Strategic Plan Level: Hightower Trail Middle School updated 6/13/2016
Focus Area: Focus Priorities:
(Based on priorities identified by
IE 2 , AdvancEd-AdvEd,
Superintendent-S, and Academic
Division-AD)
Vary learning experiences to increase success in college and career
pathways.
1. Organize student performance data through CTLS for full accessible use by teachers and school leaders. (S) (AdvED)
2. Organize, examine, and adjust instruction based on student progress monitoring data. (AD)
3. Develop and deliver flexible formative assessments in all core content areas for monitoring student progress and adjusting instruction to meet individual student learning needs. (S)
4. Align critical professional learning by grade level/content area and ensure access for all teachers. (AD)
Key Actions:
(List as many actions as needed in each box.)
N/A
Establish overarching school wide goals based on overall achievement data on the EOG and 7 th grade IOWA
Revise common formatives and summative in collaborative teams
Adjust instruction based on common formative data
Align professional development to include both vertical and horizontal learning for subject
6-8 alignment Identify teacher critical professional learning needs through walk through and observations
Measured by:
(Formative and/or
Summative)
N/A
Collaborative planning log entries that address academic needs as evidenced through common formative data
Comparative data on the
EOG and IOWA
Common formatives and summative
Planning logs
Faculty participation in professional learning
Faculty walk throughs/observations that show evidence of application of appropriate strategies based upon
Classroom Instruction that
Works – 2 nd edition
Owner(s):
N/A
All faculty
Collaborativ e teams
Professional learning directed by principal
AP in charge of SFSD
Resources
Needed:
None
None
N/A
Results
Of Key Actions:
(Due June 15, 2016)
N/A
Planning logs need to be maintained and consistently monitored for information concerning academic progress of students. The discussion was for a revamping of the format to more clearly articulate needed information.
Comparative data on the EOG and IOWA are showing student progress in most areas. Areas of no or declined growth will be addressed during the coming academic year by decisive support established within the academic day.
Common formatives and summative are a school wide requirement. They are revised yearly and will continue to be monitored for appropriateness.
SFSD funding SFSD funding was used to give teachers ½ day planning opportunities that were to be used for enhancing classroom instruction and cross curricular planning.
Training on Classroom Instruction that Works – 2 nd edition will continue in preplanning of 2016-2017 with each teacher being given a notebook of information that will be used for documentation of implementation of the strategies.
Focus
Priority
Status:
NM = Not
Met
IP = In
Progress
M = Met
N/A
IP
IP
IP

5. Increase percentage of students reading on grade level.
(S)
(Based on CCRPI 2014 Reading
Scores)
7. Increase number of students academically completing every grade.(S)
8. Other:
(Priorities specific to school, division, or area. Can be multiple.)
Implement direct vocabulary instruction at each grade level
6. Increase percentage of student performance in math/algebra at every grade level. (S)
(Based on CCRPI ES-MS Math &
HS Algebra Scores)
Continue focused math fluency at all grade levels
Provide support classes during connections for reading/la and math
Summative – final
Pre and mid are formative with no grade assigned
Pre, mid and post data
Increase in overall promotion rate
Seek STEM certification by coordinating school activities to the state rubric
Support grade level STEM committee as appropriate
Formative feedback from visiting state committee
Rdg/LA teachers and all content areas for specific content vocabulary
Math teachers
Student purchased additional resources –
Sadlier/Oxford
Using a score of 80% as being proficient the following scores were reported:
6 th pre: 3% 6 TH mid: 16% 6 th final: 56%
7 th pre: 7% 7 th mid: 30% 7 th final: 55%
8 th pre: 4% 8 th mid: 29% 8 th final: 67%
The EOG score remained at 1.9 out of 2
Academic teachers none
20 day funding to pay teachers to work during planning
All teachers 1.PLTW
$20,000 grant
2.County funding
$20,000
3.Local
Foundation support
4.SFSD funding for teacher development
6 th pre: 73.8% 6 th mid: 91.1% 6 th post: 88.2%
7 th pre: 77.3% 7 th mid: 87.8% 7 th post: 88.32%
8 th pre: 54.19% 8 th mid: 83.8% 8 th post: 87.25%
Scores reported as % correct on the CAPS.
6 th grade math increased overall EOG score by .05 –
2.99(16)/2.94(15); 7 th grade math increased overall score by
.23 – 3.29(16)/3.06(15); and 8 th grade math dropped, as predicted due to way scores are reported (EOC versus EOG)
.12 – 3.19(16)/3.31(15).
Sadly, we had more students retained this year than in previous years. Much of that is determined to be students cannot manage semester courses in the middle school environment. Students were scheduled into support classes but simply could not recoup their grades to be passing.
Strong conversation has occurred as to types of interventions that will be put into place for the upcoming SSP.
Hightower Trail did seek/obtain county certification and will be seeking AdvancED certification during the 2016-2017 school year.
PLTW funding will be used to continue to enhance resources for STEM types of classes.
Grade level STEM committees have been again revisited and will be a natural part of cross curricular planning for the
2016-2017 school year.
The Foundation has contributed funding for STEM requirements.
IP
M/IP
NM
IP

Focus Area:
Differentiate resources for students based
on needs.
Focus Priorities:
(Based on priorities identified by
IE 2 , AdvancEd-AdvED,
Superintendent-S, and Academic
Division-AD)
Identify local school innovations through system flexibility to increase student achievement. (IE 2 )
Key Actions:
(List as many actions as needed in each box.)
Support 8 th graders who do not qualify for foreign language with an innovative reading program.
Measured by:
(Formative and/or
Summative)
EOG scores in
LA/RDG
Owner(s):
Origins of language teacher
N/A N/A
Resources
Needed: none
N/A
Results
Of Key Actions:
(Due June 15, 2016)
Student’s scores from 7 th grade EOG were compared to the EOG scores of 8 th grade:
7 th Lexile: 1167.6 8 th Lexile: 1237.1
7 th ELA score: 2.60 8 th ELA: 2.66
N/A
Divisionally support local school innovations identified through system flexibility for increasing student achievement. (IE 2 )
Provide targeted resources for students:
1. not reading on grade level
(Lexile)
2. unsuccessful in Math/Algebra
(Based on 2014 CCRPI
Math/Algebra
scores)
3. not on-track for graduation (S)
Identify and provide resources to increase opportunities for advanced, on-level, and remedial students to earn initial credit, embedded credit, dual credit, recovered credit, distance learning, and certifications in areas of student interest. (AD)
Other:
(Priorities specific to school, division, or area. Can be multiple.)
N/A
1. Provide direct reading instruction through sped interventions, RTI strategies, direct support through connections classes
2. Provide direct math instruction through sped interventions, RTI strategies, direct support through connections classes
3. Implement RTI interventions as necessary, study skill support through counseling department
N/A
1.EOG score
2.EOG score
3.Promotion rates
N/A
All teachers 20 day funding for teachers
Reading instruction was provided through connections time for students identified in need.
Math instruction was provided through connections time for students identified in need.
RTI process was implemented with fidelity under the guidance of counseling department.
N/A N/A N/A
Focus
Priority
Status:
NM = Not
Met
IP = In
Progress
M = Met
IP
IP

Focus Area:
Develop stakeholder involvement to promote student
success.
Focus Priorities:
(Based on priorities identified by IE and Academic Division-AD)
2 ,
AdvancEd-AdvEd, Superintendent-S,
Seek and evaluate stakeholder input for critical processes. (AdvED)
Key Actions:
(List as many actions as needed in each box.)
Measured by:
(Formative and/or
Summative)
Attendance at meetings
Recruit parent representatives on
Building Leadership Team, School
Council, Technology Action Team,
Counselor Advisory Team, and
Student input with Interclub
Council
Other:
(Priorities specific to school, division, or area. Can be multiple.)
Implement yoga and deep breathing exercises to reduce anxiety and to improve academic success.
Pre and post survey
Owner(s):
Parent representatives
Resources
Needed: none
HR – 22 teachers Yoga for classroom cards already purchased
Results of Key Actions:
(Due June 15, 2016)
Parent representatives from PTSA, Foundation and
School Council attended all BLT meetings. The
Counselor Advisory Team met two times for the
2015-2016 school year and will be expanding for the
2016-2017 school year.
The Interclub Council met 4 times and made some decisions about helping students to understand the significance of school work. They will continue for the 2016-2017 school year.
Data from the survey showed a decrease in the tension of students and an increase in the ability of students to self-monitor.
Focus
Priority
Status:
NM = Not
Met
IP = In
Progress
M = Met
IP
IP

Focus Area:
Recruit, hire…
Support and retain employees for highest levels of
excellence.
Focus Priorities:
(Based on priorities identified by IE 2 ,
AdvancEd-AdvED, Superintendent-S, and Academic Division-AD)
Seek and hire teachers who meet the qualifications for a highly effective teacher. (IE 2 )
Seek and hire school administrators who meet the qualifications for a highly effective school leader and who are best suited for the school’s environment. (IE 2 )
Support local school teachers and leaders to improve retention rate.
(IE 2 ) (S)
Ensure that teachers are highly trained in the standards, learning engagement strategies, formative assessments, and student progress monitoring. (AD)
Fully implement and evaluate state system of teacher and leaders evaluation (TKES and LKES).
Use results of TKES and LKES to improve professional performance
(IE 2 )
Other:
(Specific to school, division, or area.
Can be more than one.)
Key Actions:
(List as many actions as needed in each box.)
Evaluate applicants for posted positions
N/A
N/A
Embed Professional Learning Unit in the school day concerning learning engagement strategies with book study
N/A
Place teachers as needed on
Professional Learning Plans
Measured by:
(Formative and/or
Summative)
Hiring of HiQ teachers
Principal
Owner(s):
N/A
N/A
Successful completion of the PLU
N/A
Progress on
PLP
N/A
N/A
AP in charge of
SFSD
N/A
Principal
Resources
Needed:
STAR
SFSD funding none
N/A
N/A
N/A
Completed
Results of Key Actions:
(Due June 15, 2016)
N/A
N/A
Process was begun and will be continued into the
2016-2017 school year
N/A
Two teachers were placed on PLP and completed.
IP
M
Focus
Priority
Status:
NM = Not
Met
IP = In
Progress
M = Met
M

Indicator 2012 2013 2014 2015
2014 District Mean
Elem. Middle High
Lexile Levels
8 th grade
(D.S.: CCRPI)
On-Track for
Graduation
95.7%
93.1%
96.1%
93.9%
98.1%
52.9%*
92.4% N/A 85.8% N/A
94% 90.0% 88.0% 78.0%
Career
Ready
Advanced
Academics
Stakeholder
Satisfaction
(Annual AdvancED Survey)
100%
63%
90.9%***
100%
69%
90.8%***
***This data is not from the Advanced Ed
Survey but from a Cobb County measure
100%
69.4%
80.2%
100% 93.6% 99.2% 55.0%
69% 15.0% 40.0% 50.0%
82.5% 89.0% 76.0% 73.0%
CCRPI Score 96.8 96.6
90.2**
**
Inaccurate and by local school calculations should be 94.4. See On Track for Graduation and no credit for HS courses taught in middle school.
96.5 75.7 80.0 77.7
Iowa Reading
Grade 7
88%
ITBS
88%
ITBS
82%
IOWA
82%
IOWA
N/A 47.9% N/A
th

Lexile Levels
Middle
Schools
On-Track for
Graduation
Career
Ready
Advanced
Academics
Stakeholder
Satisfaction
Iowa Reading
Grade 7
CCRPI
Percent of students in grade 8 achieving a Lexile measure greater than or equal to the following on the EOG grade 8: 1050
Students scoring a Lexile measure
≥ 1050 (8th)
Students with a valid Lexile score on the EOG
Data for this element is extracted from the EOG data file and include students with valid scores.
Percent of students in grade 8 passing at least four courses in core content areas (ELA, Math,
Science, Social Studies, and World Language)
Unduplicated count of grade 8 students passing courses in four core content areas (ELA, Math,
Science, Social Studies, and
World Language)
Percent of students with a complete statedefined Individual Graduation Plan by the end of grade 8
Unduplicated count of students in grade 8 with a complete IGP
Percent of students enrolled in Middle School
AC classes
Unduplicated count of students in grades 6-8 enrolled in Middle
School AC classes
Number of positive ("Strongly
Agree" and "Agree") responses on the AdvancEd surveys
Percent of positive responses to all items included on the AdvancEd surveys (parents, students, staff)
Percentage of students in grade 7, scoring ongrade level in reading
(On-grade level = 7.1)
State accountability system whereby Georgia schools earn up to 100 points, based on required performance measurements
Number of 7 th grade students scoring on-grading in reading
NA
Total enrollment in grade 8
Total enrollment in grade 8
Total Enrollment of grades 6-8
Total number of responses excluding "No Answer" or "No
Basis to Judge"
Number of 7 th grade students with a valid test score in reading
NA
Data extracted from Synergy Gradebook
Will be collected via Student
Records
Course information in Synergy
School Improvement Survey
Report, Page 2 - Provided by the
Office of Accountability
Riverside Data Manager
Georgia DOE