2015 state review panel recommendation form...2015 state review panel recommendation form...

© 2015 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Recommendation Form - 1

2015 State Review Panel Recommendation Form School/code & District/code: Bessemer Academy/0822 & Pueblo 60/2690

State Review Panelists: Lisa Gjellum and Cindy Shane

Recommendation Meeting Date: June 10, 2015

Panel’s Recommendation:

The State Review Panel recommends Innovation School Status for Bessemer Academy within a larger district

Innovation Zone based on an analysis of compiled data and documentation, as well as a site visit conducted on

April 30, 2015.

Evidence and Rationale:

The SRP recommends Innovation School Status for Bessemer Academy within a larger Innovation Zone established by

the district. The SRP rated the school as Developing in all of the critical factors. Leadership was new in the 2014-15

academic year, but the SRP noted that the principal has been able to establish key systems and structures that lend

themselves to Innovation status. An Innovation Zone, however, would ensure that the school functions within a larger

network of schools, providing necessary opportunities for collaboration for the principal and the staff at Bessemer, as

well as allowing the district to target resources and support more effectively.

Bessemer has had five principals in the last seven years. The current principal has demonstrated experience turning

around low-performing schools. Additionally, Bessemer and its leadership team have a new and strong partnership

with the district. This school now has the capacity for dramatic improvement and potentially consistent leadership.

For example, the building leadership and teacher leaders have implemented assessment structures to measure

student achievement on a more consistent basis and use that data to inform instruction. The current principal is also

improving communication and collaboration at the school through her development of professional learning

communities. Additionally, she has formed a building leadership team that has representatives from all grade levels

and content areas. This team meets with the principal and instructional coach to review data and discuss the quality

of the program implementation that is already embedded. This team then works with their grade level teammates to

access data and use that data to improve instruction and student learning.

The district began a STEM alignment process in 2013 to implement a district-wide system of schools that would feed

students from STEM-focused elementary schools (including Bessemer Academy) into high school programs. As a

result, the district currently supports Bessemer in a number of ways, including through the sharing of resources. This

support has enabled the school to create a computer lab for the middle school, staff a technology position in the

building, and offer professional development around the Project Lead the Way programs. Additionally, the district has

provided opportunities for collaboration between the district’s technology education facilitator and teachers at the

high school, middle school, and elementary school level. During the SRP site visit, stakeholders reported that the

district is putting clear structures in place that are much stronger than they were even a year ago.

The SRP found that Bessemer has done a thorough job of implementing STEM-based programming as well as

accessing data from this programming to ensure that the students are continually learning and applying the strategies

that are part of the STEM integration. Innovation status, with the continued support of the district, would assist this

school in effectively continuing the work that has been done over that past year.


The State Review Panel does not recommend management by a private or public entity other than the district

because there is no evidence that school leadership is lacking in effectiveness. In fact, evidence indicates that the

current leadership has implemented significant improvement strategies that have strong foundational structures that,

given time, should produce dramatic improvement. Pueblo 60 has hired a ‘hands on’ superintendent who is visiting

each of their schools. The district has reorganized (based on new leadership) and now has much more targeted

supports such as instructional coaches to work with teachers to improve classroom instruction, and an assessment

coordinator who works directly with those instructional coaches to improve data collection and analysis , a big shift

from the supports that they received in the past. The principal is supported by weekly meetings with the principal

supervisor, whose job it is to oversee programming implementation, answer policy/procedure questions, and to

support the principal with staffing issues. The principal also engages in monthly meetings with the superintendent.

The SRP believes that the current district leadership is demonstrating the capacity to support the school effectively;

therefore additional management by an outside entity is not recommended.

The State Review Panel does not recommend conversion to charter status. The SRP found that Bessemer is

Developing in all of the critical areas, including its leadership, infrastructure, readiness and capacity of personnel to

affect positive student outcomes, capacity to engage productively with external partners, and capacity for positive

returns on state investments. These findings do not align with conversion to a charter. When Bessemer was converted

into a K-8 in 2013, the elementary school remained a neighborhood school while the middle school was given ‘choice’

status by the district, and now permits families to choose Bessemer for their STEM offerings. Additionally, the district

and the school have already put improvement strategies in place to make Bessemer a STEM magnet school and a

feeder school to the STEM high school. The district is working towards the creation of an Innovation Zone, and has

already implemented most of the foundational structures and staff training to make this a successful venture. If the

school were converted to a charter, they would lose they key district supports that they currently receive from the

district, including the Project Lead the Way programming, leadership coaching and mentoring, and other district-wide

professional development opportunities available to the school’s staff.

Finally, the State Review Panel does not recommend closure as an option for Bessemer because the school serves a

unique community. The school has a high population of low income students and has successfully implemented

support services to target the specific needs of this group. These supports include school supplies for families who

cannot afford them, food assistance during the holidays, and incentives to reward students who make academic and

behavioral improvements. Bessemer continues to assess the needs of the students and the surrounding community.

As needs arise or shift, the school is dedicated to ensuring services are targeted and refined. The SRP found evidence

of early returns on the strategic implementations that have been put in place. For example, a focus on horizontally

and vertically aligned reading and writing programming has already shown evidence of improvement based on data

reviews from the technology based programs. Additionally, the SRP noted that the other schools in the area are not

performing better. When looking at the surrounding elementary and middle schools, all are either in Turnaround or

Priority Improvement status, with the exception of two, which are in Improvement. Students will not benefit by being

redistributed to those schools. None of the schools has the capacity to absorb Bessemer’s entire student population.

As a result, students would have to be divided among the different schools, which would create a splintering within

the student population and the supporting community. Many of the parents and grandparents attended Bessemer,

and although the school is not currently performing at acceptable levels, it is a source of pride and connection for the


community. Finally, the current principal has turnaround experience in low performing schools. Although she is only

in her first year, she has already put in structures to ensure improvement in classroom instruction and student

achievement growth. There is a newly implemented PBIS system in place that is aligned to a redefined discipline

matrix; this was designed to improve behavior in and out of the classroom, enabling teachers to focus more on

instruction and less on managing distractions. Finally, the current leader is a ‘no nonsense’ individual who is

committed to changing things. She is actively making staffing changes, replacing staff that do not show adequate

proficiency to affect positive student outcomes, and recruiting staff that have the experience and desire to work with

the population at Bessemer.

State Review Panel Site Visit Feedback Form 2015

© 2015 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Site Visit Feedback Form - 1

Purpose: The State Review Panel (SRP, or the Panel) was created by the Accountability Act of 2009 to provide a critical evaluation of the state’s lowest-

performing schools and districts’ plans for dramatic action and provide recommendations to the Commissioner and the State Board of Education. The

Panel’s work is informed by a review of documents (e.g., Unified Improvement Plan) and, in some cases, by a site visit. The site visit component was added

in 2013 to strengthen panelists’ understanding of the conditions in the schools and districts that are further along on the accountability clock. The

expectation is that the site visit will inform their recommendations to the Commissioner and the State Board of Education about potential actions at the

end of the accountability clock.

Prior to arriving on site, panelists conducted a document review aligned to the six key areas in the Accountability Act. The results of this review were shared

with all members of the site visit team and helped inform the team’s work during the visit. On site at the school/district, the site visit team used evidence

collected through classroom observations, focus groups, interviews, and document review to come to consensus on capacity levels in relation to the six key

areas. This report presents the school/district’s capacity levels in relation to the six key areas and a summary of evidence for each. Reviewer Name(s): Cindy Shane and Lisa Gjellum Date: May 1, 2015 Form: [ ] Individual [X] Consensus

District Name/Code: Pueblo 60/2690 School Name/Code: Bessemer Academy/0822

SRP Site Visit Summary (complete using ratings from the following pages) Capacity Level:

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Developing

2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Developing

3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance.

Developing

4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with and benefit from the assistance provided by an external partner. Effective

5. There is likelihood of positive returns on state investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing.

Developing

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. Yes



Capacity Level Rubric

The site visit team will use the following guidance to select a capacity level for each key question. Note that the quality standard for each capacity level is based

on the extent to which the site visit team finds multiple types and multiple sources of evidence related to the adoption and/or implementation of a practice or

system AND the extent to which the site visit team finds evidence of high levels of adoption and/or implementation of a practice or system.

Capacity Level Quality Standard

Not Effective Evidence indicates that the key question is not a practice or system that has been adopted and/or implemented at the school/district, or that the level of adoption/implementation does not improve the school/district’s effectiveness.

Developing Evidence indicates that the key question is a practice or system that is developing at the school/district, but that it has not yet been implemented at a level that has begun to improve the school/district’s effectiveness, OR that the impact of the key action on the effectiveness of the school/district cannot yet be determined.

Effective Evidence indicates that the key question is a practice or system that has been adopted at the school, and is implemented at a level that has begun to improve the school/district’s effectiveness.

Highly Effective Evidence indicates that the key question is a practice or system that has been fully adopted at the school, and is implemented at a level that has had a demonstrably positive impact on the school/district’s effectiveness.

Exte

nt

to w

hic

h S

PR

Tea

m F

ind

s M

ult

iple

Typ

es a

nd

Mu

ltip

le S

ou

rces

of

Evid

ence

Extent to which SPR Team Finds Evidence of High

Levels of Adoption and/or Implementation

Evidence Relating to Strength of

Adoption/Implementation

Key:

Not Effective:

Developing:

Effective:

Highly Effective



SRP Evaluation Based on Site Visit

State Review Panel Criteria Claims & Evidence

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

1.1: Leadership acts as a change agent to drive dramatic achievement gains.

Leadership communicates a relentless commitment to the school/district turnaround.

Leadership makes data-driven changes to the academic program and organization to promote dramatic achievement gains.

Leadership conveys clear expectations for performance for all stakeholders, including leadership, teachers, students, and partners.

Leadership acts as a change agent to drive achievement gains, and new,

clear expectations for all stakeholders are beginning to make an impact

on classroom instruction and student learning.

Building leadership (the principal, dean of students, and instructional coach) and teachers reported that there are very high expectations for the teachers and students. No complacency is accepted by the school leadership and teachers are expected to improve classroom instruction. The goal is to be at Performance status within 3 years.

Teachers reported that there is a new vertically aligned reading

curriculum building wide. When hired, the new district

superintendent visited the building and reviewed the resources that

were being used in reading and math. The reading curriculum was

replaced and the cost was absorbed by the district. The teachers

expressed excitement, especially since it was supported by the

Superintendent.

Building leadership and teachers reported that the new philosophy of

‘Right tools with the right training’ is aligned to the improvement

goals in the UIP. Training in all new curriculum and technology based

supplemental resources is expected for all new staff, and will be

provided by the district at the building prior to the start of school.

This expectation is connected to contracts for everyone who will be

teaching at Bessemer next year. This was confirmed by a review of

the draft professional development calendar for 2015-2016.

There have been 29 PD opportunities provided this year as evidenced

by the PD calendar and the UIP. Topics covered the new reading

curriculum, the new STEM programming, and the new PBIS system

expectations. Several of the PD opportunities were optional and

provided as supplemental extensions for the staff. These trainings

1.2: Leadership analyzes data to identify and address high priority challenges.

Leadership communicates data trends and issues, ensures timely access to data, and models and facilitates data use.

Leadership first concentrates on a limited number of priorities to achieve early, visible wins.

Leadership openly shares results and holds staff accountable for results and effective use of data.

Leadership involves teachers in making and implementing meaningful decisions and policies that guide continuous school improvement.

Leadership targets resources (e.g., funding, materials, time, staff) toward the school's instructional framework and goals, treats resources flexibly, and implements focused improvement efforts with a focus on early wins.

1.3: Leadership establishes high expectations for student learning and behavior.

The school/district holds high expectations for academic learning.

Educators set high expectations for learning and clearly convey these to students.

Educators convey that students are responsible for raising their achievement and encourage their participation in learning.

The school provides a safe environment to support students’ learning and, in the case of a virtual school, ensures that students’ interactions between and among themselves and school staff are respectful and supportive.

Leadership ensures that school’s physical environment is clean, orderly, and safe.



and the supplemental sessions were confirmed by teachers. Building

leadership expressed a concern that this large amount of PD

necessitates a great deal of coaching and monitoring. They explained

that follow through by the building administration would be essential

for teacher improvement. Classroom supports for modeling, data

collection and review, classroom management, and lesson planning is

facilitated by the new instructional coach.

Leadership is analyzes data to identify and addresses high priority

challenges.

Teachers confirmed that school leadership shares data with teams on

a consistent basis to show trends and areas that need additional

supports. They explained that teachers are held accountable through

the connection of student growth and achievement data to their

evaluations and continued employment.

Teachers and leadership reported that new programming was

brought in this year with Title I, STEM resources, and grant monies.

New programming support, and PD was provided for - Rubicon

Writing Rubric; Kronos; SIS system trainings; Six minute Fluency;

Burst; Alpine data system; Think Central; Journey’s / Collections

Literacy; SuccessMaker Reading and Math; Best First Math and

Project Lead the Way. All of the technology based programs have

built in data collection/reporting components.

Teachers and building leadership reported that teams are learning to

refine the collection and review of relevant data to assess short term

improvement. The use of the built in data collection systems from the

content programs allow the teachers to observe student

achievement on a weekly basis. The use of the new writing rubric

assists the teachers in providing immediate feedback to students and

guides the need for re-teaching.

Leadership is beginning to establish high expectations for student

learning and behavior.



All stakeholders confirmed that the school has adopted new

guidelines for behavior and discipline, with supports from a

newly developed PBIS (positive behavior intervention supports)

system. A new Dean of Students was hired to address discipline

issues and support teachers and students. The parent/student

handbook contains clear expectations for attendance,

achievement and behavior. Students are to attend school daily

unless there is a medical emergency or other reason for missing.

A new behavior system with an aligned discipline matrix was put

into place for the first time this year. The basic focus is for

students to interact with each other and adults in a respectful

manner, complying with reasonable requests, and completing

lessons and activities assigned by their teachers. Appropriate

student behavior was observed during classroom visits in 72% of

classrooms. In the majority of classrooms, students were

engaged and participating in the lesson, answering questions,

completing written work, completing internet research steps,

and communicating with peers in groups. In some observed

classrooms, however, students were talking during instruction,

moving about the classroom without being directed or re-

directed, and, in some instances, were even observed sleeping.

Building leaders and teachers confirm the creation and use of

student data folders that are used for students to track their own

data and determine if there is personal growth.





2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

2.1: The district leads intentional, strategic efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the academic program and the sustainability of the organization.

The district/superintendent ensures ongoing leadership development for emerging and current school leaders with a focus on building leadership capacity to lead turnaround efforts and sustain improvement.

The district/superintendent provides adequate oversight in schools’ work to deliver the curriculum, monitors instruction on a regular basis, and provides adequate support and feedback to principals to improve instruction.

The district leads intentional, strategic efforts to ensure the effectiveness

of the academic program and the sustainability of the organization.

The building leadership reported that the principal meets with the

district superintendent at least once a month and has done so since

being hired. District leadership indicated that this meeting time was

designed to align district goals and the school’s goals by ensuring that

there was clear and consistent communication of expectations with the

principal. Additionally, the meetings enable the parties to review

progress toward the revised 2014-2015 school goals. The building

principal meets with her direct supervisor 1-2 times a week. These

meetings consist of discussions on progress made toward the goals that

the district had set for this principal. These goals include staff

development and support for the new programming, as well as the

district’s expectations for the processes used for staff evaluation and

possible dismissal. District leadership explained that the principal’s direct

supervisor uses these meetings to support and encourage the leadership

of this building and help them develop next steps.

Teacher’s reported, and building leadership confirmed, that the district

superintendent was the person who recognized the need for a new

reading program, oversaw the purchasing of resources, and arranged for

the professional development needed for teacher effectiveness. The

program was implemented in its entirety beginning in November of

2014-2015. The curriculum includes built in formative assessments, a

scope and sequence that aligns vertically through 8th grade, and has an

extension component for differentiation for higher level learners.

2.2: School/district leadership has a strong focus on recruiting and retaining talent; creates and implements systems to select, develop, and retain effective teachers and staff who can drive dramatic student gains; evaluates all staff; and dismisses those who do not meet professional standards and expectations.

Leadership has created and/or implemented an organizational and staffing structure that will drive dramatic student gains.

Leadership recruits and hires teachers with commitment to, and competence in, the school’s philosophy, design, and instructional framework (e.g., trained and experienced with curriculum, certified/licensed to teach, qualified to teach subject area).

Leadership ensures the evaluation of all staff, and dismisses those who do not meet professional standards and expectations.

Leadership provides teachers with active, intense, and sustained professional development (PD), including guidance on data analysis and instructional practice, aligned to school improvement efforts.

PD is informed by ongoing analysis of student performance, instructional data, and educators’ learning needs.

PD requires teachers to demonstrate their learned competency in a tangible and assessable way.

PD engages teachers in active learning and provides follow-up sessions and ongoing support for teachers’ continued learning.

The quality of professional development delivery is regularly monitored, evaluated, and improved.



2.3: School/district leadership ensures that the school/ district has sound financial and operational systems and processes

School/district leadership ensures that the organizational structure supports essential school functions, and that roles and responsibilities of all individuals at the school are clear.

School/district leadership has established effective means of communicating with school staff.

School/district leadership ensures that the school meets all compliance requirements and deadlines set by the state, including the submission of school improvement plans, financial statements, school audit, calendar, and student attendance.

School/district leadership effectively manages the school budget and cash flow, and there is a plan for long-term financial sustainability.

The school/district leadership effectively manages operations (e.g., food services, transportation, school facilities).

The building leadership reported that there is a district Service Learning

Center for teachers, interventionists and leaders. Teachers can access

additional resources for use in their classrooms, receive supplemental

training or review on programs used in their buildings

The school and district leadership is beginning to create and implement

systems to select, develop, and retain effective teachers and staff who can

drive dramatic student gains; and dismisses those who do not meet

professional standards and expectations.

The building and district leadership reported that 13 teachers will be

non-renewed for next year due to ineffective practice and refusal to

integrate building initiatives. This was observed by the site visit team:

one member of a focus group was removed during the interview and

given non-renewal papers and then returned to the interview. Building leaders and teachers confirmed that hiring for new and

replacement positions have been a joint task force effort of the district and the building leadership. Those recruited from job fairs will come to the building from the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs teacher program and from Teach for America. Selected candidates showed a desire to work with or have experience working with at risk populations.

Teachers expressed their desire that administration needs to find

teachers who have a passion for the population at Bessemer, who know

what they are doing in the classroom, and have the content knowledge.

Both school and district leadership confirmed that they are actively

recruiting only those candidates who have internship/teaching

experience in working within high poverty, at-risk schools. All

stakeholder groups agreed that it is essential for transparency so that

teachers know what they are getting and are willing to put in the time

necessary to see improvement.

District, school, and teacher leaders confirmed that there is an incentive

system in place to reward highly effective teachers for growth in student

achievement and longevity of obtaining adequate growth.

2.4: School/district leadership provides effective instructional leadership.

School leaders ensure that the school implements a coherent, comprehensive, and aligned curriculum.

School leaders ensure that curriculum, instruction, and assessments are aligned with state standards, aligned with each other, and coordinated both within and across grade levels.

School leaders ensure that instructional materials are selected and/or developed in accordance with a school-wide instructional framework and aligned with established curriculum standards.

School le aders ensure the curriculum is periodically reviewed and revisions are made accordingly.

School leaders provide meaningful feedback on teachers’ instructional planning and practice.

Leaders regularly provide meaningful feedback on instructional planning.

Leaders regularly observe instruction and provide meaningful, timely feedback that helps teacher improve their practice.

School leaders provide conditions that support a school-wide data culture.

Teachers have easy access to varied, current, and accurate student and instructional data.

Teachers are provided time to collect, enter, query, analyze, and represent student data and use tools that help them act on results.



School leaders ensure that all teachers receive professional development in data use (e.g., how to access, read, and interpret a range of data reports; frame questions for inquiry; analyze data, assessment literacy, use data tools and resources).

Leadership and teachers reported that there have been multiple

opportunities for professional development provided by the district and

at the building. There are also follow-up sessions offered for

reinforcement. The PD opportunities are all connected to the building’s

action plan. The district has provided opportunities for select teachers to

get training on the Project Lead the Way and on the new reading

curriculum that was purchased by the district. All other trainings were

provided at the school with district personnel involvement (content

facilitators and assessment coordinator) based on and aligned to the UIP

action plan.

The school leadership is beginning to provide effective instructional

leadership.

Teachers reported and leadership confirmed that the newly hired instructional coach is providing mentoring and coaching to improve instructional practices used in the classroom, as well as differentiation strategies and effective lesson planning. This is a building-based position where the coach provides training on best practice for instruction, classroom observations, and meets with grade level teams during a weekly plan time to provide feedback (engagement, student participation, classroom management, lesson objectives tied to instruction, and implementation of formative assessments) based on the observation and provide additional training if necessary.

The new reading and Project Lead the Way curricula are vertically aligned for K-8 application and aligned to the Common Core State Standards. Teachers reported that the new reading programming was acquired to replace curriculum that had been in the building since the 1990’s and that many of the supplemental components were no longer available.

Teachers, school leadership, and district leadership confirmed that the district assessment coordinator is working with the instructional coach to ensure that the teaching staff at Bessemer is being trained on how to use the Alpine data system to easily access student data in order to be able

2.5: The school provides high quality instruction.

Classroom interactions and organization ensure a supportive, highly structured learning climate.

Classroom instruction intentional, engaging, and challenging for all students.

The school has created a performance-driven classroom culture in which teachers effectively use data to make decisions about daily instruction and the organization of students.



to see where they need to make adjustments to their instruction to achieve academic improvement.

The teacher handbook schedule shows, and teachers confirmed, that there is time built into their day when the students are attending music, physical education, and intervention classes that is dedicated to PLC and planning purposes. There was no documentation provided to indicate the structures of these meetings or what was being accomplished during that time.

The school is not providing high quality instruction in the majority of classes.

Classroom visit data indicated that quality instruction and rigor was observed in 33% of classrooms. Some observed classrooms had learning targets and objectives posted. Additionally, teachers engaged students through questioning that required a more rigorous Depth of Knowledge response. Responses required students to infer, describe, and predict. However, in the majority of classrooms, questioning was focused on identification and/or recall, requiring students mostly to repeat what the teacher had just said.

In the majority of classrooms, student disruptions were minimal or non-existent. In many observed instances, teachers addressed disruptions quickly. However, in cases where there were observed student disruptions (talking during instruction, moving about the room, refusing to follow directions), these were not corrected or even addressed. For example, in one classroom, a student was sleeping and the teacher told the rest of the students not to disturb the child.

Finally, all stakeholders informed the team that many teachers are not following instructional initiatives. There are teachers who refuse to implement the new behavior system, to develop learning targets, or to implement the use of formative assessments





3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

3.1: Leadership establishes clear, targeted and measurable goals designed to promote student performance.

Leadership communicates clear and focused goals that are understood by all staff.

Data on progress toward goals drives organizational and instructional decision making.

Educators understand their responsibilities for achieving goals.

Leadership maintains school-wide focus on achieving established goals.

Leadership allocates resources in alignment with goals and critical needs.

Progress toward school goals is shared regularly across the school.

Leadership is beginning to establish clear, targeted and measurable

goals designed to promote student performance through continual

review of student performance data and updates to the UIP.

District leadership reported that the original UIP was written by the

former principal and that the new building administration, along

with teacher leaders, have completed all of the updates, which

include a revision and refinement of targeted goals that are designed

to accelerate student growth.

Teachers and leaders reported that they clearly understand what

their responsibilities are and the roles they play in improving student

achievement. The parents and community member reported that

the new administration is placing a focused emphasis on student

growth and achievement.

As stated above, teachers and leadership reported that new

programming was brought in this year with Title I, STEM resources,

and grant monies. New programming support and PD for - Rubicon

Writing Rubric; Kronos; SIS system trainings; Six minute Fluency;

Burst; Alpine data system; Think Central; Journey’s / Collections

Literacy; SuccessMaker Reading and Math; Best First Math and

Project Lead the Way. All of the technology based programs have

built in data collection/reporting components. These resources are

aligned to the UIP goals and to each targeted major improvement

area. Progress toward school goals can be tracked more frequently

using the data collection components in the new programming.

Teachers and building leadership review this data during PLCs and

plan times and discuss areas that need additional instruction or

complete re-teaching.

3.2: Leadership adjusts implementation of the action plan in response to systematic review of data.

Leadership has established systems to measure and report interim results toward goals.

There is regular progress monitoring of performance and implementation data and, as appropriate, results lead to elimination of tactics that do not work.

Benchmarks are used to assess progress toward goals; goals are adjusted as progress is made.

3.3: The

school/district

engages the

community and

families in support of

students’ learning

school improvement

efforts.

School/district includes parents/guardians in cultivating a culture of high expectations for students’ learning and their consistent support of students’ efforts.

School/district invites family participation in school activities (e.g., volunteering in classrooms or on committees; attendance at performances, sports events, organizational meetings) and regularly solicits their input.

School/district offers workshops and other opportunities for parents/guardians to learn about home practices that support student learning.

Educators communicate with parents/guardians about instructional programs and students’ progress.



All stakeholders report that there have been new intervention staff

added to support struggling students.

The school engages the community and families in support of students’

learning school improvement efforts.

Parents and community reported that the school requests their

input on support programs, tutoring, and intervention opportunities

for students.

The building is working with the community to support their PBIS

system through rewards, incentives, field trips, and supplies and that

the school encourages parent and community participation in

activities, concerts, forums, parent nights, and in volunteer

opportunities. This has gone from being an unstructured event to a

focused and purposeful connection to support the building.





4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with and benefit from the assistance provided by an external partner. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [X] Effective [ ] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

4.1: The school/district collaborates effectively with existing external partners.

The school/district seeks expertise from external partners, as appropriate (i.e., for professional development, direct support for students).

The school/district ensures that roles and responsibilities of existing partners are clear.

There are designated school/district personnel to coordinate and manage partnerships.

The school collaborates effectively with existing external partners and

leverages existing partnerships in support of student learning.

The district and building leadership reported and parents confirmed

that the new administration is relentless at recruiting and connecting

with community partners such as the Pueblo Poverty Coalition,

Central High School, Colorado State University at Pueblo, Pueblo

Community College, and a local business owner who donates school

supplies, to enhance the support and opportunities for the student

populations.

School leadership and teachers reported that the district is providing

training and support for the implementation of the PLTW – Gateway

to Technology programming as well as connecting Bessemer

teachers to the Central High School teachers who are implementing

the program there.

Teachers and parents reported that several local business owners

get together each year and make Thanksgiving and Christmas

baskets for needy families, as well as incentives for students for

improved attendance and academic improvement.

The community and building administration reported that the

partnership supports provided to the building are purposeful and

aligned to specific goals for improvement (i.e., attendance, academic

effort, perseverance).

4.2: The school/district leverages existing partnerships to support of student learning.

The school/district maximizes existing partners’ efforts in support of improvement efforts.

All externally provided professional development is aligned to improvement efforts.





5. There is likelihood of positive returns on state investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

5.1: Leadership monitors the return on investment of specific improvement initiatives, and uses that data to inform decision-making.

Leadership identifies turnaround strategies and implements programs/initiatives designed to improve student performance.

Leadership assesses the cost and impact (effect on student achievement and number of students served) of each program/initiative to determine its academic return on investment.

Leadership makes decisions regarding continuation or discontinuation of programs/initiatives based on this analysis.

Leadership establishes systems and structures to support regular and ongoing monitoring.

Leadership is beginning to monitor the return on investment of specific

improvement initiatives and to use data to inform decision-making.

The district reported that they have directed the current administration

to focus on staffing and climate and culture with achievement goals

being next year’s focus.

The school leadership and district leaders reported that the new building

leaders are using short term data from the new program data sources to

track results toward UIP goals. The data is also used to update the UIP

for resubmission to CDE.

The district assessment coordinator and the instructional coach reported

that student program data is being used in conversations with teachers

to identify areas for professional development.

5.2: Leadership is responsive to feedback and uses resources effectively.

Leadership seeks feedback on improvement plans.

Leadership integrates feedback into future improvement efforts.

Leadership seeks resources aligned to its improvement efforts and programs/initiatives with high academic return on investment.

Any additional resources received (i.e., specialized grant funding) are aligned, strategic, and showing evidence of results.





6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. [X] Yes [ ] No

Considerations:

6.1: The school/district is mission-driven and its mission and vision meet a unique need.

All stakeholders share an understanding of, and commitment to, the mission and vision.

School/district programs reflect the mission and vision.

The mission and vision guide decisions about teaching and learning.

The mission and vision meet the needs of an identified student population

The school/district is mission-driven and its mission and vision meet a

unique need.

All stakeholders reported that they believe that this administration team

has the right focus on student growth and the belief that all kids can

achieve at high levels and that there is a true commitment to improve

what is being provided to the student population for enhanced learning.

The mission at Bessemer is to have 100% of students demonstrate

proficiency in academic and social behaviors and give the students a safe

and engaging climate. The implementation of the new discipline matrix

and PBIS system is a first step to developing social equity and a safe

climate.

The Pueblo 60 website lists Bessemer as Pueblo 60’s STEM magnet

school. The middle level grades are not considered a neighborhood

school but a choice school for STEM. The inclusion of Project Lead the

Way programming is aligned for K – 8 implementation and feeds into the

Central High School Engineering program.

There are no other viable options for enrolled students that will likely lead

to better outcomes.

Information pulled from the Colorado Department of Education website

and the Pueblo City Schools website indicates that other similar school in

the surrounding areas could not absorb the population from Bessemer

as they are at similar capacity numbers. The district as a whole has

multiple schools in the same performance situation, two of which would

be those closest to this boundary area are in turnaround status.

6.2: There are no other viable options for enrolled students that will likely lead to better outcomes.

There are limited other school options available (e.g., online, charter, district).

The school/district serves an isolated and/or remote community.

Closure would have a significant negative impact on the community.

Comparison schools do not promote better student outcomes.



The district reported that the new superintendent will be making a

presentation to the state school board of education about creating an

Innovation Zone, with Bessemer being part of that designation.

Pueblo City Schools website confirms that Bessemer is already

implementing Project Lead the Way, is already pairing with Central High

School, and is designated as a STEM Renewable Energy themed magnet

school.

The CDE website shows that there are already 95 middle school students

choosing into Bessemer and receiving PLTW - Gateway to Technology

instruction in design and modeling, automation, and robotics.

State Review Panel Document Review

Feedback Form 2015

© 2015 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Document Review Feedback Form - 1

Purpose: To critically evaluate the school or district plan (i.e., Unified Improvement Plan). This report will be used as one element of a body of evidence to inform actions that may be undertaken by the Commissioner of Education and the State Board of Education.

Reviewer Names: Lisa Gjellum and Cindy Shane Date: April 28, 2015

District Name/Code: Pueblo City 60/2690 School Name/Code: Bessemer Elementary/0822

Performance Trends Trend Trend

(based on % of pts. on DPF/SPF) Up Flat Down Varies None Up Flat Down Varies None

Overall X Growth Gaps OR Student

Engagement X

Achievement X PWR (District/High School Only)

Growth X

SRP Summary (complete using ratings from the following worksheets) Capacity Level:

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Developing

2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Developing

3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance.

Developing

4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with, and benefit from, the assistance provided by an external partner. Not Effective

5. There is likelihood of positive returns on state investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing.

Not Effective

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. Yes

Based on your professional judgment, will the plan result in dramatic enough change to pull the school/district off the accountability clock if it is implemented as written?

[ ] Yes [X] No [ ] Not sure, more information is needed. Specify the additional information required.

Based on your professional judgment, what is your overall level of concern regarding this school/district’s ability to significantly improve results?

Level of Concern: [X] High [ ] Moderate [ ] Low [ ] Cannot determine. Specify the additional information required.


Feedback Form 2015


Overall Comments:

Bessemer Academy put in a plane a new principal this year (2014-2015) and they have added a dean of students, instructional coach, and a math interventionist. 20% of grade level teachers are new to Bessemer this year. Bessemer has an overall student-to-teacher ratio of 15:1 which is lower than the CO average of 16:1 and yet there is no evidence that this ratio has been used as an opportunity to increase interventions. 25% of the grade level teachers who returned to Bessemer from last year switched grade levels this year. There is no documentation as to whether this movement was a strategic move to support achievement, or if there were other issues being addressed. Bessemer was awarded a new SIS Grant, and are in the 2nd year of a (S.T.E.M.) grant. They created a S.T.E.M. Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA) position in order to help implement the new Project Lead the Way (PLTW) programming. With such a significant number of staff providing for 463 students, it is concerning that there has not been significant growth. Minority students continue to score well below minimum standards. The review of root cause analysis does not show an in depth look at what has kept this building from having any significant growth in the last 5 years.

With the few exceptions of growth in grades 6, 7, and 8 in reading and grade 4 in math there is an overall downward trend in data for the past three years in reading, math, and writing. Growth is low and well below the state expectations. The downward trend in data has been occurring for more than five years, yet the action steps in the Unified Improvement Plan (UIP) do not appear to support the high priority changes nor the sense of urgency needed within the state’s accountability clock.

Bessemer Academy has a center-based program for the deaf and hard of hearing, however there is no indication that there is any focus on the special learning needs of the hearing impaired. Minority enrollment is 84% of the student body (majority Hispanic), and the average daily attendance rate is 75%, which is of concern. Referral data indicates that structures for behavior expectations need to be reviewed and revised.


Feedback Form 2015


Areas that should be explored more deeply through an on-site visit:

Are high expectations for students and teachers evident in classroom observations?

Is there a common instructional method to writing from class to class?

Is there evidence of progress monitoring throughout the school?

Is the parent communication log consistent and updated teacher to teacher?

Are instructional lessons in alignment to common core standards and are lesson plans monitored?

How is the funding from the S.T.E.M. Grant and the SIS Grant being used to improve achievement?

How are the newly implemented programs being monitored for achievement impact?

Professional development for leadership in academics and leadership – listed as ‘in-progress’ – what does it look like and how is it connected to achievement?

Pk-8 systems provide a unique opportunity for vertical alignment of content and standards implementation – is any occurring?

How is the effectiveness and efficiency of the new MTSS system being monitored?, and how is it impacting what is happening in the classroom? (ie. Differentiation, flexible grouping, learning targets, etc.)


Feedback Form 2015


Capacity Level Rubric

The site visit team will use the following guidance to select a capacity level for each key question. Note that the quality standard for each capacity level is based

on the extent to which the site visit team finds multiple types and multiple sources of evidence related to the adoption and/or implementation of a practice or

system AND the extent to which the site visit team finds evidence of high levels of adoption and/or implementation of a practice or system.

Capacity Level Quality Standard

Not Effective Evidence indicates that the key question is not a practice or system that has been adopted and/or implemented at the school/district, or that the level of adoption/implementation does not improve the school/district’s effectiveness.

Developing Evidence indicates that the key question is a practice or system that is developing at the school/district, but that it has not yet been implemented at a level that has begun to improve the school/district’s effectiveness, OR that the impact of the key action on the effectiveness of the school/district cannot yet be determined.

Effective Evidence indicates that the key question is a practice or system that has been adopted at the school, and is implemented at a level that has begun to improve the school/district’s effectiveness.

Highly Effective Evidence indicates that the key question is a practice or system that has been fully adopted at the school, and is implemented at a level that has had a demonstrably positive impact on the school/district’s effectiveness.

Evidence Relating to Strength of

Adoption/Implementation

Key:

Not Effective:

Developing:

Effective:

Highly Effective

Exte

nt

to w

hic

h S

PR

Tea

m F

ind

s M

ult

iple

Typ

es a

nd

Mu

ltip

le S

ou

rces

of

Evid

ence

Extent to which SPR Team Finds Evidence of High

Levels of Adoption and/or Implementation


Feedback Form 2015


SRP Evaluation Based on Unified Improvement Plan and Other Available Documents

State Review Panel Criteria Source(s) of Evidence

Notes

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

1.1 Leadership acts as a change agent to drive dramatic achievement gains.

Leadership makes changes that deviate from organization norms or rules – not just for the sake of change, but to intentionally achieve positive outcomes.

Major improvement strategies and action plan

There have been significant additions to the staff this year. A new Principal was brought in this year as well as the addition of a Dean of students. According to the documents reviewed and the online review from the district, this is the 5th principal since 2011

The UIP includes thorough data analysis with effective connections between data analysis, priority challenges, and root causes. Benchmarks need to be refined; however, there are excessive root causes, which limits the ability of faculty to monitor the school’s improvement. Despite efforts to design a plan that would improve student performance by using better data analysis, greater identification of root causes, focused improvement strategies, and measurable action steps, the results of Bessemer’s efforts shows a decrease in achievement over the past four years. The school action plan does not include a series of detailed, step-by-step actions with a month-by-month timeline to provide a closer monitoring of implementation strategies and action steps. The number of strategies is ambitious and possibly very

The degree to which leadership has been continuous over time. Any change(s) in leadership is utilized to activate and sustain dramatic change.

Human Resources data

1.2 Leadership analyzes data to identify and address high priority challenges.

Leadership analyzes data about the organization’s performance to identify high-priority problems.

Data analysis and data narrative

Leadership focuses on a limited number of changes that will achieve visible wins for the organization.

Priority performance challenge(s), root cause(s), major improvement strategies and action plan

Leadership openly shares results and holds staff accountable for results. (Assessment data --both interim and summative-- and implementation benchmark data are described in the plan(s), including how data will be used to drive described work.)

Target setting form, Action Plan


Feedback Form 2015


1.3 Leadership establishes high expectations for student learning and behavior.

Elements of climate and culture are identified and addressed in the plan(s).

Data Narrative, Root Cause Analysis, Action Planning

daunting for staff. Some benchmarks lack evidence as to how teacher implementation will be monitored for effectiveness.

In the update of the UIP, Major Improvement Strategy 1 was revised to include the development of clear behavioral and rigorous academic expectations throughout the building. Documentation indicates that this strategy was due to the continued increase in behavior referrals (8%)/suspensions (7%) over the past three years. There is no evidence to show if the addition of the Dean of Students has impacted this trend since this is the first year for that position.


Feedback Form 2015


2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

2.1: The district leads intentional, strategic efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the academic program and the sustainability of the organization.

Others inside and outside the organization are contributing their effort and see a clear picture of success and its benefits. (Evidence of internal and external stakeholder involvement in development and implementation of UIP – for example PLC’s, building leadership teams)

Data Narrative, Action Plan

The UIP was done in conjunction with the entire building staff, building leadership team, and professional learning communities (PLC). All stakeholders reviewed and provided input as to the root causes and trends based on the past three years of data.

It is unclear as to what, if any, follow-up has occurred regarding the use of the UIP to drive decision making and actions to improve student performance. There is no evidence that the UIP was revised after the final review and feedback from CDE.

20% of grade level teachers are new to Bessemer this year. 25% of the grade level teachers who returned to Bessemer switched grade levels this year There is no evidence or documentation that this turnover was initiated by administration. An instructional coach and a math interventionist was added this year through Title funding. A Project Lead the Way TOSA was also added this year from grant monies. UIP documentation indicates that this position was allocated to support the movement toward a S.T.E.M. magnet school. Although, the following assessments are included in the plan: TCAP, DIBELS, and Galileo, it does not appear that the school has developed the necessary infrastructure for analyzing assessment data to improve instructional strategies. Root Causes stated in the UIP lack the professional development in best first instruction and knowledge of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), and underutilization of the math series assessments to progress monitor instruction. Additionally, no information is provided as to if/how data findings are used for improving instruction and student performance. How the effectiveness of improved instruction will be evaluated and monitored is not included in the UIP nor in any of the other available documents.

2.2: School/district leadership has a strong focus on recruiting and retaining talent; creates and implements systems to select, develop, and retain effective teachers and staff who can drive dramatic student gains; evaluates all staff; and dismisses those who do not meet professional standards and expectations.

Indication of strategic staff changes, particularly at the supervisory level, to support dramatic improvement efforts.

Data Narrative, Action plan

2.3: School/district leadership ensures that the school/district has sound financial and operational systems and processes

Assessments (both interim and summative) and their results are identified and appropriately described in the plan(s).

Data Narrative, Target Setting, Action Plan

2.4: School/district leadership provides effective instructional leadership.

Instructional needs and associated assessments are identified as a mechanism to address performance needs.

Organizational routines are established that include ongoing data analysis to improve student learning. (Evidence of interim measures and how they will be used to monitor results.)

Target Setting (interim measures) and Action Plan (implementation benchmarks) Data Narrative, Action Plan

2.5: The school provides high quality instruction.

n/a n/a


Feedback Form 2015


3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [X] Developing [ ] Not Effective

Considerations:

3.1: Leadership establishes clear, targeted and measurable goals designed to promote student performance.

The organization focused on high goals rather than on partial success. When a goal is met, the bar is likely to be raised.

Previous Targets Form, Target Setting Form and Action Plan, Previous UIPs (if applicable)

A sense of urgency and intensity does not permeate the UIP. Descriptions of action steps designed to accomplish the school goals lack the focused, detailed, specificity and unified systems to address the magnitude of the school’s challenges.

The UIP states that there is quarterly monitoring of teacher/ parent communication, classroom initiatives to improve attendance, parent/teacher home visits, and parent referrals to Response to Intervention, but the document includes no clear explanation on how often these communications take place or how data collected from this is used to assess improvement.

There are action steps that address instruction and assessment. They are as stated:

o Strategy #1 – : Develop and implement a multi-tiered system of support to ensure that students will utilize supports to meet rigorous academic and behavioral expectations

o Strategy #2 - Project based learning training for all teachers and implementation of multi-content PBL school wide

These steps are stated as ongoing with no specific time line or start end date.

The school plans Grade-level specific parent activities to promote grade specific skills and supports for parents and students. These School-wide Parent Involvement activities are held quarterly. The annual Title I Parent Meeting is used to initiate collaborative work on the Unified Improvement Plan with parents. Bessemer fosters partnerships with the Colorado Family Education & Resources (CFERT) ‘Parenting Matters’ initiative, as a satellite venue, for Colorado State University, Fort Collins, which supports the school, families,

The action plan is clear that change is mandatory, not optional. A sense of urgency is evident in the plan and does not include blaming or excuse making. There is a clear sense of ownership for performance and actions.

Action plan (to some extent the data narrative to get a sense of ownership in the root cause analysis)

Action plan is so clear that everyone involved knows specifically what s/he needs to do differently. Evidence that there is alignment throughout the plan and a logical progression of planning built on data.

Entire UIP with particular emphasis on the Action Plan

3.2: Leadership adjusts implementation of the action plan in response to systematic review of data.

Tactics that do not work are strategically eliminated and the plan focuses on tactics that work. The plan focuses limited time and money where they will have the most impact on critical results. Evidence that the plan presents a clear strategy and alignment of resources and a clear change in direction in response to performance.

Action Plan

Systems are set up to measure and report interim results often to enable the rapid discard of failed tactics and increase successful tactics essential for fast results. (Evidence of progress monitoring activities, review of performance and implementation data. The targets/interim measures and activities/implementation benchmarks are framed in a way that can be measured and used to adjust systems as needed.)

Target Setting Form and Action Plan

3.3: The school/district engages the community and families in support of students’ learning school improvement efforts.

Strategies for community and family involvement are incorporated throughout the plan

Parent Involvement Plan is present (for Title I Schools only) and details strategies for involving families to advance student learning.

Action Plan

Parent Involvement Agreement/Compact (Title I Schools only)


Feedback Form 2015


and community through • Parenting information presentations • Parenting Classes • Family Involvement Incentive Programs, School Facebook page and website communications of parent involvement events.


Feedback Form 2015


4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with and benefit from the assistance provided by an external partner. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ ] Developing [X] Not Effective

Considerations:

4.1: The school/district collaborates effectively with existing external partners.

Articulation of roles/responsibilities with external entities (e.g., district level staff, BOCES staff, vendors, CDE) is evident. (District involvement with and support of school is evident.)

Action Plan

The UIP states that there are district support personnel that assist with the review of UIP with CDE and participate in the UIP revisions.

District level instructional Coaches are working with staff on the formative assessment process, as well as how to use the data collected for instructional improvement.

However, there is no evidence of external support; it appears to all be in-house professional development.

4.2: The school/district leverages existing partnerships to support of student learning.

Activities of external entities align with major improvement strategies and performance needs of the school/district (not just a list of services the entity provides).

Action Plan


Feedback Form 2015


5. There is likelihood of positive returns on state investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing. Capacity Level: [ ] Highly Effective [ ] Effective [ ] Developing [X] Not Effective

Considerations:

5.1: Leadership monitors the return on investment of specific improvement initiatives, and uses that data to inform decision-making.

Additional resources provided through specialized grant funding are aligned, strategic and show evidence of positive results. (Districts/schools that have received additional funds.)

Data Narrative, Action Plan

Evidence is lacking as to what grant funds are supporting, other than providing additional FTE (instructional coach, science specialist, PLTW technology specialist, math interventionist), The impact these additional staff will have on Bessemer’s low achievement levels is not known as this is the first year that any of these specialists have been at Bessemer. The school received a School Improvement Grant in 2013 and a STEM Grant in 2013. There is no reviewed documentation that indicates exactly how the SIG funds are being used. The STEM Grant was utilized for Project Based Learning (PBL) professional development and for the PLTW TOSA position.

Teachers will utilize the ‘Math Workshop Model’ strategies learned during professional development (number talks, and math talks) from Math Solutions to increase student understanding of concepts and engagement, which will be supported by the Math Solutions program support consultant supplied by the district.

The former principal wrote the original UIP and the current principal revised the current UIP after receiving feedback from CDE. The revisions were done with stakeholder input and district support personnel involvement, and included the following new action steps: Strategy #1 – : Develop and implement a multi-tiered system of support to ensure that students will utilize supports to meet rigorous academic and behavioral expectations

Strategy #2 - Project based learning training for all teachers and implementation of multi-content PBL school wide.

The evidence is lacking as to whether these action steps have improved instruction and overall student performance due to the limited time frame for focus and implementation. According to the revised UIP and the CDE feedback

5.2: Leadership is responsive to feedback and uses resources effectively.

Identification of resources is aligned and strategic.

Action Plan

(For Districts and Schools previously reviewed by CDE) There is evidence that feedback provided on previous UIPs has been integrated into the current plan.

Previous UIPs and associated feedback


Feedback Form 2015


documents the administration’s revisions addressed state concerns for strategy refinement and alignment of action steps, and the required alignment of available resources.

The district documentation shows a closer alignment of its systemic approach toward improvement with that of the school’s, to include resources and supports.


Feedback Form 2015


6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. [X] Yes [ ] No

Considerations:

6.1: The school/district is mission-driven and its mission and vision meet a unique need.

Population of students served is clearly identified.

Data Narrative

Currently, there are 463 students enrolled in pre-school (three and four year old programs) through eighth grade, and 88% of students receive a free and reduced-priced lunch. Minority students comprise approximately 84% of the enrollment. Average daily attendance rate is 75%. In total, 12% of students have Individual Education Plans. Gifted and Talented students on Advanced Learning Plans comprise 6%, and English Language Learners are 14% of our enrollment.

The mission at Bessemer Academy is to have 100% of students demonstrate proficiency or advanced proficiency in academic and social behaviors, as measured by state and district assessments. All accessible documentation and the revisions to the UIP indicate that all action steps are focused on achieving this goal.

Although the UIP provides a framework for improving student performance, it does not describe what specific assistance will be provided, nor a timeline for actions designed to help improve overall teacher and administrative performance. There is no evidence to support that there is a true sense of urgency for significant academic improvement in this plan. The UIP revisions show a clearer understanding of what is needed to move this building forward and the commitment to addressing the challenges identified during the root cause analysis.

Based on the results of assessment data, students have not demonstrated that they have been empowered to learn and achieve at high levels. Students from diverse backgrounds have not been academically successful on state assessments.

Consideration might be given to closing the school and assisting families in enrolling elsewhere. However, closing Bessemer may not be an option due to transportation issues and space available in other district schools.

6.2 There are no other viable options for enrolled students that will likely lead to better outcomes.

n/a n/a


Feedback Form 2015


Bessemer is the only K-8 STEM magnet school.

All five of the surrounding elementary schools are currently in the same situation as Bessemer (Priority Improvement/Turnaround) on the performance frameworks. The four options for the 6-8 grade population are all currently in Turnaround status. All are servicing similar numbers and socioeconomic populations.