Parkrose
School District
2011-2012
School Improvement Plan
Page 1 of 37
School
School Improvement Plan (SIP)
School: Parkrose Middle School
2011-2012
Date: 9.9.2011
Principal: Molly T. Davies
1. Building Readiness
Planning Team - List the names of people involved in developing this plan. Begin to build readiness in people by engaging them in Active School
Improvement efforts. When the Planning Team comes together review the school’s data as a focus for school improvement efforts. Planning Team
members bring different perspectives that determine next steps.
Form 1 – SIP Leadership Team
Name
Representation
Page 2 of 37
Geri Miller
Parents
Kris Flynn (educational assistant)
Licensed Staff (include position)
Andy Phelps (teacher), Stephanie Murdock
(teacher), Clint Henry (special education), Ann
Stinson (teacher), Carolee Church (teacher),
Molly Davies (principal), Annette Sweeney
(assistant principal)
Classified Staff (include position)
Administrators (include position)
Form 1 – Technical Assistance
Name
Representation
Yuki Monteith, Director of School Improvement,
Parkrose District Office, 503.408.2124
SIP Templates and SIP Development process,
data analysis, professional development
David McKay, Director of Human Resources,
Parkrose District Office, 503.408.2133
Highly Qualified Teachers,
Kathy Keim-Robinson, Director of Student Services,
Parkrose District Office, 503.408.2118
ELL, Title I, PBS, Talented & Gifted, Special
Education
Table of Contents - Forms
. Building Readiness
Form 1 – SIP Leadership Team and Technical Assistance
2
Form 2 – Brief Narrative of SIP Planning Process
5
. Collecting and Analyzing Data
Form 3 – School Profile Overview
6
Form 4 - Content Area Analysis
7
Page 3 of 37
Form 5 - Report Card and AYP Analysis
11
Form 6 – Additional Assessment Collection of Evidence List
12
Form 7 – Staff Development Analysis
13
Form 8 – Discipline Data Analysis
14
Form 9 – Summary of Analysis
15
Form 10– Parent and Family Involvement
16
. Set, Review, Revise Measurable Goals
Form 11 - SMART Goals
. Gather Research and Information Around Best Practices
17
18
. Identify Strategies to Meet Goals and Develop Actions Plans
Form 12 – SIP Action Plan
19
. Implement Plans and Monitor Progress
Form 13 – Monitoring Process and Timelines
. Evaluate Effectiveness
23
24
* Attach the Following Appendices
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report
State Report Card
Parent Involvement Plan
Literacy Plan
. Title I Compliance Items
25
Page 4 of 37
Building Readiness (Planning Team)
Research tells us that the most effective change is accomplished through a pattern of steps. In order to improve schools something has to change so
new patterns can be established. The Sustaining School Improvement Cycle is composed of a seven-step process that is often repeated and revisited in
the journey to increase student achievement and improve school for all students.
Briefly describe your plans to meet the seven steps in the Sustaining School Improvement Cycle.

Build Readiness- Look at and analyze data, develop an action plan

Collect and analyze data- Build in regular times to collect and analyze data, CORE instruction,
individual student data, OAKS data, intervention data, behavior, data Easy CBM data

Set goals based on data- Grade level, and building wide goals

Investigate research-based practice- AVID strategies, PLCs, S.I.O.P., data analysis

Make action plan- PBIS plan, professional development plan, PLC plan

Implement and monitor- Collection of artifacts
Page 5 of 37
Form 2 – Brief Narrative of SIP Planning Process: Complete this section using the
information from your previous year’s School Improvement Plan
Page 6 of 37
1.
State each goal listed in the previous year’s district approved School Improvement plan and
the strategies implemented to address the achievement of each goal.
Goal: By the end of the 2010-2011 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding
the state math standards will increase from 76% to 80%.
Strategies: Cornell notes, Costa’s level of inquiry, S.I.O.P., differentiated instruction, technology
Goal: By the end of the 2010-2011 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding
the state reading standards will increase from 72% to 76%.
Strategies: Cornell notes, Costa’s level of inquiry, S.I.O.P., differentiated instruction, reading in the
content area
Goal: By the end of the 2010-2011 school year the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding
the state writing standards will increase from 42%-50%.
Strategies: Writing rubric, technology, differentiated instruction, S.I.O.P., Cornell notes
Goal: By the end of the 2010-2011 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding
the PBIS “green zone” expectations by receiving 2 or fewer referrals will increase from 80%-90%.
Strategies: ROCK matrix, data analysis, behavior strategies
Page 7 of 37
2.
State the progress made toward the achievement of each goal. What data has been reviewed
to understand the progress of each goal? What additional data might help to understand this area of
concern?
There was a decline in scores in reading, writing and math. OAKS data, common formative
asseesment data, subgroup data, historical data and individual student data was reviewed.
Additional data that would help understand this decline would be to analyze comparable school data.
2.
Collecting and Analyzing Data – Review all data to gain insights about strengths and weaknesses of teaching and learning programs. There should be a clear
connection between what the data indicates and what actions are being taken. Conclusion of results should include a brief analysis of the data collected and its
implications for school improvement
Form 3 - School Profile Overview
2005/2006 - 2010/2011
School
Enrollment
Year
ELP
# of
Languages
Mobility
SPED
Free & Reduced
Attendance
05-06
821
16%
15
35%
12%
61%
93%
06-07
824
19%
18
36%
12%
61%
93%
07-08
799
20%
25
31%
11%
65%
94%
Page 8 of 37
37%
809
787
804
17%
16%
11%
29
25
23
White
Black
Hispanic
Asian/Pacific
Islander
Native American
05-06
52%
14%
14%
18%
1%
06-07
46%
18%
16%
18%
2%
07-08
46%
15%
20%
19%
2%
08-09
42%
46%
44%
15%
11%
14%
20%
22%
23%
21%
16%
16%
2%
5%
6%
08-09
09-10
10-11
Ethnicity
School
Year
09-10
10-11
School
Year
AYP
Report Card Rating
05-06
23%
12%
13%
11%
14%
67%
71%
72%
93%
93%
94%
2010-2011 Staffing
Information
Classroom Teachers:
40
06-07
Not Met
Strong
Certified Support Staff:
11
07-08
Not Met
Strong
Classified Staff:
17
08-09
Not Met
Satisfactory
09-10
Not Met
Satisfactory
10-11
Not Met
Satisfactory
Outside Support Staff:
Page 9 of 37
Student Achievement Data Analysis
Form 4 – Content Area Analysis
Content Area: Reading - Target
Reading - Target Goal _80_%
Student Sub-category
(i.e. ELL, Hispanic,
3rd grade)
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
All Students
62%
63%
67%
67%
Economically
Disadvantage
Limited English
Proficient
Students with
Disabilities
Asian/Pacific
Islanders
Black (non-Hispanic)
54%
52%
59%
60%
21%
18%
17%
43%
20%
23%
30%
27%
63%
64%
67%
70%
41%
45%
54%
47%
Hispanic origin
53%
48%
54%
58%
White (not of
Hispanic origin)
70%
76%
79%
76%
Conclusion of Results - Include Strengths / Weaknesses

- Both Cause and Effect Data
Reading data showed an average of 3 RIT point gain
Page 10 of 37









PLCs well functioning
2009-2010 all subgroups made 4-10% improvement in Reading
Poor Testing Environment
Change in Testing Coordinator (new teacher almost every year)
Lacked 7th grade reading intervention
6th grade interventions inflexible
Teacher created intervention curriculum versus a researched based intervention curriculum
Slow improvement in CORE instruction
Students who participated in intervention showed greater gains
Content Area: Math - Target
Math - Target Goal _80___%
Student Sub-category
(i.e. ELL, Hispanic,
3rd grade)
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
All Students
66%
68%
69%
58%
Economically
Disadvantage
Limited English
Proficient
Students with
Disabilities
Asian/Pacific
Islanders
Black (non Hispanic)
59%
59%
62%
51%
47%
38%
27%
36%
21%
30%
32%
24%
77%
76%
73%
65%
44%
47%
46%
33%
Page 11 of 37
Hispanic origin
56%
54%
60%
47%
White (not of Hispanic
Origin
71%
79%
78%
68%
Conclusion of Results - Include Strengths / Weaknesses









- Both Cause and Effect Data
PLCs well functioning
Math data showed an average of 3 RIT point gain
Change in Math standards
Increase RIT score to meet or exceed
Slow improvement to core instruction
All curriculum materials are teacher created
All intervention materials are teacher created versus research based
Special education students were pulled out of their math class to meet individual needs
Students who participated in an intervention class showed greater gains
Student Sub-category
Content Area: Writing(i.e. ELL,Target
Hispanic,
2009-2010
2010-2011
All Students
44%
43%
Economically
Disadvantage
42%
35%
3rd grade)
Writing - Target Goal _80___%
Page 12 of 37
Limited English
Proficient
Students with
Disabilities
Asian/Pacific
Islanders
Black (non Hispanic)
25%
30%
10%
13%
48%
48%
43%
26%
Hispanic origin
42%
26%
White (not of Hispanic
Origin
43%
52%
Conclusion of Results - Include Strengths / Weaknesses










- Both Cause and Effect Data
Reading data showed an average of 3 RIT point gain
PLCs well functioning
2009-2010 all subgroups made 4-10% improvement in Reading
Poor Testing Environment
Change in Testing Coordinator (new teacher almost every year)
Lacked 7th grade reading intervention
6th grade interventions inflexible
Teacher created intervention curriculum versus a researched based intervention curriculum
Slow improvement in CORE instruction
Students who participated in an intervention class demonstrated greater gains
Page 13 of 37
ent Achievement Data Analysis
Form 5 – Report Card and AYP Analysis
In math we saw a decrease in scores in the following subgroups: all students, economically
disadvantaged, limited English proficient, students with disabilities, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic
and White.
In math we saw an increase in scores in the following subgroups: Black, American Indian, and MultiRacial.
In reading we saw a decrease in scores in the following subgroups: all students, economically
disadvantaged, students with disabilities, Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, American Indian, and White
In reading we saw an increase in scores in the following subgroups: limited English proficient, Hispanic,
and Multi-Racial
Conclusion of AYP Analysis - Include Strengths / Weaknesses
- Both Cause and Effect Data
In both math and reading we saw an increase scores in three subgroups. We saw a decrease in scores in
seven subgroups. The target to meet AYP increased in both math and reading. We did not meet the
target with all subgroups in both math and reading. Intervention classes need to use “research based”
materials versus teacher created materials.
Page 14 of 37
Student Achievement Data Analysis
Form 6 – Additional Assessment Collection of Evidence List
Please list assessments used in your building in the 2010-2011 school year (i.e. STAR Math, Running Records, AIMSweb, etc.)
Common Formative Assessments
Easy CBM
Assessment built in with the Language! curriculum
OAKS assessments
Page 15 of 37
Instructional and Organizational Effectiveness Data
Form 7 – Staff Development Analysis
Please list staff professional development activities during the 2010-2011 school year.
MONTH
ptember- June
ACTIVITY
S.I.O.P.- ½ day training 2 times per year
AVID strategies (summarization, reading in the content areas, The
Write Path, inquiry)- ½ day training 2 times per year
Data organizer- every six weeks (minimum)
Common Formative Assessments- every six weeks (minimum)
Instructional strategy template- every six weeks (minimum)
Cornell Notes- 3 times per year (minimum)
Reading strategey in the content areas- 3 times per year (minimum)
Professional development from menu- three times per year
Professional Development Menu
Cornell Notes
 Scaffolding
 Summarizing
Formative Assessments
 Creating
Reading Strategies
 Marking the Text
 Frayer Diagram
 Content area AVID strategies
Data Analysis
 Organizing
 Using to identify interventions
 Using to identify effective strategies

Writing
Content area strategies
Page 16 of 37

Chunk paragraph




Inquiry
Implementing Costa’s levels of questioning
Philosophical chairs
Socratic Seminar
Interactive Notebook


Collaboration
Think-Pair-Share
Jigsaw
Reading Work Samples
Culturally Responsive Teaching Strategies
Differentiated Instruction
Technology
Credit by Proficiency
onclusion of Staff Development Analysis
Page 17 of 37
aff will be expected to complete tasks in the areas of common formative assessments, data analysis and
structional strategies. The builind gProfessional Development plan is designed to meet the need of individual
LCs based on the district and building initiatives. In addition staff will be required to attend two ½ day S.I.O.P.
ainings, and two ½ day AVID strategy trainings.
Instructional and Organizational Effectiveness Data
Form 8 – Discipline Data Analysis
Collection of Evidence
Conclusion of Discipline Data Analysis
2010-2011 Discipline Referrals
Our 2010-2011 SWISS Behavioral Data consists of 6th, 7th and 8th grade students
 74% if our 2010-2011 student population were in the green zone (students with 0-1 referral)
 14% of our 2010-2011 student population were in the yellow zone (students with 2-5 referrals)
 12% of our 2010-2011 student population were in the red zone (students with 6 or more referrals)
Form 9–
Summary of Analysis
Summarize the findings of the
data review by describing the strengths and weaknesses of your current program[s].
1. Strengths of the Current Program:
PLCs, differentiated Professional Development, S.I.O.P. trainings, AVID trainings, improving the CORE
curriculum, improving the implementation of PBIS, structure of intervention, the AVID program
Page 18 of 37
2. Weaknesses of Current Program:
Not providing students with both a reading and a writing intervention, not having the resources to
provide a researched based intervention in both math and reading, inflexible interventions
3. Other Factors to Consider:
Increase of RIT, change in math standards, decrease in staffing, loss of literacy coach, decrease in
resources
Page 19 of 37
ructional and Organizational Effectiveness Data
rm 10– Parent and Family Involvement
e school improvement program must:
Create effective involvement of parents
Have a School Parent Involvement Policy
Conduct conferences with the parents of students who have not met academic standards and essential skills requirements, and
Incorporate use of the parent-school compact
e major parent involvement activities should relate to the student academic goals as much as possible, and should include activities that are valued by
ents. In “Best Practice” parent involvement programs, parents actively participate in designing, implementing, and evaluating these activities.
Describe the key strategies planned to increase meaningful parental involvement that are designed to enhance
me-school partnerships and improve student learning. These strategies should be also found in the Action Plan.







Daily bulletins are sent through our email list serve
Monthly newsletter, “pacer pride” sent home in Monday folders
Parent sign-off sheet in Monday folders
Website is updated with parent volunteer and involvement opportunities
Parent Volunteer coordinator- through PTO
Schedule Fall Conferences
Back to School Night
Page 20 of 37
Set, Review, Revise Measurable Goals – Guidance: List your school improvement plan goals for the upcoming school year. Goals are written as
ART goals – specific and strategic, measurable, attainable, result-oriented, and time-bound.
rm 11 – SMART Goals
ecific to a targeted subject area, grade level and student sub-group
easurement instrument to be used and the element examined must be measurable
hievable percentage gains or increases in terms of expected change
levant subject areas – Is the goal tending to an urgent need?
me-bound when assessment will take place as well as timely in terms of identified need
al 1: By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding the state reading test will increase from
66% to 80%.
al 2: By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding the math reading test will increase from
58% to 80%.
al 3: By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding the PBIS «green zone» expectations will
increase from 74% to 80%
Page 21 of 37
Page 22 of 37
Gather Research and Information Around Best Practices – Guidance: The instructional programs strategies should be based on incorporating
ormation obtained from a review of the research and/or other information gathered from multiple activities.
Current research-based practices, program of studies. Cite your research.
LCs- (DuFour)
B.I.S.- (Mitchell, and Leaf)
VID- (Watt, Huerta, and Mills)
idge to Algebra- (What Works Clearing House)
- What Works- (What Works Clearing House)
I.O.P- (U.S. Department of Education)
5. Identify Strategies to meet Goals and Develop Action Plan The action plan highlights what the goal is, how it will be measured, what the steps
are for reaching the goal, who is responsible, what the timeline is, and which resources will be utilized.
Directions for Developing the School improvement Action Plan
The School Improvement Action Plan is based on the results of the data review and the solutions selected. The Action Plan will serve as an effective
tool for integrating goals, strategies to achieve the goals, and the timeline and resources needed to accomplish the goals. It should also assist in the
implementation by clarifying who will provide leadership for each component of the plan, and how progress will be monitored and evaluated.
The Action plan template provided on the next page can be modified to meet your school’s specific needs. Strategies to address attendance, safety,
participation rates can be incorporated into the template provided.
Establish SMART [specific – measurable – achievable – realistic – time related] goals for continuous and substantial progress by each group of students
enrolled in your school. Review AYP Growth Targets for each group.
School: Parkrose Middle School
Page 23 of 37
ART GGoal # 1: By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding the state reading test will
increase from 66% to 80%.
Target Group: All students
Measurable Targets: OAKS data, AYP data
Strategy/Activity
Evidence of
Implementation
Evidence of
Impact
Person(s)
Responsible
What evidence-based
strategy will be
What evidence and
What data will be Who will provide
implemented?
processes will be used to collected through your oversight for
How do you know the
ensure that the
assessment system that implementation,
strategy will help achieve strategy(ies) and staff
measures desired monitoring, and
the goal?
development planned are changes in student evaluation of the
being implemented in the learning? (universal strategy?
classroom?
screening, progress
monitoring and
outcome measures)
All teachers will be Sign-in sheet, use of
trained through their strategies and
PLCs in paragraph
agreements will be
summarization as part documented in PLC
of their two ½ day
minutes, PLC
AVID professional minutes will be
development sessions posted on google
sites, examples of
student work,
administrative walkthroughs
All teachers will be Sign-in sheet, use of
trained through their strategies and
PLCs in the «Write agreements will be
Dates
Estimated Funding Source
Costs
Evaluation
What are the
What sources of funding
What did the
projected What are the will be used for the
Evidence of Impact
start and end anticipated activity (more than one data tell you about
date(s)?
source may be listed)?
your district or
costs?
school? Were the
results what you
intended? Are the
results moving the
district towards the
goal?
Common
Administration, September $3,388.84 Title IIA
formative
PLC leaders,
2011-June
assessment,
instructional.lite 2012
OAKS, Easy CBM racy coach
Assessment data
Common
formative
assessment,
Assessment data
Administration, September $3,388.84 Title IIA
PLC leaders,
2011-June
instructional.lite 2012
Page 24 of 37
Path» strategy as part
of their two ½ day
AVID professional
development sessions
documented in PLC OAKS, Easy CBM racy coach
minutes, PLC minutes
will be posted on
google sites,
examples of student
work, administrative
walk-throughs
All teachers will be Sign-in sheet, use of Common
Administration, September $6,777.68 Title III
trained through their strategies and
formative
PLC leaders,
2011-June
PLCs in S.I.O.P.
agreements will be assessment,
S.I.O.P. trainer 2012
strategies specifically documented in PLC OAKS, Easy CBM
on lanuage objectives minutes, PLC minutes
as a part of two ½ day will be posted on
trainings
google sites,
examples of student
work, administrative
walk-throughs
Assessment data
Page 25 of 37
Form 12 – SIP Action Plan
School: Parkrose Middle School
ART GGoal # 2: By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding the math reading test will
increase from 58% to 80%.
Target Group: All students
Measurable Targets: OAKS data, AYP data
Strategy/Activity
What evidence-based
strategy will be
implemented?
How do you know the
strategy will help achieve
the goal?
Each PLC will
complete a minimum
of one data analysis on
a common formative
assessment every six
weeks.
Evidence of
Implementation
Evidence of
Impact
Person(s)
Responsible
What evidence and
What data will be Who will provide
processes will be used to
collected through
oversight for
ensure that the strategy(ies) your assessment
implementation,
and staff development
system that
monitoring, and
planned are being
measures desired
evaluation of the
implemented in the
changes in student
strategy?
classroom?
learning? (universal
screening, progress
monitoring and
outcome measures)
Each participant will be Common
responsible for entering formative
their data onto the
assessment,
district data organizer OAKS, Easy
sheet.
CBM
Each PLC will
PLCs will complete an Common
complete a miinimum instructional strategy formative
Dates
Estimated
Cost
What are the
projected start What are the
and end
anticipated
date(s)?
costs?
Funding
Source
Evaluation
What did the
Evidence
of Impact
What sources of
data
tell
you
about
funding will be
your district or
used for the
activity (more than school? Were the
one source may be results what you
intended? Are the
listed)?
results moving the
district towards the
goal?
Administration, September
PLC leaders,
2011-June
instructional.lite 2012
racy coach
n/a
Professional
development
time
Assessment data
Administration, September
PLC leaders,
2011-June
n/a
Professional
development
Assessment data
Page 26 of 37
of one instructional
strategy analysis using
data from a common
formative assessment
every six weeks
Each PLC will
complete three- 45
minute- professional
development trainings
around instruction in a
specific area, that they
choose from the
professional
development menu
which is aligned with
the district initiatives.
analysis and it will be
posted on the google
site
assessment,
OAKS, Easy
CBM
instructional.lite 2012
racy coach
time
PLCs will complete a
Professional
Devlopment plan and it
will be posted on their
google sites
Common
formative
assessment,
OAKS, Easy
CBM
Administration, September
PLC leaders,
2011-June
instructional.lite 2012
racy coach
n/a
Professional
development
time
Assessment data
Form 12 – SIP Action Plan
School: Parkrose Middle School
ART GGoal # 3: By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, the percentage of all students meeting or exceeding the PBIS «green zone»
expectations will increase from 74% to 80%.
Target Group: All students
Measurable Targets: SWISS and ESIS data
Strategy/Activity
What evidence-based
strategy will be
implemented?
How do you know the
strategy will help achieve
the goal?
Evidence of
Implementation
Evidence of
Impact
What evidence and
What data will be
processes will be used to
collected through
ensure that the strategy(ies) your assessment
and staff development
system that
planned are being
measures desired
implemented in the
changes in student
classroom?
learning? (universal
Person(s)
Responsible
Who will provide
oversight for
implementation,
monitoring, and
evaluation of the
strategy?
Dates
Estimated
Costs
What are the
projected What are the
start and end anticipated
date(s)?
costs?
Funding
Source
What sources of
funding will be
used for the
activity (more than
one source may be
listed)?
Evaluation
What did the
Evidence of Impact
data tell you about
your district or
school? Were the
results what you
intended? Are the
results moving the
Page 27 of 37
screening, progress
monitoring and
outcome measures)
Students will
Completion of matrix, SWISS data,
participate in a training student work,
ESIS data
that teaches expectaions
in all areas of the PBIS
matrix
Form 12 – SIP Action Plan
district towards the
goal?
Administration,
PBIS chair
September n/a
2011- June
2012
n/a
Behavior data
School:
Page 28 of 37
Form 13 – Monitoring Process and Timelines
Describe the process that will be used to monitor progress throughout the year.
The Site Council will review the 2011-2012 School Improvement plan at each meeting. PLCs google
site will regularly be monitored, walkthrough data, examples of students work, staff gallery walks,
professional development calendar
Explain the monitoring timeline, ensuring that at least mid-year and year-end will be included.
PLC work will be monitored weekly, PLC leaders will share out monthly, Site Council will
continuously review dates, staff gallery walks of student work will be done twice a year, the district
will complete a site visit
Indicate names and positions of peers and/or district office personnel to assist in the monitoring
process.
School Improvement Department
PLC leaders teams
PMS adminsitration
District Administrators
Page 29 of 37
Page 30 of 37
Page 31 of 37
Page 32 of 37
Page 33 of 37
Page 34 of 37
Page 35 of 37
Page 36 of 37
Page 37 of 37