
57%
24%
0
8
Watts Elementary is currently conducting their first Acuity benchmark for the 2010-11 school year.
DIBELS Benchmark Data
The following percentage of Watts’ students scoring at benchmark level on the end of year (200910) DIBELS assessment: kindergarten - 62%: first grade - 87%; second grade - 65%; third grade 37%. The combined K-3 percentage of benchmark students was 64%. At least 80% of the students in a
class should score at benchmark level. Benchmark is the level where students should be functioning at
that point in the school year. This level is considered “established” with “low risk.” Scoring
at benchmark or higher is the goal. Most students scoring at benchmark do not require interventions.
The following percentage of Watts’ students scoring at strategic level on the end of year (200910) DIBELS assessment: kindergarten - 14%: first grade - 5 %; second grade - 21%; third grade 27%. The combined K-3 percentage of strategic students was 16%. No more than 15% of the students in
a class should score at this level. The strategic level indicates students scoring at “some risk” and should
be considered “emerging readers” who will need interventions.
The following percentage of Watts’ students scoring at intensive level on the end of year (200910) DIBELS assessment: kindergarten - 24%: first grade - 8%; second grade - %; third grade - 14%. The
combined K-3 percentage of intensive students was 20%. The intensive percentage should not exceed 35% of students. The intensive level indicates students at “high risk or deficit” level and will need
intensive interventions.
The following percentage of Watts’ students scoring at benchmark level on the beginning of year (201011) DIBELS assessment: kindergarten - 49%: first grade - 81%; second grade - 59%; third grade 50%. The following percentage of Watts’ students scoring at strategic level on the beginning of year
(2010-11) DIBELS assessment: kindergarten - 32%: first grade - 14%; second grade - 34%; third grade 25%. The following percentage of Watts’ students scoring at intensive level on the beginning of year
(2010-11) DIBELS assessment: kindergarten - 19%: first grade - 5%; second grade - 7%; third grade 25%.
External Trend Data
Watts Elementary is located on the west side of Charleston, West Virginia, which is considered inner city.
This area of Charleston is known for a high violent crime rate with disproportionate rates of murder,
assaults and malicious woundings in comparison to other parts of the city as well as crimes related to the
illegal sale and use of drugs. Approximately 50% of children attending Watts Elementary reside in
Washington Manor which is a federally subsidized Housing and Urban Development (HUD) project.
Approximately an additional 30% of students come from other HUD subsidized housing located in the
Watts attendance area.
Watts Elementary has historically been served as a Title I school due to the high poverty level of the
student population and the attendance area in general. For the 2010 - 2011 school year, Watts Elementary
has 76.19% of the student population participating in the federal Free and Reduced Meals program.
Student enrollment at Watts Elementary has experienced fluctuation since the 2005-06 school year.
Student enrollment has varied as follows:
9
School Year
Enrollment
2005-06
170
2006-07
158
2007-08
203
2008-09
235
2009-10
204
2010-11
168
Sixteen percent (16%) of the students are identified as special needs and are served in special education
while the minority population at Watts is approximately 35%. There are no students currently enrolled at
Watts identified as English Language Learners (ELL).
Other Student Outcomes
Despite the overall economic and social conditions in the Watts attendance area, student attendance rates
remain strong. Watts Elementary continues to exceed the State standard for attendance and shows an
increase in student attendance with percentages of 95.1% for the 2009-09 school year and 96.8% for the
2009-10 school year. However, data from the WVDE Data Portal 21 (DP 21) does indicate attendance
concerns related to unexcused absences particularly at the Kindergarten grade level with an increase in
the number of total outs raising from 20.5 to 56.5 for an increase of 36 and unexcused absences raising
from 12.5 to 39.5 for an increase of 27 from November 2010 to December 2010. Baseline data from
school year 2009 – 10 and current attendance data to date is shown in the DP 21 table below:
School Year 2010 (baseline)
#Out
Nov 2010
Dec 2010
Avg.
#Unexc %Unexc Att. Rate Enrolled
#Out #Unexc %Unexc Att. Rate #Out #Unexc %Unexc Att. Rate
(10 months)
School
2780
1459
52.5%
90.8%
78.0
56.3%
94.2% 188.0
142.5
75.8%
91.2%
K
477.5
236.0
49.4%
89.9%
175.0 138.5
27.5
20.5
12.5
61.0%
95.5%
56.5
39.5
69.9%
86.4%
1st
626.0
360.5
57.6%
90.4%
37.9
20.5
11.0
53.7%
94.1%
26.5
22.0
83.0%
91.8%
2nd
487.5
303.5
62.3%
91.5%
33.2
32.5
24.0
73.8%
92.4%
35.5
29.0
81.7%
90.6%
3rd
486.5
252.0
51.8%
91.6%
33.3
17.0
7.0
41.2%
95.3%
25.0
19.0
76.0%
92.3%
4th
312.0
124.5
39.9%
92.2%
23.0
27.0
12.5
46.3%
93.9%
22.0
18.0
81.8%
94.4%
5th
390.5
182.5
46.7%
88.7%
20.1
21.0
11.0
52.4%
93.8%
22.5
15.0
66.7%
92.5%
10
Discipline infractions at Watts Elementary vary in nature and severity. The most recent data (2009-10) on
incidents of student discipline infractions is summarized in the table below –
Infraction
Total Incidents
In School
Suspensions
Number of Expulsions
Disrespectful/Inappropriate
Conduct
19
6
0
Aggressive Conduct
63
8
0
Failure to Obey
Rules/Authority
24
9
1
Weapons
1
0
0
107
23
1
Total Infractions
Finally, the transiency (mobility) rate at Watts Elementary is also a concern. The transiency rate for
Watts Elementary for the 2009 – 2010 is calculated at 40.47%. This was determined by applying a
formula used by the Nevada Department of Education where transiency rate is calculated as follows:
New Enrollment + Re-Enrollment + Withdrawals
Reported Enrollment + New Enrollment + Re-Enrollment
A transiency rate this high may be attributable to the high saturation of HUD available housing within the
Watts attendance area wherein frequent occupancy turnover rates are likely to occur.
Analysis of Culture, Conditions, and Practices
Staffing
For the 2010-11 school year, Watts Elementary experienced a high turn-over of their staff. Of the 14
teachers currently employed there, 12 are new to Watts. Watts Elementary reports 86% of their staff as
meeting the Highly Qualified definition under No Child Left Behind for this school year. Data also show
a pupil/teacher ratio of 12:1. The average years of experience for professional staff is 9.79 years. Six of
the 14 teachers have 5 or less years of experience. The table below shows the levels of education of the
teachers at Watts for this school year:
Level Of Education
Percentage of Teachers
Bachelor’s Degree
50% (n=7)
Bachelor’s Degree + 15
14.3% (n=2)
11
Master’s Degree
7.1% (n=1)
Master’s Degree + 15
7.1% (n=1)
Master’s Degree + 30
0%
Master’s Degree + 45
21.4% (n=3)
Doctorate
0%
In addition to regular classroom teachers, Watts’s faculty also includes 1 special education teacher who is
certified in behavior disorders (BD), specific learning disabilities (LD) and mentally impaired (MI) as
well as 4 Title I teachers and a full-time school counselor.
Teacher Attendance
# Days
0
127
6
57
12
0
52
Total
Jury Duty
Personal
Bereavement
Family
Professional
Development
Sick
(Unexcused)
Sick (Excused)
Absence
Reasons
Absent w/o
pay/suspension
The table below shows the most recent, complete year data on teacher attendance for the 2009 - 2010
school year for Watts Elementary. The table below shows the number of days absent and reasons for
absences. The overall teacher attendance rate for 2009 – 10 is 94.53% exclusive of days absent for
professional development.
0
254
External Evaluations
WVDE State System of Support
During the 2009 – 2010 school year, Watts Elementary was identified as a Tier I school under the WVDE
State System of Support (SSOS). As part of the WVDE SSOS process, several visits were made by the
SSOS team and an exit conference was conducted on March 15, 2010. The SSOS diagnostic team used
interview questions based on the seven pillars of the High Yields Practices Inventory and High
Performing Classrooms. The High Yield Practices Inventory consisted of seven areas:
 culture,
 climate,
 curriculum,
 instruction,
 effective and efficient practices,
 student support,
 and continuous improvement.
12
The on-site diagnostic review culminated with staff perceptions around these seven areas after five hours
of interviews with both faculty members and students. The following are excerpts from the diagnostic
report.
Culture and Climate
The staff at Watts Elementary was going through an administrative transition during the 2009 -10 school
year. When the team asked “What does this school care most about?” responses ranged from making
AYP to making sure the students at Watts are well cared for and that their physical needs are taken care
of. Examples of these answers consisted of home visits, food banks for the holidays, and an overall
commitment to nurturing the child each day they enter the building. It was perceived that this faculty is
caring and desires the best for the students of Watts Elementary. However, there are differing views on
what is most important. A defined set of core values and beliefs is sometimes viewed as insignificant.
Staff members did not feel their input was valued nor were decision making processes encompassing
teacher perspectives. Many teachers, from across grades and programmatic levels illustrated a level of
frustration and concern with regard to administrative support in this area. Building school-based
leadership across staff members has fertile ground for growth. The staff wanted to be involved and help
the school get better. A school leadership team representing the grade level teams is one method of
building capacity throughout the school. Student leadership was not examined, but should be a
consideration for the school. Watts had a renewed sense of commitment to the atmosphere of the physical
plant. Dedicated community partnerships with a local business were highlighted and great pride had been
demonstrated in cleaning up the grounds and certain areas within the building.
Culture and Climate Recommendations




A collaborative vision should be developed. When a collaborative vision statement for the school
is established and all staff members commit to the vision, protocols for staff actions to achieve
the school’s vision must ensue.
Establish a leadership team or principal’s advisory council (PAC) that takes into account teacher
feedback with regard to the decision making needs and processes at Watts.
Continue to recognize and celebrate all successes that move students and the school toward
academic achievement.
Continue to take pride in the community through quality upkeep of the physical structure and
plant at Watts.
Curriculum and Instruction
Curriculum and Instruction are the high yield practices which will affect the present levels of academic
achievement in reading and math at Watts Elementary. It is these two pillars that show the most need for
attention and subsequent professional development. As illustrated in the chart below, the team felt that
Watts Elementary must seriously examine both curriculum and instruction in order to affect the needed
changes highlighted in this review:
13
School
STATE
Watts Elementary
Elementary A
Elementary B
Elementary C
Elementary D
Enrollment
N/A
235
234
294
268
246
% Poverty
52
71
79
66
77
87
% Minority
7.6
29.8
27.8
29.3
34.3
61.4
% SPED
16.3
15.7
22.7
14.6
30.6
24.4
RLA
65.5
41.3
57.0
76.3
68.8
50.0
Math
65.2
33.3
55.1
70.5
76.0
50.9
Then team felt that curriculum alignment appeared to be present at Watts; however there were clear,
school-level goals for instruction. It was well noted that a greater importance has been placed on
academics during this administrative transition. Lesson plans were checked frequently and teachers were
able to speak with a high level of knowledge around curricular issues. District-wide initiatives were wellunderstood and followed through. An evaluation of Tier I instructional strategies should be conducted.
Consistent instructional strategies throughout the grade levels will help provide consistency for the
student population served at Watts. Knowledge around Everyday Mathematics may be an area of
concern. Some teachers responded positively when asked about this curricular area, yet observations and
further conversations exposed a potential knowledge gap with regard to understanding and instructional
delivery.
After school tutoring or mentoring programs were not operational at Watts Elementary. Staff members
stated this was due to transportation issues. Many of the comments directed toward the SSOS team
highlighted the great needs of the students that attend Watts and the lack of quality home environment in
place to tend to those needs. This should place an even higher importance on establishing a quality afterschool program for this community. These interventions should be established as early in the school year
as possible in order to meet the needs of the students to be served.
Teacher Support Meetings (TSM) had been established in order to examine teacher and student needs.
These needs focus on academic areas of concern and data analysis; however other needs, such as
resources are also discussed. Some teachers felt these meetings are supportive in nature while others did
not. Many spoke of the benefits of these weekly meetings, but would contest that the title is not
indicative of the content being examined. The SSOS team saw these meetings as beneficial to the overall
expected increase in student achievement and yet another indication that academics and student
achievement have a renewed sense of focus at Watts.
Curriculum and Instruction Recommendations




Job-embedded professional development examining student engagement should be
considered. Data collection through the Instructional Practices Inventory (IPI) could provide
a needed set of information to drive the school’s PLCs.
Conduct an audit to determine if professional development for Everyday Mathematics is
necessary and ensure consistent Tier I instruction is occurring in Reading/Language Arts.
Establish an after-school program that supports the needs of the community being served by
Watts.
Continue the process of TSMs however; examine this title and/or the agendas that go along
with this form of support.
14
Effective and Efficient Practices
The SSOS team discovered that all members of the professional staff at Watts Elementary are expected to
contribute to the overall expectation of increased student achievement. This was exhibited through
discussions around how most staff members facilitate and teach a literacy small group. This not only
promotes unity of mission and purpose, but provides opportunity for professionals to grow and learn
themselves. The dedication to this endeavor was never more present than when the team was told “If you
are going to be here tomorrow, then you will have a reading group starting tomorrow”. That system and
dedication highlights the laser-like focus sustainable school improvement must entail. This approach
does, however, come with the expectation to balance the needs of all students as well as the exploitation
of a staff’s strengths. The team would only recommend that leadership continue to be diligent in
examining the needs of the students being served and each staff member’s strengths as it applies to those
student needs.
Effective and Efficient Practices Recommendations

Continuous evaluation of time and effort in relation to the needs of each individual student at
Watts Elementary I needed.
Student Support
The team felt that students are well cared for at Watts Elementary. Teachers and staff are nurturing,
exhibit a sense of community and desire for their students to learn. A change in scheduling allowing for
weekly guidance to be conducted could be very beneficial to this particular student population. However,
as highlighted above, ensuring adequate time and effort in the area of “guidance” should be a top priority
for Watts. Student attendance and tardiness was highlighted as a major concern. Home visits were
referenced as a way in which to address these issues, but those did not seem to be occurring as they have
in the past. The KCS mentoring program was perceived to be a strength at this school and also helps to
offset the potential for the tardy and absenteeism problem from worsening. The movement of a special
needs classroom as well as the school’s new positive behavior support system appears to have made huge
impacts upon both the daily operations of the school as well as student behavior. Again the team would
like to highlight the need for an after-school program to further the area of student support in this
community.
Student Support Recommendations


Continue the newly adopted positive behavior support system and the focus on the KCS
mentoring program.
Examine duties and responsibilities each year in order to adequately gauge if the assigned duties
and responsibilities are meeting student needs.
Continuous Improvement
The team determined that the responsibility and ownership of the school improvement process should be
the combined efforts of all staff. Developing a quality leadership team is essential to formulating a
quality plan that analyzes the right sets of data and coordinates the proper systems for continuous school
15
improvement. Input, feedback, and other forms of collaboration should be gathered and considered when
formulating and structuring school improvement plans and processes.
Continuous Improvement Recommendations

Establish a school leadership team with representation of general education and other
professional branches of the school. Ensure that through the selection of this team, school-wide
buy-in is evident and pervasive across all staff members.
Conclusions
The SSOS diagnostic team members believed that Watts Elementary School is a school that has the
ability and the opportunity to effectively prepare its students for 21st Century demands. This belief is
based on the qualified personnel that truly believe in doing what is best for the children of Watts. The
overall climate of the building is one in which students are cared for and the desire for those students to
learn is extremely high. The team believed the above mentioned collaborative systems are needed for
sustained and continuous school improvement. However, those beliefs should not be confused with the
need for school level administration to make decisions that demand immediate attention and/or are in the
best interest of students. Those decisions are then to be examined and reflected on through the quality
and professional feedback given by the stakeholders those decisions effect. It was the belief of the team,
based upon their conversations, observations, and examination of the data that the changes being
implemented at Watts in that transitional year were appropriate, data-driven, and in the best interest of the
students it serves.
As a result of this visit, the SSOS team recommended Watts to be removed from Tier I and placed into
Tier II. This decision was been made in light of the recent administrative change, the high quality staff
that exists at Watts Elementary and the overall sense of community felt by most within the school.
Office of Education Performance Audits
On November 9, 2010, the West Virginia Office of Education Performance Audits (OEPA) conducted an
on-site audit of Watts Elementary. Several areas of concern were identified and subsequently shared with
the staff of Watts and the WV State Board of Education members. The following are excerpts of findings
from the OEPA report as presented to the WV State Board of Education on December 10, 2010.
Education Performance Audit Summary
The Team identified nine high quality standards necessary to improve performance and progress.
They include the following:
7.1.1. Curriculum based on content standards and objectives.
7.1.5. Instructional strategies.
7.1.6. Instruction in writing.
7.1.7. Library/educational technology access and technology application.
7.1.9. Programs of study.
7.1.12. Multicultural activities.
7.1.13. Instructional day.
7.6.2. Licensure.
7.7.2. Policy implementation.
16
7.1.1. Curriculum based on content standards and objectives. Two teachers were not using the West
Virginia 21st Century content standards and objectives (CSOs) properly. The textbook was the basis for
the curriculum in these classes rather than the CSOs. The Team noted that these were beginning teachers
and the principal and central office staff are providing them support. The Team was confident that
experience combined with guidance in instructional delivery will resolve this issue.
7.15 Instructional Strategies. One class had little to no instruction during the day of the Education
Performance Audit. Students were off task and disorderly and the teacher and Title I teacher did not bring
the classroom under control. Incorrect information was given to the students during instruction and the
teacher apologized to at least two different classes. The Team expressed serious concerns regarding this
class. The Team observed that teachers in at least six classes appeared to have deficiencies in content
knowledge. This was demonstrated through mistakes with the content in instruction and curriculum.
Seven teachers did not vary instruction. Teacher directed instruction was predominate in these classes
7.1.6. Instruction in writing. Instruction in writing was not being conducted at least one time per week
in many of the classes. The principal informed the Team that writing instruction was on the list of items
to be implemented by the staff, which consisted of mostly new teachers.
7.1.7. Library/educational technology access and technology application. Although the school had a
student to computer ratio of 1.6:1, the Team observed minimal technology application in instruction
during the day of the Education Performance Audit. Teachers and students stated that technology was
not being used to a great extent.
7.1.9. Programs of study. The principal and teachers reported that science and social studies were not
being taught at the school. The main reason was that the focus on the school was mathematics and
reading/language arts.
7.1.12. Multicultural activities. A Multicultural Plan was not in place at the school.
7.1.13. Instructional day. One class schedule indicated only 300 instructional minutes per day,
consequently, 15 minutes of required instruction was lost daily. The lesson plans in this class indicated a
high amount of textbook instruction with minimal detail regarding the lessons to be taught.
The Team reported an inordinate amount of student movement for intervention support throughout the
day. This movement, in conjunction with the lost time getting ready to move and getting set back up,
resulted in a great amount of lost instructional time. The Team recommended that this practice be
reviewed to investigate ways to reduce the amount of lost instructional time and transition students
smoothly to intervention programs.
7.6.2. Licensure. Two teachers were teaching classes they were not certified to teach. One teacher’s
certificate expired June 30, 2010 and no application was pending.
As a result of the OEPA findings, Watts Elementary has been directed to revise their 5 year strategic
plan to include specific activities to correct the identified deficiencies. Additionally, Watts Elementary
was given Temporary Accreditation status at the December 10, 2010 State Board of Education meeting.
17
Frameworks Considerations
In addition to the deficiencies identified by external evaluators including the WVDE SSOS and the
OEPA, the staff at Watts have identified the following core components as areas of need and focus in the
Considerations from the Frameworks Needs Assessment part of the 5-Year Strategic Plan:
Standards Based Core Literacy:








Standards based lesson plans, units of study and project based units of instruction.
Literacy, informational, primary source documents and real world materials.
Writing strategies explicitly taught in all content areas.
Vocabulary, background knowledge, comprehension strategies and increasing fluency focused
on 4 – 6 instruction.
Real world application apparent in all content instruction.
Lexile and Quantile measures to differentiate instruction.
Balance of inquiry based investigations, guided practice, independent work, skill review and
homework.
Proficiency, conceptual understanding with fractions (decimals, percents, and negative fractions)
established prior to grade 8.
Course Content:




Comprehension strategies before, during and after reading.
Discussion of what has been read (interpret, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, infer).
Academic vocabulary across content areas.
Text structure to organize materials learned.
Integration of Technology Based Resources:
 TechSteps (K – 8).
Technology Data Systems:
 Student computers.
Development of Highly Skilled Teachers:
 Assessment of and for learning.
 Intervention Programs – Tiers II and III
Support for School Improvement:
 Parent and community involvement.
 Wellness.
 Additional support staff for students.
Support Staffing:
 Technology Integration Specialist.
18
School Structure and Administrative Support:
 Policies that support student success (grading, homework, discipline).
School Climate:
 Cross grade collaboration.
Root Causes
Based on the extensive data analysis that is available for Watts including WESTEST 2, benchmarks,
external trend data, other student outcomes, culture, conditions and practices as well as extensive reports
from the WVDE SSOS and OEPA along with staff generated frameworks for considerations, the
following root causes impacting student achievement have been identified.
Accountability (AYP) Data: Student Achievement and School Improvement
A key potential root cause to students to students not meeting achievement targets is most likely a
turnover in staff and the number of new teachers (recent graduates) at Watts. The OEPA observed two
teachers not using the CSOs properly; one class with little or no instruction occurring; instruction in
writing not being conducted at least one time per week; teachers in at least six classes appeared to have
deficiencies in content knowledge; incorrect information was given to students in one class; seven
teachers did not vary instruction; minimal use of technology application in instruction; science and social
studies are not being taught; one class schedule indicated only 300 minutes of instruction per day instead
of the required 315 minutes, and; two teachers are not certified to teach the classes they were teaching.
Additionally, the WVDE SSOS cited a potential knowledge gap with regard to understanding and
instructional delivery; the lack of a high quality after school program for the highest academically at-risk
students; the need to ensure that consistent Tier I instruction is occurring in reading/language arts, and; a
need to determine if additional professional development is needed in the Everyday Math curriculum.
It is also a concern that benchmarking with Acuity to monitor student progress has not occurred this year.
There is a need for teachers to continually monitor student’s strengths and weaknesses academically in
order to differentiate and modify instruction in accordance with students’ needs.
External Trend Data: Poverty Rates and Mobility Rates:
Watts Elementary serves an attendance area with a high poverty rate as evidenced by the percentage of
students participating in the federal Free and Reduced Meals program. The poverty rate for the 2010 – 11
school year is 76.19% with 128 of 168 students participating in the Free and Reduced Meals program.
The 2009-2010 rate was 83.82% and the 2008-09 rate was 81.41%. At the same time, the mobility
(transiency) rate for the 2009 – 10 school year was 40.47%. The Watts attendance area supports a high
number of HUD housing units along with high incidents of violent crimes both of which most likely
attribute to the high mobility rate.
19
Culture, Conditions and Practices: Governance Structure and Professional Development
As stated previously, there has been a turn-over of staff at Watts Elementary in the past year with many of
the new teachers employed there being recent graduates. Additionally, this is only the second year for the
school principal. During their visit in 2009 – 10, the WVDE SSOS observed that staff members did not
feel that their input was valued nor did the decision making process encompass teacher perspectives.
There is a need to continue to develop a collaborative vision and strengthen the newly formed leadership
team to address the concerns surrounding governance.
To address the root causes surrounding staff needs, Watts Elementary must intensify their efforts to
provide high quality, job embedded professional development to address content knowledge deficiencies
and the disconnect between instructional delivery and understanding that were observed during the
external evaluators’ visits. Tiered instruction needs to be monitored and adjusted based on formative data.
There is a need to address the lack of using of the Acuity and other software platforms (EMI, DIBELS,
etc.) as instructional tools to assist teachers in modifying and differentiating instruction. Professional
development should be provided to assist teachers in learning to use and incorporate the various formative
platforms.
Conclusion
As Watts Elementary has been identified as a Tier I school and then moved to a Tier II school under the
West Virginia Department of Education’s State System of Support and has now been identified as a Tier I
school under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I 1003(g), and in consideration of the
findings and concerns addressed by both the WVDE SSOS team and the Office of Education Performance
Audits, it is the intent of Kanawha County Schools to seek funding under the ESEA Title I 1003(g) grants
to provide additional, intensive support to the students and staff of Watts Elementary to ameliorate the
issues that have been identified in this Letter of Intent. A preliminary budget is included within this Letter
of Intent indicating the use of 1003(g) funds to provide the support and resources needed to address the
issues and findings that have been identified.
20
Preliminary Budget Form
District Name: Kanawha
School Name by Tier
Intervention Models: Select the model that will be
implemented in each Tier I and Tier II school.
Turnaround
Restart
Closure Transformation
Tier I School: Watts Elementary
X
Tier II Schools:
Tier III Schools:
Not applicable to Tier III schools.
Complete a separate table for each Tier I school or Tier II school. Estimate the amount of funds
required to implement the intervention model selected for each school.
School Name: Watts Elementary
Transformation Model
PreImple
mentation
A. Develop teacher and school leader effectiveness
Replace the principal (Not Applicable)
Use rigorous, transparent and equitable evaluation systems that take
into account data on student growth
Identify and reward school leaders, teachers and other staff who
have increased student achievement and the graduation rate
Tier: I
Year 3
Year 1
Year 2
Total
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
0
LEA
Funded
LEA
Funded
LEA
Funded
LEA Funded
$77,097.83
$69,097.83
$69,097.83
$215,293.49
Provide high quality, job-embedded professional development
Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities)
Subtotal:
B. Comprehensive instructional reform programs
Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is
research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next as
well as aligned with State academic standards
Promote the continuous use of student data to inform and
differentiate instruction
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities) Employ 1 Title I Math teacher and 1 Title I Basic
Skills teacher (reading & math) Basic Skills teacher (reading &
math); provide additional classroom supplies and technology
Subtotal:
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$77,097.83
$69,097.83
$69,097.83
$215,293.49
Included
below
Included
below
Included
below
Included below
$5,500.00
$5,500.00
$5,500.00
$16,500.00
$154,056.75
$156,924.55
$158,358.46
$469,339.76
$159,556.75
$162,424.55
$163,858.46
$485,839.76
C. Increasing learning time and creating community-oriented
schools
Establish schedules and strategies that provide increased learning
time as defined by ED and create community-oriented schools
Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community
engagement
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities) student transportation for extended time learning
Subtotal:
D. Provide operating flexibility and sustained support
Give schools operating flexibility to implement fully a
comprehensive approach
Ensure that the school receives ongoing, intensive technical
assistance and related support from the LEA and/or the SEA
Provide intensive technical assistance and related support from a
designated external lead partnership organization
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities) Indirect costs @ 3.12%
Subtotal:
Total for Transformation Model:
22
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Total
$30,789.21
$30,789.21
$30,789.21
$92,367.63
$5,298.38
$5,298.38
$5,298.38
$15,877.14
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$45,000.00
$51,087.59
$51,087.59
$51,087.59
$153,262.77
0
0
0
0
LEA funded
LEA funded
LEA funded
LEA funded
0
0
0
0
$8,705.93
$8,550.65
$8,593.13
$25,849.71
$8,705.93
$296,448.10
$8,550.65
$291,160.62
$8,593.13
$292,607.01
$25,849.71
$880,215.73
LEA Budget
Transformation Model
PreImple
mentation
A. Develop teacher and school leader effectiveness
Replace the principal (Not Applicable)
Use rigorous, transparent and equitable evaluation systems that take
into account data on student growth
Identify and reward school leaders, teachers and other staff who
have increased student achievement and the graduation rate
Provide high quality, job-embedded professional development
Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff (tuition
reimbursement for advanced certification/degree to promote
teacher/leader effectiveness)
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities)
Subtotal:
B. Comprehensive instructional reform programs
Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is
research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next as
well as aligned with State academic standards
Promote the continuous use of student data to inform and
differentiate instruction
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities)
Subtotal:
C. Increasing learning time and creating community-oriented
schools
Establish schedules and strategies that provide increased learning
time as defined by ED and create community-oriented schools
Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community
engagement
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities)
Subtotal:
D. Provide operating flexibility and sustained support
Give schools operating flexibility to implement fully a
comprehensive approach
Ensure that the school receives ongoing, intensive technical
assistance and related support from the LEA and/or the SEA
(travel, materials and supplies for assigned transition specialist
and other LEA level support personnel)
Provide intensive technical assistance and related support from a
designated external lead partnership organization
Other permissible activities as defined in the regulations (specify
activities) Indirect costs @ 3.12%
Subtotal:
Total for Transformation Model:
23
Tier: I
Year 3
Year 1
Year 2
Total
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$7,500.00
$7,500.00
$7,500.00
$22,500.00
0
0
0
0
$7,500.00
$7,500.00
$7,500.00
$22,500.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$15,000.00
0
0
0
0
$378.20
$378.20
$378.20
$1,134.60
$5,378.20
$12,878.20
$5,378.20
$12,878.20
$5,378.20
$12,878.20
$16,134.60
$38,434.60