Running head: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
School Improvement Plan:
Mathematical Theory and Curriculum Development
Curriculum and Assessment
Marian University-Appleton Campus
EDL 725
David Boers
Marian University
November 3, 2017
1
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
2
Abstract
This paper outlines a plan for addressing identified weaknesses of the mathematics curriculum in
grades six through eight at Seymour Community School District. State and district assessments
are used to determine the areas of strength and needed improvement. Additionally, theory
regarding best practices and indicators that directly impact student achievement are examined.
Analysis of the Wisconsin Forward Exam, district assessments, and educational theory regarding
best practices in mathematics classrooms are the foundation of the curriculum improvement plan.
This plan includes a clear goal, detailed action steps, involved individuals, needed resources, and
a timeframe for measuring successful implementation.
Keywords: mathematical theory, best practice, mathematics curriculum, College
Preparatory Mathematics
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
3
Introduction
Schoolwide Effort
The objective of this school curriculum improvement effort is the development of a plan
for implementing supplemental resources and applicable projects so that gaps identified in the
current mathematics curriculum will decrease. The plan focuses on the mathematics curriculum
in grades six through eight at Seymour Middle School. Analysis of current data will help drive
efforts in identifying the skills students are lacking. With the support of the data, middle school
math teachers will use time during professional learning community (PLC) meetings to
formulate strategies, supplemental resources, and applicable projects that will help fill voids in
the curriculum. As a result, test scores will ideally reflect increased levels of student
achievement.
Parameters
Middle school math teachers will examine assessment data to identify areas of strength
and deficiencies with the middle school math curriculum as it aligns with the Common Core
State Standards for Mathematics. The Common Core State Standards for Mathematics are
organized into six domains which include ratios and proportional reasoning, the number
system, expressions and equations, geometry, statistics and probability, and functions.
According to Mertler and Zachel (2006), “This process of critically examining curriculum and
instructional practices relative to students' actual performance on standardized tests and other
assessments yields data that help teachers make more accurately informed instructional
decisions” (as cited in Mertler, 2014, para. 4). Data from standardized tests will be the primary
method used, however, local assessments, summative assessments, and formative assessments
could also be viable sources of student data for this process.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
4
Ideally, after examining all viable sources of data, the math PLC will be able to
pinpoint a common domain that needs attention at each grade level. The math teachers
can then work to develop a cohesive plan and sequence of lessons that will be appropriate
for each grade level and all students. Furthermore, teachers will modify instruction and
learning activities to meet the needs of all students, just as they do with the universal
curriculum. A successful plan will increase the achievement of all students including
students with disabilities and lower scoring subgroups.
Personal Curriculum Philosophy
I believe that each and every child who enters a school building is capable of achieving
success. As a teacher, I value the active engagement of all learners and teach in ways that
support and promote independence, critical thinking, and problem solving. My beliefs align with
many ideas of educational theory of progressivism. According to Ornstein and Hunkins (2017),
“For Dewey and other progressivists, the curriculum should be interdisciplinary, and teachers
should guide students in problem solving and scientific projects” (p. 40). Teachers should be a
guide and facilitator in helping students make connections to previously learned mathematical
concepts so that they can form new knowledge. I believe all students can be successful when
they are engaged in meaningful learning activities, encouraged positively, and supported
throughout the learning process.
Background and Demographics
Classroom, School, and District Characteristics
According the Seymour Community School District (2017) website, the district was
established in 1963 as a result of many area schools being consolidated. The district is
composed of 175 square miles adjacent to the Fox River Cities of Green Bay and Appleton. The
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
5
boundary of the school district covers all or part of twelve municipalities in Northern Outagamie
and Southern Shawano counties. The district's 4K through twelfth grade student population is
approximately 2,500, where students attend five schools: Rock Ledge Primary, Rock Ledge
Intermediate, Seymour Middle School, Seymour High School, and Black Creek
Elementary/Middle School (“Seymour Community School District,” 2017).
Seymour Middle School’s enrollment fluctuates between 110-160 students per grade
level each year. For the 2017-2018 school year there is a total enrollment of 406 students.
Grade six, seven, and eight have 118, 153, and 135 students respectively. Seymour Middle
School has the following racial subgroups: 81.4 percent White, 16.4 percent American Indian,
1.7 percent Hispanic, and 0.5 percent Black. Additionally, in the 2016-2017 school year there
were 55 students (12.8 percent) who had disabilities and two students (0.5 percent) who are
Limited English Proficient. A large percentage, 29.5 percent, of the student population is
economically disadvantaged and this number continues to rise consistently each year.
Strengths and Challenges
In the 2015-2016 school year, Seymour Middle School earned a 74.2 on the Wisconsin
Department of Public Instruction Report Card, which is listed as exceeding expectations. The
results from the Wisconsin Forward Exam reflect areas of strength in both English language arts
(ELA) and mathematics. In mathematics, 42.5 percent of students tested proficient compared to
the 41 percent of students statewide who tested proficient (Wisconsin Department of Public
Instruction [DPI], 2017). Although Seymour Middle School was scored as exceeding
expectations on the school report card, there is certainly room for improvement when less than
half of students are demonstrating proficiency on the math standardized state assessment.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
6
Closing the achievement gap is a concern that is reflected on the report card in both
mathematics and ELA. Specifically, Seymour Middle School earned only thirty out of fifty
possible points for mathematics. Closing the achievement gap is a statewide priority that is
concerned with having all students improve while decreasing the achievement and graduation
gaps between groups of students (Wisconsin DPI, 2017). The score is calculated by comparing
growth in the proficiency rate of traditionally lagging student groups to the growth in the rate for
traditionally higher scoring groups of students. American Indians were identified as Seymour
Middle School’s targeted subgroup. As a result of the test scores of these students, compared to
the racial majority, the achievement gap was not reduced enough to earn a favorable score on the
school report card.
Current Mathematics Curriculum
Seymour Middle School’s Mathematics curriculum is College Preparatory Mathematics
or more commonly known as CPM. The middle school adapted this curriculum prior to the
2013-2014 school year. Now after four years of successful implementation, the curriculum will
be reviewed for strengths and weaknesses as part of this curriculum improvement effort. The
CPM curriculum is designed to promote problem solving, reasoning, and communication so that
all learners are actively engaged in the learning experience. According to the College
Preparatory Mathematics (CPM) website (2015), “CPM envisions a world where people are
empowered by mathematical problem-solving and reasoning to solve the world’s problems”
(CPM Educational Program, para. 3). Students are challenged to think creatively and
collaboratively with their peers as they work to solve challenging and in-depth problems. The
lessons and activities in the curriculum do not promote rote learning, however, they encourage
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
7
students to make connections by understanding the process behind mathematical concepts and
ideas.
The teacher is viewed more as a guide and facilitator during lessons rather than the means
to solutions. This type of learning follows the beliefs of constructivism. According to Ornstein
and Hunkins (2017), “In constructivism, the learner is the key player; learners participate in
generating meaning or understanding. The student connects new learning with already-existing
knowledge” (p. 113). This is different from the process of traditional practices that many are
familiar with when learning mathematics. Instead, the methods used by the CPM curriculum
teaches students to think deeply about ideas and concepts, rather than memorizing procedures for
finding answers.
Targeted Area
The CPM math curriculum has been chosen as the targeted area for improvement because
it has been implemented in the middle school for four years and is under review during the 20172018 school year. Going into our fifth year of the curriculum, there is now student achievement
data available which can be used in determining strengths and weaknesses of the curriculum.
Furthermore, high school math teachers have observed incoming students who are lacking
foundational math skills which are needed to be successful in higher level math classes.
State, district, and classroom assessments will be used when identifying specific
curricular concerns. Using this data, teachers and administrators will be able to make datadriven decisions that continue to support the mathematics curriculum. According to Ornstein
and Hunkins (2017), “If the new curriculum is to enable improvement in students’ learnings, it
must be maintained and supported overtime” (p. 242). Through newly established professional
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
8
learning communities in the Seymour School District, teachers will be able to have professional
conversations about best practices and make improvements to the current curriculum.
If change does not occur, logically it can be anticipated that student achievement
will remain at or below state averages on the state standardized assessment. Curricular
gaps will remain an issue and students will continue to test below state averages in each of
the five mathematical domains. Lastly, students lacking foundational math skills will
continue to be a problem and consequently students’ achievement in high level math classes
will be negatively affected.
Vision for Student Achievement
Standards and Benchmarks
The overall effort of this curriculum improvement plan is aligned to the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS) for Mathematics. The College Preparatory Mathematics curriculum was
specifically chosen by Seymour Middle School because of the philosophy of the curriculum, but
also because of its strict alignment to the CCSS. The specific mathematical domains that will be
examined include ratios and proportional relationships, the number system, expressions and
equations, geometry, and statistics and probability. After the team is able to identify a specific
domain that students are not demonstrating proficiency in, student achievement data on each
standard within the domain will be examined.
Linked Research
Data-driven decisions is certainly a common phrase echoed by many educational leaders;
however, the impact data has on curriculum decisions and curricular changes cannot be
overlooked. Educators use data to identify individual student needs, identify students in need of
interventions, modify curriculum and instruction, and evaluate programs. Data is a strong
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
9
indicator of student achievement and teaching practices. When curriculums are strictly aligned
to state standards and local benchmarks, it can be concluded that student achievement and
curriculum effectiveness will be strongly correlated. Dougherty (2015), reiterates the purpose of
this curriculum improvement plan by writing, “Referencing all student achievement data back
to the curriculum can help school and district leaders identify gaps in the available information
on student learning” (p. 1). Furthermore, after conducting research in two Texas school districts,
Dougherty identified ten steps, grouped into four categories, which district leaders can take to
improve data use by teachers and principals. The four categories included clarifying school
system goals, creating infrastructure for data use, ensuring adequate educator knowledge on how
to interpret and use data, and supporting collaboration among educators (Dougherty, 2015). The
main conclusion that Dougherty emphasizes is that data can be a catalyst to curriculum
improvements. The math team at Seymour Middle School hopes, with strategic planning, that
student achievement data can prove to be just as impactful for curriculum improvement and
student success.
Vision
After successful completion of this curriculum improvement effort, it is the vision for
middle school students’ mathematical achievement to increase, measured by the state mandated
assessment. According to the National Association for Elementary School Principals, “To help
all students achieve, teachers need to systematically and routinely use data to guide instructional
decisions and meet students’ learning needs” (National Association for Elementary School
Principals [NAESP], 2011, p. 3). The collection of data should be ongoing and through
multiple data sources so that teachers can interpret data, develop strategies to increase student
achievement, and implement instructional changes (NAESP, 2011). This process will be used
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
10
throughout the entirety of this plan as it is the primary goal to specifically identify curricular
deficits affecting student achievement. Furthermore, Gamoran et al. conclude that data can be
used to “tailor instruction to individual students’ needs” and “identify and correct gaps in the
curriculum” (as cited in Goldring & Berends, 2009, p. 13).
Sources of Data
There will be two main tools teachers will use to help gather data. First and foremost,
data from the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) will help establish a baseline for the
mathematics achievement of students in grades six through eight. During the first PLC meeting
in late October, math teachers will begin to analyze the data further by examining student
achievement data as it relates to each domain of the Common Core State Standards in
Mathematics. This will provide an overview of specific skills that many students are lacking in
the five domains: ratios and proportional relationships, number system, expressions and
equations, geometry, or statistics and probability.
The district math assessment screener, FastBridge (FastBridge Learning, 2017), will be
a secondary source of data. This assessment is given three times each year in the fall, winter,
and spring and will be a pivotal tool to cross reference when examining student achievement,
identifying general areas of weaknesses, and pinpointing specific skill deficits. Both the
Wisconsin Forward Exam (Wisconsin DPI, 2017) and FastBridge Assessment will provide data
that will help the carry out the beginning steps of this curriculum improvement effort.
Goal
During the 2017-2018 school year, the middle school mathematics professional learning
community will analyze state and district math assessments, identify gaps in the math
curriculum, and implement a plan to reduce these skills deficits. As a result, the percent of
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
11
Seymour Middle School students demonstrating proficiency on the 2018-2019 Wisconsin
Forward Exam will increase ten percent from the 2017-2018 school year.
Technology Integration
Technology usage will be essential for the success of this curriculum improvement
plan. Teachers will use technology to access websites and online resources when gathering
and interpreting data. Specifically, data from the Wisconsin DPI, Wisconsin Forward Exam,
and district math assessment screener will be accessed and represented in graphical
displays which will be the foundation of this plan.
All data and graphical displays gathered from the aforementioned assessments will
be organized in a Google Document so that it is easily accessible by all members of the
math PLC. With accurate and reliable data the team will be able to develop supplemental
learning activities and applicable projects. The sequential lessons developed for each grade
level will target a common Mathematics CCSS domain. These will also be organized in a
Google Document so that math teachers can easily add to and revise the scope and
sequence of the plan. These curriculum and instructional changes will help realize the
vision of all students demonstrating proficiency in mathematics at Seymour Middle School.
Plan of Action
Successful school initiatives, curricular changes, or new programs must be systematically
planned. According to Ornstein and Hunkins (2017), “Successful curriculum implementation
results from careful planning, which focuses on three factors: people, programs, and processes”
(p. 239). These factors and others were considered when developing an implementation action
plan for this initiative. The action plan overview includes six sections: goals, action steps,
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
12
leadership, resources, indicators of success, and timeframe (see Appendix A for Implementation
Action Plan Overview).
Goals
The mathematics professional learning community will successfully complete the action
steps identified in the implementation action plan during the 2017-2018 school year so that
teachers can fully implement curricular changes at the beginning of the 2018-2019 school year.
The math PLC has three primary goals:
1. Improve and maintain a curriculum that is rigorous and effective for all students.
2. Reduce curriculum gaps and deficits.
3. Increase student achievement in mathematics.
The team of math teachers will use the four formal PLC meetings and monthly meetings to
complete an analysis of the current curriculum and a plan for addressing the identified concerns.
According to Ornstein and Hunkins (2017), “Idealization value addresses ways to improve a
curriculum. Evaluators should not be concerned with only determining whether what was
planned actually happened; they should also view data in terms of ways to create and maintain
the best possible programs” (p. 276). This aligns with the goal of the implementation plan as our
team executes the plan to improve and maintain a curriculum that is rigorous and effective for all
students. Furthermore, Ornstein and Hunkins (2017) write, “They consider information on how
the program is working and ask themselves if there are alternative ways to make the program
even better” (p. 276). As a result, instructional practices will improve and student achievement
will increase.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
13
Action Steps
The first action step of the curriculum improvement plan was completed prior to the first
PLC meeting of the school year. All data from the Wisconsin Forward Exam (Wisconsin DPI,
2017) was gathered and organized by the curriculum and instruction director. During the first
PLC meeting math teachers began the process of carefully analyzing this data and interpreting
the implications of the data, as it pertains to the current curriculum. Moving forward the focus
will be on unpacking our curriculum and critically analyzing the learning targets of every lesson
for each grade level. As a result, math teachers will be able to identify Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) that lack content in the curriculum and comparisons can be made with CCSS
that are strongly represented with thorough content in the curriculum. The process of developing
a plan, to address identified concerns, will take place after data is analyzed and the curriculum is
unpacked. This will be the most important step of the curriculum improvement plan. Teachers
will develop supplemental lessons, create extensions to existing lessons, coordinate guest
speakers to reinforce mathematical concepts, and plan field experiences that will be applicable to
learning targets.
The action step with the greatest leverage is having the opportunity to collaborate with a
CPM consultant and other math teachers at surrounding districts who are familiar with the CPM
curriculum. The knowledge of others will be extremely valuable for gaining insights and ideas
about strategies that have been successful in other math classrooms. Ornstein and Hunkins
(2017) write, “For successful implementation, schools essentially must establish learning
communities” (p. 264). The PLC at Seymour understands the importance of establishing a
community of stakeholders who are committed to improving so that all students receive the best
possible education.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
14
Leadership
The math PLC will be responsible for carrying out the efforts of the implementation plan.
The PLC facilitator will be the point person who facilitates each meeting while also ensuring that
each step of the implementation plan is executed. Furthermore, the facilitator will actively
communicate with school leadership including the school principal and curriculum director. The
team includes four middle school math teachers at the sixth, seventh, and eighth grade levels
who will collaborate with a shared style of leadership. This type of democracy will be highly
inclusive, encourage all teachers to have a voice, and allow every member to actively participate
in the decision making process. According to Ryan and Oestrich (1998), “It is strongly
advocated that to be effective in today’s schools, the leader must use democratic practices
driving fear out of the workplace and fostering a community of leaders who collaborate on all
major issues” (as cited in Green, 2013, p. 32). Through this collaboration, PLC members will
empower each other and create a feeling of ownership and responsibility (Green, 2013).
Resources
People. The middle school math PLC is the most important resource in the
implementation plan. According to Drake and Sherin, “Teachers bring their own knowledge,
experiences, and dispositions to the curriculum and modify it to fit” (as cited in Ornstein &
Hunkins, 2017, p. 261). Each math teacher will have this opportunity during PLC meetings.
Another integral person in the plan will include a CPM consultant. Consultants can provide
guidance, analysis, and critique as needed. Furthermore, they can help guide teachers so that
they can become more comfortable with, and knowledgeable about, the innovation (Ornstein
and Hunkins, 2017). Teachers were supported with the help of a coach when Seymour Middle
School first adopted the CPM math curriculum; however, this only lasted for one year and very
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
15
little support has been provided since. There is certainly value in an outside consultant who will
be able to offer valuable advice as the PLC develops a plan for addressing curriculum deficits.
Time. Time is of the essence. Teachers need time to make sense of curricula and time to
gain competence in new instructional practices that engage students (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2017).
Therefore, aside from the district scheduled PLC meetings the math PLC will also meet on the
final Thursday of each month. The extra time will provide teachers with ample time to create a
polished plan that will comprehensively address curricular concerns across grade levels.
Materials. There are few additional materials that are needed to carry out this
implementation plan. The team will utilize technology resources already available when
accessing information from the Wisconsin DPI, administering the district wide math screener,
and creating supplemental resources; however, incorporating more technology into the
curriculum will be a focus for the future. Therefore, additional computers will need to be
purchased for all math classrooms. As part of this initiative, a mathematics computer program
will also be purchased. Ornstein and Hunkins (2017) write, “New curriculum is not a static
document, carved in stone. Rather, it is an educational document always in flux, in the making”
(p. 261). Technology upgrades including the purchase of more computers and math programs
will help make the curriculum more effective.
Money. All middle school math teachers will attend a CPM veteran teacher’s workshop
in the summer of 2018 and the Wisconsin Mathematics Council Annual Conference in May. The
cost per teacher is 150 and 275 dollars respectively. The workshop and conference will ideally
provide invaluable professional development, insights, and ideas on best teaching practices in
middle school math classrooms. Teachers will receive curriculum pay at a rate of twenty five
dollars per hour which will be deducted from the professional development budget. The middle
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
16
school has applied for and has received a grant for a consultant who will offer support, guidance
and coaching. The consultant will be a valuable asset for no cost to the district. Other costs
include purchasing twenty Chromebooks at a cost of approximately 200 dollars per computer.
Additionally, the purchase of a math program will cost approximately 2,100 dollars which will
provide full access to all middle school math students. When developing the plan to address the
identified deficits, it will be a priority to incorporate field experiences and guest speakers. This
will be a significant cost that will be decided in early 2018 and submitted as a budget proposal
before final district budgets are due.
Indicators of Success
There are multiple indicators that will be implemented to ensure success. According to
Glatthorn et al. (2016), “Indicators for effective curriculum development represent working
characteristics that any complex organization must have in order to be responsive and
responsible (p. 359). The PLC team have identified indicators of success which will have a
positive effect on the three goals in the implementation plan.
The PLC will focus on five indicators of success:
1. Instruction that reflects the objectives and learning targets identified in each lesson.
2. Instruction that reflects the philosophy of the curriculum and vision and mission of the
curriculum improvement plan.
3. Sequential and clearly organized vertical curriculum across grade levels.
4. Commitment and shared vision by all math PLC members.
5. Long range plan that will be regularly modified as needed.
Instruction that is strictly aligned to objectives, learning targets, philosophy, vision, and
mission of the curriculum improvement plan will be the most important indicator of success.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
17
The Common Core State Standards are the basis of state mandated assessments. Therefore,
teachers must plan learning activities and carrying out instructional practices that mirror the
curriculum. According to Glatthorn et al. (2016), “With this in mind, the evaluation of the
written curriculum and its effectiveness is ever more dependent on the taught curriculum. To be
effective, the written curriculum needs to be the taught curriculum” (p. 374). The CPM
consultant will provide support and help coach teachers so that best teaching practices are
regularly observed in all math classrooms.
When developing the plan to address curricular gaps and deficits it will be extremely
important to develop a plan that is sequential and clearly organized across grade levels. This will
allow educators to develop learning activities which are appropriate for the developmental age of
their students. Also, it will reduce unneeded repetition or gaps in instruction, creating a
systematic flow of learning activities from grade to grade.
PLC members who are committed to a shared vision will be a strong indicator of success.
Ornstein and Hunkins (2017) write, “The key to getting teachers committed to an innovation is
involvement” (p. 261). All teachers will share responsibilities and actively participate in the
decision making process. Through this commitment, the curriculum improvement plan will have
a higher probability of positive effects.
Timeframe
The major efforts of the curriculum improvement plan will take place over the next two
school years. The PLC will complete all efforts of analyzing data and making a plan for
curricular improvements by the end of the 2017-2018 school year. During the spring and
summer of 2018, math teachers will be attending professional development opportunities
including a CPM veteran teachers’ workshop and the Wisconsin Mathematics Council Annual
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
18
Conference. The workshop and conference will be a great opportunities for Seymour Middle
School math teachers to collaborate with other teachers around the state. During the 2018-2019
school year math teachers will implement the curricular changes established as part of the
curriculum improvement plan. At the end of the 2018-2019 school year, the PLC will begin the
formal evaluation process. The PLC will use data as the foundation of meetings during the
2019-2020 school year. Lastly, math teachers will continue to be supported by the CPM
consultant through the 2019-2020 school year.
Evaluation
Evaluation of Success
There will be various methods which will be used to evaluate the success of the
implementation action plan. The PLC team will use student surveys, the district math screener
(FastBridge Learning, 2017), data from the Wisconsin Forward Exam (Wisconsin DPI, 2017),
and CPM end of course assessment (CPM Educational Program, 2017).
The first goal, improving and maintaining a curriculum that is rigorous and effective for
all students, will be measured by student surveys. According to Ornstein and Hunkins (2017),
“The results of a newly developed curriculum may not be evident immediately, if ever” (p. 287).
Exit interviews, focus-groups, and surveys are different approaches some schools have used
when measuring the results of newly developed curriculums (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2017). The
PLC team believes the use of a student survey will provide useful feedback that can be used to
evaluate the results of the curricular changes. The survey will be given to sixth and seventh
grade students at the end of the 2017-2018 school year and again following the 2018-2019
school year.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
19
The second goal, reducing curriculum gaps and deficits, will be measured by the
Wisconsin Forward Exam (Wisconsin DPI, 2017). If the goal is met successfully, then results
should reflect a decrease in student achievement gaps of Seymour Middle School students and
students statewide. This is long term goal which will be evaluated on a yearly basis.
The third goal, increasing students’ math achievement, will be measured using the end of
year CPM generated assessment for grades six, seven, and eight (see Appendix B). The
summative evaluation will assess the overall quality of the curriculum and inform educators that
students have met the school and state educational standards (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2017). Also,
the schoolwide mathematics screener, given in the fall, winter, and spring of each school year,
will be used to measure student achievement (FastBridge Learning, 2017). This data will
provide teachers with longitudinal data for subgroups of students.
Implementation
The school improvement plan being implemented reflects the components of the Analysis
Factors in the Curriculum Integration Review (see Appendix C). One of the early steps in the
curriculum action plan has the PLC unpacking the CPM curriculum at each grade level.
Specifically, teachers will be aligning all lessons from each grade level to each of the Common
Core State Standards for math. This process will allow the PLC to identify standards that are
infrequently taught or ineffectively represented in the curriculum. Standards and benchmarks
clearly represent the knowledge, skills, and processes that we want students to know and be able
to do. The standards themselves must be vertically aligned with one another so that they reflect a
consistent flow for teaching from one grade level to the next. According to Burns (2001), “The
process is both a vertical and a horizontal one that removes unnecessary curricular repetitions,
promotes alignment, emphasizes cross-disciplinary connections, and encourages "spiraling" of
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
20
essential skills, which involves reinforcing and extending those skills with increasing complexity
within and across grades” (para. 7). Aligning the curriculum to state standards is a strength of
the curriculum improvement plan which will directly impact instruction.
Instruction will greatly benefit with the help of the CPM consultant. She will guide and
coach teachers so that classroom instruction uses standards as a guide and reflects best teaching
practices. Furthermore, the PLC comprised of all middle school math teachers allow for
impactful collaboration. According to Burns (2001), “As teachers analyze maps [curriculum]
within and across grades, they share examples of creative teaching strategies, fill the gaps in
standards-based instruction, eliminate any unnecessary repetitions, and make other adjustments
in instruction” (Aligning Curricula to Standards and Assessments section, para. 4). This allows
teachers to bring the curriculum into alignment with district benchmarks and state standards
(Burns, 2001). It is anticipated that there may be challenges with all math teachers accepting the
guidance of a coach. Many teachers have significant teaching experience and may be reluctant
to accept the knowledge and expertise of another person in their classroom. It will be important
to reiterate the purpose of the coach to some teachers and emphasize she is not in their
classrooms to evaluate, but to provide support.
Lastly, the curriculum improvement plan will address how to monitor student learning.
Assessments will very clearly represent the standards. Once teachers have mapped the
curriculum, analyzed its alignment to benchmarks and standards, and made any necessary
modifications, they can develop assessments for measuring student mastery of the aligned
curriculum. In turn, student performance on teacher developed assessments should be an
indicator of students' performance on standardized tests (Burns, 2001). As part of the curriculum
improvement plan, math teachers will be giving an end of year summative assessment to assess
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
21
student achievement. The results of this assessment will be used for instructional decision
making in future years. Overall, the assessment portion of the Curriculum Integration Review is
in most need of improvement. Moving forward, the math PLC will be looking at teacher
designed chapter assessments to ensure that they are effectively aligned to standards within each
chapter. Time is certainly a major barrier to this effort. Therefore, math teachers will be asked
to review all of their assessments on their own to be sure they strictly align to the standards and
benchmarks of each assessed chapter.
Conclusion
The efforts of this curriculum improvement plan will, at the least, promote collaboration,
stimulate data-driven decision making, and empower math teachers to create a plan to improve
curriculum. Educators across the country who effectively use assessment data can ignite change
and achieve positive results at the district, school, and classroom levels (Protheroe, 2001). In
general, this plan does just that. It outlines a specific plan where the math PLC members can be
active participants in improving their mathematics curriculum so that teaching and learning are
positively impacted.
Buy-in from all math teachers will be critical for successful implementation. According
to Ornstein and Hunkins (2017), “Teachers must be viewed as full participants in curriculum
implementation, not just passive recipients of the curriculum” (p. 261). The established math
PLC will encourage participation which will lead to high levels of commitment. Additionally,
successfully using data can be a powerful tool for making instructional decisions, aligning
curriculum, determining instruction, and designing innovative and engaging classroom
instruction (Burns, 2001). According to Burns (2001), “[It] can transform low-performing
schools into high-performing learning communities (conclusion section, para. 4). School
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
22
initiatives come and go, some with more success than others. However, the mathematics
teachers at Seymour Middle School are committed to making this initiative one that has a lasting
impact on all students for years to come.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
23
References
Burns, R. (2001). Curriculum Mapping. In Curriculum handbook. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/curriculum-handbook/421.aspx
CPM Educational Program. (2015). CPM. Retrieved from http://cpm.org/
Dougherty, C. (2015). How school district leaders can support the use of data to improve
teaching and learning (pp. 1-7, Issue brief No. 3674). ACT Core Practice Framework.
FastBridge Learning. (2017). Assessments. Retrieved from
http://www.fastbridge.org/assessments/
Glatthorn, A. A. (2016). Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Green, R. L. (2013). Practicing the art of leadership: A problem-based approach to
implementing the ISLLC standards. Boston: Pearson.
Goldring, E. B., & Berends, M. (2009). Leading with data: Pathways to improve your school.
Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin.
Mertler, C. A. (2014). The data-driven classroom: How do I use student data to improve my
instruction? Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/sf114082/chapters/Introduction_to_Data-Driven
_Educational_Decision_Making.aspx
National Association for Elementary School Principals. (2011). Using student achievement data
to support instructional decision making [PDF file]. Alexandria, Virginia:
National Association of Elementary School Principals. Retrieved from
http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/Student%20Achievement_blue.pdf
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
24
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2017). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (7th
ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Protheroe, N. (2001). Improving teaching and learning with data-based decisions: Asking the
right questions and acting on the answers [PDF]. Education Research Center.
Seymour Community School District. (2017). District. Retrieved from
http://www.seymour.k12.wi.us/district/
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2017). WISEdash public portal. Retrieved from
http://wisedash.dpi.wi.gov/Dashboard/Page/Home/Topic%20Area/WSAS/
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
25
Appendix A
Implementation Action Plan
Goals
Action Steps
Leadership
Resources
Indicators of Success
Timeframe
Specify a goal for this component:
Specifically, what are you going to
do?
● Next steps
● Steps with the greatest leverage
Who is responsible for “leading out” What resources are needed?
each action step?
● People
● Point person
● Time
● Shared leadership
● Materials
● Money
How will we know whether we are
successful?
● Criteria
● Method
● Evidence
When will this occur?
● Range
● Deadline
1. Improve and maintain a
curriculum that is rigorous and
effective for all students.
Gather all applicable data from
Wisconsin Forward Exam and
Wisconsin Department of Public
Instruction
Jenny Pierre: Instruction and
Curriculum Director
Instruction that reflects the
objectives and learning targets
identified in each lesson
2017-2018 school year:
 Data collection
 Data analysis
 Curriculum unpacking
 Plan for addressing
deficits and weaknesses
2. Reduce curriculum gaps and
deficits.
3. Increase student achievement in
mathematics.
Conduct math screener (FastBridge
Learning, 2017)
First PLC meeting of school year on
October 27, 2017
Critically analyze each chapter and
lesson from the mathematics
curriculum for each grade level at
the middle school
Identify the frequency of lessons as
they relate to each Common Core
State Standard (CCSS)
Target a common domain within the
CCSS for mathematics across grade
levels
Develop a series of sequential
lessons that can be used to
supplement the current curriculum
Finalize the coordination of CPM
consultant
Commitment to the goal and vision
by each PLC member
Jonathan Dunks: Sixth Grade
CPM coach
Mathematics/facilitator/point-person
Four scheduled PLC meetings
Todd Vandehei: Seventh Grade
Mathematics
Monthly meetings occurring on the
last Thursday of each month
Michael Herrala: Eighth Grade
Mathematics
Technology upgrades
Matt Braun: Eighth Grade
Mathematics
Shared leadership among each math
PLC member
Purchase mathematics computer
program as a supplemental learning
tool
Instruction that reflects the
philosophy of the curriculum and
vision and mission of the curriculum
improvement plan
Summer of 2018
 Attend CPM verteran
Sequential and clearly organized
teacher’s workshop
vertical curriculum across grade
 Attend Wisconsin
levels
Mathematics Council
Annual Conference
Commitment and shared vision by
all math PLC members
2018-2019
Funding for applicable guest
speakers and field experiences
Long range plan that will be
regularly modified as needed.
Attend CPM refresher workshop as
professional development
District math screener (FastBridge
Learning, 2017)
Attend the Wisconsin Mathematics
Council Annual Conference
Data from the 2017-2018 Wisconsin
Forward Exam will be compared to
the 2018-2019 Exam
CPM end of year math assessment
Students demonstrating proficiency
will increase ten percent

Fully implement
curriculum changes and
improvement
Future
 Continue to gather data to
evaluate success
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
26
Appendix B
Data Collection Instrument
Name: ______________________________
Date: __________________
Period: __________
5.G Standards
1.
Top
A rectangular solid is shown here.
a.
6
What is the area of the top?
Fron
12
The right side?
9
The front?
b.
2.
What is the volume of the solid?
The graph at right is used to compare the age of a painting
with its value. On the axes, place a dot and label it:
a.
V
V for a new and very valuable painting.
alue
b.
W for a not-too-old but worthless painting.
c.
X for a very old and very valuable painting.
A
5.MD Standards
3.
Every dime is one-tenth of a dollar and every penny is one-hundredth of a dollar. How
much money does a person have if he has:
a.
Four hundred twelve tenths of a dollar?
b.
Six hundred fifty-eight hundredths of a dollar?
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
4.
27
Fill in each blank with either a fraction or a whole number.
a.
b.
c.
d.
One year equals _______ months.
One week equals ________ days.
One day equals ________ weeks.
One hour equals ________ days.
5.OA Standards
5.
6.
For each sequence, what are the next three numbers in the pattern? Explain the pattern in
words.
a.
8, 12, 16, 20, …
b.
5, 12, 19, 26, …
c.
14, 11, 8, 5, …
Evaluate each of the following expressions.
6 + 5×8
a.
7.
b.
3× 5 + 2 ×10
c.
3+ 2(4 + 7)
Which of the following numeric expressions represents the phrase “25 less than 12 groups
of 15”?
A.
8.
12 (15) – 25
B.
25 – 12 (15)
C.
25 + 12(15)
D.
F
F
12 (25) – 15
Consider this pattern:
F
F
a.
Draw figure 4 in the space provided.
b.
What is the relationship between the figure number and the number of dots?Is there a
figure that would have 300 dots? If so, which figure is it? How many dots would be
in Figure 20 and how do you know?
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
28
5.NBT Standards
9.
10.
Add or subtract as indicated. NO calculators!
a.
1039.9 + 93.07
b.
0.82 + 432.1
c.
67.23 – 23.05
d.
398.32 – 129
Consider the list of numbers below.
0.34
0.034
0.304
a.
Which number is the smallest? How do you know?
b.
Which number is the greatest? How do you know?
11.
0.314
Round each number to the given place.
a.
12.
0.4
23.679
(hundredths)
b.
55.55
(ones)
c.
2,840.12
(tenths)
Fill in the blank with either < , > , or = .
a.
91.01 _______ 91.10
b.
0.123 _______ 0.0123
c.
1.345 _______ 0.678
d.
89.34 _______ 89.34000
5.NF Standards
13.
Tim is dividing up a 2-pound bag of nuts into smaller portions.
a.
How many 14 -pound bags of nuts can be made from a 2-pound bag of nuts?
b.
How many 12 -pound bags of nuts can be made from a 2-pound bag of nuts?
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
29
15.
There were 52 problems on Petunia’s last math test. She got one-fourth of them wrong.
How many questions did she get right? Explain.
16.
How many fourths would I need to subtract from 10 to get to zero? Why?
17.
18.
Calculate.
a.
1
10
c.
3
4
+ 53
b.
5
8
- 163
- 58
d.
1+4
3 9
The two spinners below are incomplete. What fraction is missing in each spinner?
a.
b.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
30
Appendix C
Analysis Factors in the Curriculum Integration Review
Dr. Boers
Marian University
Curriculum leaders need to continually review to make sure that progress is evident and constant
regarding curricular intentions that are aligned with instructional activities and that are based
on assessment are in place and connected to create an integrated curriculum which
accommodates the needs of all students.
CURRICULUM FOR STUDENT
LEARNING
Standards and Benchmarks
P
The knowledge, skills, and processes that
we want students to know and be able to do.
L
L
A
A
Student Learning
N
N
N
N
I
N
P
I
Instruction
The strategies that we use to facilitate
G
student learning of knowledge, skills,
and processes.
Assessment
N
The evidence that students have learned.
G