ace 2019-20 phase three: executive summary for schoolswe opened in 2006, we were on the cutting edge...

Powered by AdvancED eProve

10/24/2019 Open

ACE 2019-20 Phase Three: Executive Summary for Schools

Athens-Chilesburg ElementaryMark Rose

930 Jouett Creek DrLexington, Kentucky, 40509

United States of America

Last Modified: Status:

2019-20 Phase Three: Executive Summary for Schools Report - Generated on 01/08/2020

Athens-Chilesburg Elementary


Page 3 of 5

Description of the SchoolDescribe the school's size, community/communities, location, and changes it has experienced in the last three years. Include demographic information about the students, staff, and community at large. What unique features and challenges are associated with the community/communities the school serves?

Athens-Chilesburg Elementary is located in the southern end of Lexington, Kentucky in one of the fastest growing suburbs of the city. The school which opened in 2006 and was built for 650 students and currently houses 630 students. New home construction is growing so rapidly that the school district has already built two schools in close proximity to keep the school at a manageable size. Athens-Chilesburg Elementary (nicknamed ACE) has always been a strong school academically and socially. In the past threeo years, we scored Proficient on KPREP and on the 2018 test, ACE was named as an “Other” category school, and this year we are a 4 STAR school. Our academic successes can be attributed to many factors—an experienced staff with little turnover; a great deal of parental involvement; a student population that sees the value in education; a central office that works to help us provide for all students; and the most incredible PTA ever. An example of our wonderful PTA can be seen in our procurement of technology. When we opened in 2006, we were on the cutting edge with new computers being purchased; projectors in every room; document cameras for all and a few smart boards. During the past 12 years, our district has built multiple new schools and much of ACE’s technology has quickly become outdated. With the help of our PTA, we now have chrome books for 1:1 in grades 1 - 5. The PTA has also purchased 12 Clear Touch boards for use in the classrooms.Redistricting will be the biggest challenge we will face in 2019-2020. Approximately 200 of our students will be moved to other schools and approximately 150 will be moved into our school. This change will reduce our diversity and reduce our percentage of free/reduced students. Plans are being made to address these changes so that ACE can continue to do what it does best—meet the needs of all students who enter the doors.ACE is under new leadership for the 2019 - 2020 school year and the new administration is eager to continue the traditions, while implementing proven strategies to move the school even further.

School's PurposeProvide the school's purpose statement and ancillary content such as mission, vision, values, and/or beliefs. Describe how the school embodies its purpose through its program offerings and expectations for students.

Fayette County adopted the following mission statement for our entire district. Everything that we do, is supported by the following: The mission of Fayette County Public Schools is to create a collaborative community that ensures all students achieve at high levels and graduate prepared to excel in a global society. To accomplish this, we will provide excellent student opportunities, excellent staff, excellent schools, excellent supports, and excellent relationships.Athens-Chilesburg Elementary (ACE) added a few things to this to make it ours: We are a community of excellence where: high achievement is the standard; students are motivated and challenged in a safe, fun environment that nurtures lasting memories; families, staff and students unite to build a community that contributes to a lifetime of learning. At ACE, Eagles SOAR - they demonstrate Safety, Ownership, Acceptance, and Respect. At ACE, we make all decisions collaboratively based on the concept that all decisions should be based on what is in the best interest of the students. Within the school, there are 2 leadership teams who meet regularly to discuss both academic and management issues. These leadership teams are made up of representatives from all grade levels, special areas, special education, other teachers and classified employees. Recommendations from these two committees are either shared directly with all staff or discussed

2019-20 Phase Three: Executive Summary for Schools

2019-20 Phase Three: Executive Summary for Schools




Page 4 of 5

with SBDM and then shared with all staff. Additionally, we have a committee structure. All faculty members serve on one of the committees as do parents. These committees are given charges by SBDM and are to report back at assigned times. One of the best examples of how we live our mission is this: for intervention purposes, we pair our best, most experienced teachers with our neediest students. While this is not always a popular decision, we have seen great growth among our struggling students. This is a decision that will remain in force for the foreseeable future.

Notable Achievements and Areas of ImprovementDescribe the school's notable achievements and areas of improvement in the last three years. Additionally, describe areas for improvement that the school is striving to achieve in the next three years.

Achievements: strong academic performance on state exams; strong programs for recognizing Positive Student Behavior; High student and staff attendance; Strong school wide structures—arrival, dismissal, drills, special events; multiple extra-curricular activities; strong interventionists with an emphasis on early intervention; RTA grant to pay for Reading Recovery; a smooth MTSS system; strong staff willing to grow and improve; a majority of families who support the mission and vision of our school; a fairly well developed PLC process; a wonderful PTA who work tirelessly on our behalf.Areas for improvement: writing across the curriculum; more instructional time for gifted students; limited time for science and social studies; time for vertical planning.In the past two years, ACE has focused on the use of manipulatives during math instruction especially in older grades; technology is either older or not in working order; lack of substitutes; and redistricting.

Additional InformationCSI/TSI Schools Only: Describe the procedures used to create the school’s improvement plan and briefly state the specific efforts to address the causes of low student performance and resource inequities.

I

Additional InformationProvide any additional information you would like to share with the public and community that were not prompted in the previous sections.

n 2017-2018, our district purchased a new ELA program from McGraw Hill called Wonders. We have seen some great improvement in the area of comprehension but we still need to focus on the writing piece of the program. For 2018-2019, our district has purchased 2 math programs; for K-2, Investigations and for 3-5, Envisions. Both of these programs have enabled our district to provide the same curricula across all schools for the first time in many years.Additionally, our district has developed a walk through instrument to use for formative classroom visits. While just in the beginning stages of use, we look forward to using the data that this program will provide to improve Tier I instruction. ACE will also be using a more congruent Primary Standards Based Report Card and grade 3 - 5 will be receiving letter grades.




Page 5 of 5

Attachment Name Description Associated Item(s)

KPREP Data 2019 •

Attachment Summary


09/18/2019 Open

ACE 2019-20 Phase One: Continuous Improvement Diagnostic for Schools





2019-20 Phase One: Continuous Improvement Diagnostic for Schools Report - Generated on 01/08/2020



Page 3 of 3

The Comprehensive School Improvement Plan or CSIP is defined as a plan developed by the school council, or successor, and charter schools with the input of parents, faculty, and staff, based on a review of relevant data that includes targets, strategies, activities, and a time schedule to support student achievement and student growth, and to eliminate gaps among groups of students.

The comprehensive school and district improvement plan process is outlined in 703 KAR 5:225. The requirements included in the administrative regulation are key components of the continuous improvement process in Kentucky and ultimately fulfillment of school, district, and state goals under the Kentucky State Plan as required by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

While the regulation outlines a timeline for compliance purposes, the plan itself is a strategic and proven approach to improve processes and to ensure students achieve. The timeline for the school's 2019-20 diagnostics is as follows:

Phase One: August 1 - October 1• Continuous Improvement Diagnostic for Schools

Phase Two: October 1 - November 1• The Needs Assessment for Schools• School Assurances• School Safety Report

Phase Three: November 1 - January 1 • Comprehensive School Improvement Plan• Executive Summary for Schools• Closing the Achievement Gap Diagnostic for Schools• Title I Annual Review* Diagnostic

Phase Four: January 1 - December 31• Progress Monitoring

As principal of the school, I hereby commit to implementing continuous improvement processes with fidelity to support student achievement and student growth and to eliminate achievement gaps among groups of students.

Please enter your name and date below to certify.Mark A. Rose 9/18/2019

2019-20 Phase One: Continuous Improvement Diagnostic for Schools

2019-20 Phase One: Continuous Improvement Diagnostic for Schools


10/23/2019 Open

ACE 2019-20 Phase Two: The Needs Assessment for Schools





2019-20 Phase Two: The Needs Assessment for Schools Report - Generated on 01/08/2020



Page 4 of 11

In its most basic form, continuous improvement is about understanding the current state and formulating a plan to move to the desired state. The comprehensive needs assessment is a culmination of an extensive review of multiple sources of data collected over a period of time (e.g. 2-3 years). It is to be conducted annually as an essential part of the continuous improvement process and precedes the development of strategic goals (i.e. desired state).

The needs assessment requires synthesis and analysis of multiple sources of data and should reach conclusions about the current stateof the school/district, as well as the processes, practices and conditions that contributed to that state.

The needs assessment provides the framework for all schools to clearly and honestly identify their most critical areas for improvement that will be addressed later in the planning process through the development of goals, objectives, strategies and activities. 703 KAR 2:225 requires, as part of continuous improvement planning for schools, each school complete the needs assessment between October 1 and November 1 of each year and include: (1) a description of the data reviewed and the process used to develop the needs assessment; (2) a review of the previous plan and its implementation to inform development of the new plan; and, (3) perception data gathered from the administration of a valid and reliable measure of teaching and learning conditions. Further, as required by Section 1114 of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), Title I schools implementing a schoolwide program must base their Title I program on a comprehensive needs assessment.

Understanding Continuous Improvement: The Needs Assessment




Page 5 of 11

Clearly detail the process used for reviewing, analyzing and applying data results. Include names of school/district councils, leadership teams and stakeholder groups involved. How frequently does this planning team meet and how are these meetings documented?

Admin Team, Leadership Team, Team Leaders, Grade Level Teams, Full Staff, PBIS, MTSS, and FRC along with Literacy, Math and Separate Academic committees meet during multiple different settings to analyze next steps, identify strengths, areas for growth and to develop action plans for next steps to ensure all students are receiving the best Tier I instruction, or the most effective Tier II and Tier III services. Most committees or teams meet weekly, although some (Literacy, Math SAI) meet monthly. These meetings are documented through agendas and minutes. These minutes are in the staff google site or on the school website.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Name

ACE FALL MAP ANALYSIS 2019

ACE MTSS Meeting Minutes 2019

Protocol




Page 6 of 11

Plainly state the current condition using precise numbers and percentages as revealed by past, current and multiple sources of data. These should be based solely on data outcomes. Cite the source of data used.

Example of Current Academic State:-Thirty-four (34%) of students in the achievement gap scored proficient on KPREP Reading.-From 2017 to 2019, we saw an 11% increase in novice scores in reading among students in the achievementgap.-Fifty-four (54%) of our students scored proficient in math compared to the state average of 57%.

Example of Non-Academic Current State:-Teacher Attendance: Teacher attendance rate was 84% for the 2018-19 school year – a decrease from 92% in2017-18.-The number of behavior referrals increased from 204 in 2017-18 to 288 in 2018-19.-Kentucky TELL Survey results indicated 62% of the school’s teachers received adequate professionaldevelopment.

AcademicMAP Reading Fall 2019 - ALL students High Growth/High Achievement = 49.49%; African Americans with High Growth = 38.9%; Asian with High Growth = 45.28%; White students with High Achievement = 81.63%; Two or More Races with High Achievement = 85.67%; EL Learners with High Achievement = 68.75%. Percent of students that met/exceeded the projected growth target in Reading = 56.39%. MAP Math Fall 2019 - ALL students High Growth/High Achievement = 48.89%; African Americans with High Growth = 50%; Hispanic with High Growth = 68.44%; EL Learners with High Growth = 66.65%; Asian students with high achievement = 83.33%; FRL students with high achievement = 96.35%. Percent of students that met/exceeded the projected growth target in Math = 56.34%. KPrep Scores (Spring of 2019) - The proficiency rating for ACE was 95.3 down from 96.1, but was Very High according to state standards. The SAI (Separate Academic Indicator) rating for ACE was 82.0 up from 79.9, but was Very High according to state standards. The Growth Rating was 57.3 and that was medium growth according to state standards. NAPD demographic groups for the 2019 Spring KPrep test are: Math P/D - 78% of all students; 81.9% of white students; 48.7% of African American students; 66.7% of Hispanic students; 76.7% of EL students; 66.2% of Economically disadvantaged and 33.3% of IEP students. Reading P/D - 75.8% of all students; 81.2% of white students; 48.7% of African American students; 61.1% of Hispanic students; 56.6% of EL students; 56.7% of Economically disadvantaged students and 40.7% of IEP students. Writing P/D - 69.9% of all students. Science P/D - 44.7% of all students. Social Studies P/D - 76.7% of all students.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Name

ACE Kprep Data Spring 2019

Current State




Page 7 of 11

Clearly and concisely identify areas of weakness using precise numbers and percentages.NOTE: These priorities will be thoroughly addressed in the Continuous Improvement Planning Diagnostic for Schools.

Example: Sixty-eight (68%) of students in the achievement gap scored below proficiency on the KPREP test in reading as opposed to just 12% of non-gap learners.

The area of concern for ACE is due to the number of students in the High Achievement/High Growth. Students are scoring very high in the percentiles and in distinguished, thus it is hard to move them to a higher status. Although several areas slipped just a little in the overall proficiency, the scores are very high according to state standards. Another area of concern is the number of subgroups out performing the IEP students. Another area of concern is the overall science scores which fell from 47.8% proficiency to 44.6%.

Priorities/Concerns




Page 8 of 11

Analyzing data trends from the previous two academic years, which academic, cultural and behavioral measures remain significant areas for improvement?

Non-Academic DataEnrollment - down from a high of 861 in 16/17 to 645 in 19/20. Attendance - is trending up from 96.25% in 15/16 to 96.55 in 17/18 and currently 97.47% with two or more races, Asian, and Hispanic having a higher attendance % than white students.Behavior - behavior incidents are down from 235 in 18/19 to only 22 report currently with most events occurring in the classroom between 10 and 12 on Wednesdays and Thursdays.Academic Data Reading: % of Distinguished students rising from 27.5 to 36.3 to 38.9; % of Novice fluctuating from 10.2, 6.5 to 8.1; FRL scoring distinguished from 14.4 to 17.9 to 24.3; African American scoring distinguished from 7.0 to 15.9 to 25.64.Math: % of Distinguished students rising from 26.5 to 36.8 to 42.2; Novice fluctuating from 8.3 to 3.7 to 5.3; FRL scoring distinguished from 7.7 to 17.9 to 25.7; African American scoring distinguished from 9.3 to 13.6 to 17.9.Social Studies: % of Distinguished students rising from 24.8 to 17.6 to 34.7; FRL scoring distinguished from 5.7 to 6.3 to 20.4; African American scoring distinguished from 0 to 7.1 to 10.5; Writing: % of students scoring Proficient from 34 to 45.8 to 62.4; FRL scoring Proficient from 17.1 to 37.5 to 42.9; African American scoring proficient from 9.1 to 50 to 42.1.

Trends




Page 9 of 11

Which processes, practices or conditions will the school focus its resources and efforts upon in order to produce the desired changes? Note that all processes, practices and conditions can be linked to the six Key Core Work Processes outlined below:

KCWP 1: Design and Deploy StandardsKCWP 2: Design and Deliver InstructionKCWP 3: Design and Deliver Assessment LiteracyKCWP 4: Review, Analyze and Apply DataKCWP 5: Design, Align and Deliver SupportKCWP 6: Establishing Learning Culture and Environment

KCWP 2: Design and Deliver InstructionIn order to ensure the effective design and delivery of Tier I instruction our efforts must:-meet the intent of standards-meets the needs of all students-monitor learning-have learning expectations-analysis of student data-have high yield strategies-active engagement Through our work with differentiation, use of Kagan strategies, TNTP, new learning intentions/success criteria, and data analysis protocol students should be meeting more of the KCWP 2 expectations as well as helping students to be more effective in their learning.

Potential Source of Problem




Page 10 of 11

Plainly state, using precise numbers and percentages revealed by current data, the strengths and leverages of the school.

Example: Graduation rate has increased from 67% the last five years to its current rate of 98%.

Overall, our academic areas continue to show improvement on various measures. Our PLC process is focused on students - academically, behaviorally, and their well-being. The majority of our students perform above national norms on MAP, Iowa, and CoGat. Students seem to come to school prepared and eager to learn. The school culture and climate is warm, welcoming, and encouraging. Our PTA is very involved and support our efforts to make ACE a fun, safe, and conducive learning center. Our SBDM has all new policies and procedures to ensure a quality educational program.

Strengths/Leverages




Page 11 of 11


ACE FALL MAP ANALYSIS 2019 •

ACE Kprep Data Spring 2019 •

ACE MTSS Meeting Minutes 2019 •

Attachment Summary


10/30/2019 Open

ACE 2019-20 Phase Three: Closing the Achievement Gap Diagnostic





2019-20 Phase Three: Closing the Achievement Gap Diagnostic Report - Generated on 01/08/2020



Page 3 of 9

The Closing the Achievement Gap Report is required by KRS 158.649, which requires the school-based decision making council, or the principal if no council exists to set the school’s targets for eliminating any achievement gap. The targets should be established with input from parents, faculty, and staff and submitted to the superintendent for consideration and the local board of education for adoption.

In addition to being a legal mandate, the Closing the Achievement Gap Report is also a vital component of the continuous improvement process. The report is designed to underscore a school's trend data (i.e. two-year window) relating to its individual gap groups. Upon completion of the Closing the Achievement Gap Report, schools will have already engaged in a significant piece of school improvement work by intentionally focusing on the gaps that exist among its underserved student populations.

2019-20 Phase Three: Closing the Achievement Gap Diagnostic

2019-20 Phase Three: Closing the Achievement Gap Diagnostic Rationale




Page 4 of 9

Schools should use a variety of measures and analysis to conduct its annual Closing the Achievement Gap Report pursuant to KRS 158.649.

Complete the Achievement Gap Group spreadsheet and attach it.

According to our current GAP report pulled from Infinite Campus, we currently have 188 students that are considered in the gap group. This is 33% of our current population.Our gap numbers in 3rd, 4th, and 5th are: 3rd = 41 students; 4th = 34 students; and 5th = 31 students.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Name

Achievement Gap Group 19 20 ACE

I. Achievement Gap Group Identification




Page 5 of 9

A. Describe the school's climate and culture as they relate to its achievement gap population.

Our current GAP students are identified in all of the criteria areas: Free and Reduced, Special Education, ELL, African American, Hispanic, Asian, Two or more races, etc. We have a set criteria for analyzing their data and ensuring appropriate supports are wrapped around them: analyzing universal data, analyzing TELL (ELL) and/or FAST data if identified as 40%ile or below, providing them with intervention, EL or Sp Ed supports based on student need. Their progress is then analyzed further throughout the year to determine if sufficient progress is made. For MAP we look at 50%ile and below for Tier II and 20%ile and below for Tier III.

B. Which achievement gaps has the school successfully closed? Use specific data from the previous twoacademic years when analyzing trends.

Our gap scores over the last several years are as follows: 2015- 55.9, 2016- 48.4, 2017- 43.6. As you can see, our progress overall has decreased; however, when breaking down by subject area we have had some gains. In reading, we have increased our GAP group progress over the past several years. Our reading GAP scores are as follows: 2015- 48.0, 2016-46.3, 2017- 56.6. Our math has also increased over the past several years. Our math GAP scores are as follows: 2015- 43.1, 2016- 46.3, 2017- 48.3. The area in which we need to pay very close attention to is our writing for our GAP students. Our writing scores over the past several years are as follows: 2015- 59.0, 2016- 52.3, 2017- 21.4.Due to a change in reporting beginning in the 2018 testing year, scores are now reported as a Growth Score, a Proficiency Score, and a Separate Academic Indicator Score. Within those scores would be the breakdown of group scores per-say. Academic performance in Reading, Math, and depending on group size, Science are reported in the areas of Economically disadvantaged, English Learning, and Student with disabilities according to Proficiency versus their counterparts (students not in the subgroup).Here are the numbers from the 17/18 and 18/19 testing cycles:Economically Disadvantaged: 17/18 - Reading 61.9% vs. 84.3%; Math 58.3% vs. 84.3%; Science 17.2% vs. 56.2%. 18/19 - Reading 56.8% vs. 80.8%; Math 66.2% vs. 81.1%; Science 33.3% vs. 47.3%. English Learning Students: 17/18 - Reading 52.2% vs. 81.1%; Math - 52.2% vs. 80.3%. 18/19 - Reading 50.0% vs. 77.5%; Math 72.7% vs. 78.4%; Students with disabilities: 17/18 - Reading 48.0% vs. 81.6%; Math - 40.7% vs. 78.7%; Science 10.0% vs. 48%.

C. Based upon the analysis of the school’s achievement gap data, identify the gap groups and content areaswhere the school has shown improvement. Use specific data from the previous two academic years whenanalyzing trends.

Due to a change in reporting beginning in the 2018 testing year, scores are now reported as a Growth Score, a Proficiency Score, and a Separate Academic Indicator Score. Within those scores would be the breakdown of group scores per-say. Academic performance in Reading, Math, and depending on group size, Science are reported in the areas of Economically disadvantaged, English Learning, and Student with disabilities according to Proficiency versus their counterparts (students not in the subgroup).Here are the numbers from the 17/18 and 18/19 testing cycles:Economically Disadvantaged: 17/18 - Reading 61.9% vs. 84.3%; Math 58.3% vs. 84.3%; Science 17.2% vs. 56.2%. 18/19 - Reading 56.8% vs. 80.8%; Math 66.2% vs. 81.1%; Science 33.3% vs. 47.3%. English Learning Students: 17/18 - Reading 52.2% vs. 81.1%; Math - 52.2% vs. 80.3%. 18/19 - Reading 50.0% vs. 77.5%; Math 72.7% vs. 78.4%; Students with disabilities: 17/18 - Reading 48.0% vs. 81.6%; Math - 40.7% vs. 78.7%; Science 10.0% vs. 48%.

II. Achievement Gap Analysis




Page 6 of 9

D. Based upon the analysis of the gap data, identify the gap groups and content areas where the school haslacked progression or regressed. Use specific data from the previous two academic years when analyzingtrends.

We are lacking progress with Students with disabilities in Reading, Math, and Science.

E. Describe the processes, practices and/or conditions that have prevented the school from closing existing andpersistent achievement gaps.

Lack of rigorous Tier I instruction, grade level expectations, and collaborative teaching.

F. Describe the process used to involve teachers, leaders, and other stakeholders in the continuousimprovement and planning process as it relates to closing the achievement gap. List the names and roles ofstrategic partners involved.

Continuing weekly PLC meetings to analyze data- Grade Level Teachers, Principal, PGES Coach Continuing PD as needed- Grade Level Teachers, Principal, PGES Coach Parent Conferences in the fall and springGrade reports in 3rd - 5th Standards Based Report Cards in K - 2nd

G. Describe in detail the school's professional development plan related to its achievement gaps.

(Note: School-based decision making councils, or principals in schools where no council exists, are required by KRS 158.649(8) to submit revisions to the school improvement plan describing the use of professional development funds to reduce achievement gaps for review and approval by the superintendent. Superintendents shall report, pursuant to KRS 158.649(9), to the local school board and Commissioner of Education schools failing to meet targets to reduce the gap in student achievement for any student group two years in a row, and improvement plans for those schools will be subject to review and approval by KDE.)

This year the PD was focused on the new Kentucky Academic Standards in Reading and Math. Teacher have also been working with the 8 Math Practice Standards and the 10 Literacy Practice Standards. Two teams of teachers also participated in the Collaborative Learning Initiative. We have a first grade team and a fifth grade team.




Page 7 of 9

Closing the Achievement Gap GoalsList all measurable goals for each identified gap population and content area for the current school year. This percentage should be based on trend data identified in Section II and based on data such as universal screeners, classroom data, ACT, and Response to Intervention (RTI). Content areas should never be combined into a single goal (i.e., Combined reading and math should always be separated into two goals – one for reading and one for math – in order to explicitly focus on strategies and activities tailored to the goal).

Reading3rd Grade/Reading - (115 students tested); All Students - 9% Novice, 17 % Apprentice, 26% Proficient, 48% Distinguished. African American (10 students) - 20% Novice, 40% Apprentice, 10% Proficient, 30% Distinguished. English Learner (12 students) - 25% Novice, 17% Apprentice, 33% Proficient, 25% Distinguished. Economically Disadvantaged (25 students) - 20% Novice, 24% Apprentice, 20% Proficient, 26% Distinguished. Disability (10 students) - 20% Novice, 20% Apprentice, 40% Proficient, 20% Distinguished. White (87 students) - 6% Novice, 17% Apprentice, 28% Proficient, 51% Distinguished. 3rd Grade/Math - (115 students tested); All Students - 6% Novice, 12% Apprentice, 48% Proficient, 34% Distinguished. African American (10 students) - 30% Novice, 20% Apprentice, 40% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. English Learner (12 students) - 8% Novice, 8% Apprentice, 58% Proficient, 25% Distinguished. Economically Disadvantaged (25 students) - 16% Novice, 12% Apprentice, 52% Proficient, 20% Distinguished. Disability (10 students) - 40% Novice, 20% Apprentice, 20% Proficient, 20% Distinguished. White (87 students) - 3% Novice, 14% Apprentice, 47% Proficient, 36% Distinguished. 4th Grade Reading - (113 students tested); All Students - 7% Novice, 16% Apprentice, 42% Proficient, 35% Distinguished. African American (10 students) - 10% Novice, 50% Apprentice, 30% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. English Learner (10 students) - 30% Novice, 0% Apprentice, 60% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. Economically Disadvantaged (20 students) - 25% Novice, 25% Apprentice, 25% Proficient, 25% Distinguished. White (83 students tested) - 5% Novice, 12% Apprentice, 40% Proficient, 43% Distinguished. 4th Grade Math - (113 students tested); All Students - 5% Novice, 23% Apprentice, 34% Proficient, 38% Distinguished. African American (10 students) - 20% Novice, 60% Apprentice, 10% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. English Learner (10 students) - 10% Novice, 20% Apprentice, 60% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. White (83 students) - 4% Novice, 18% Apprentice, 34% Proficient, 45% Distinguished. 4th Grade Science - (113 students tested); All Students - 6% Novice, 49% Apprentice, 42% Proficient, 4% Distinguished. African American (10 students tested) - 10% Novice, 80% Apprentice, 10% Proficient, 0% Distinguished. English Learners (10 studentstested) - 20% Novice, 60% Apprentice, 20% Proficient, 0% Distinguished. EconomicallyDisadvantaged (20 students tested) - 15% Novice, 50% Apprentice, 35% Proficient, 0%Distinguished. White (83 students tested) - 5% Novice, 45% Apprentice, 46% Proficient, 5%Distinguished. 5th Grade Reading - (134 students tested); All Students - 8% Novice, 14%Apprentice, 43% Proficient, 34% Distinguished. African American (20 students tested) - 15%Novice, 25% Apprentice, 30% Proficient, 30% Distinguished. Economically Disadvantaged (29students tested) - 14% Novice, 21% Apprentice, 52% Proficient, 14% Distinguished. White (90students tested) - 4% Novice, 11% Apprentice, 47% Proficient, 38% Distinguished. 5th Grade Math- (134 students tested); All students - 4% Novice, 16% Apprentice, 28% Proficient, 53%Distinguished. African American (20 students tested) - 10% Novice, 30% Apprentice, 35%Proficient, 25% Distinguished. Economically Disadvantaged (29 students tested) - 10% Novice,21% Apprentice, 38% Proficient, 31% Distinguished. White (90 students tested) - 3% Novice, 11%Apprentice, 24% Proficient, 61% Distinguished. 5th Grade Social Studies - (134 students tested);All students - 4% Novice, 19% Apprentice, 46% Proficient, 31% Distinguished. African American(20 students tested) - 0% Novice, 35% Apprentice, 55% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. Asian (13students tested) - 8% Novice, 15% Apprentice, 46% Proficient, 31% Distinguished. EconomicallyDisadvantaged (29 students tested) - 7% Novice, 35% Apprentice, 38% Proficient, 21%

III. Planning the Work




Page 8 of 9

Distinguished. White (90 students tested) - 3% Novice, 13% Apprentice, 46% Proficient, 38% Distinguished. 5th Grade Writing - (134 students tested); All Students - 10% Novice, 20% Apprentice, 62% Proficient, 8% Distinguished. African American (20 students tested) - 20% Novice, 30% Apprentice, 40% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. Asian (13 students tested) - 8% Novice, 15% Apprentice, 69% proficient, 8% Distinguished. Economically Disadvantaged (29 students tested) - 24% Novice, 24% Apprentice, 41% Proficient, 10% Distinguished. White (90 students tested) - 7% Novice, 15% Apprentice, 68% Proficient, 7% Distinguished.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Name

ACE 2019 DATA BREAKDOWN

Closing the Achievement Gap

Step 1: Download the Closing the Achievement Gap Summary spreadsheet. Step 2: Complete your findings and answers. Step 3: Upload the Completed Closing the Achievement Gap Plan Summary spreadsheet.

We will be focusing on KCWP 1: Design and Deploy Standards Classroom Activities to continually assess, review and revise school curricula to support the assurance that all students have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions for future success. -This will be done by assuring the current curriculum is valid, aligned to state/essential standards, components that support the instruction, and paced with accuracy, -This will be done by monitoring curriculum so that what is taught is taught at a high level of fidelity,-Processes to create clear and precise learning targets for students,-Readjustment of curriculum to meet student needs based on formative and summative assessments,-Vertical curriculum work.This will be monitored through lesson plans, team meetings, PLCs, district provided professional learning, and review of data points (MAP, Mastery Checks, and other tiered assessments, pacing, unpacking of "new" standards, success criteria, and effective communication to guide planning. We will also focus on KCWP 2: Design and Deliver Instruction Classroom Activities to ensure our instructional program is intentional and of highest quality. Tier I is the highly effective, culturally responsive, evidence-based core instruction provided to ALL students. This will be essential for both academic and behavioral instruction. -This will be done by assuring Tier I instruction and assessments meet the intent of the adopted standards-What are the next steps for students needing additional support in Tier I and Tier II, -How will learning be monitored before, during and after instruction (explicit instruction),-Learning expectations are clear and criteria for success is evident-What is the system for students taking responsibility for their own learning-Cognitive engagement versus passive or active engagementThis will be monitored through team planning, PLCs/PLC minutes, feedback to teachers and students, intervention schedule, MTSS meetings, Learning Expectations and Success Criteria posted in each room for each standard/lesson, and through administrative coaching visits (walkthroughs).




Page 9 of 9


ACE 19 20 Key Core Work Processes •

ACE 19 20 Measurable Gap Goal Worksheet

•

ACE 2019 DATA BREAKDOWN • III

Achievement Gap Group 19 20 ACE • I

Attachment Summary


11/14/2019 Open

ACE 2019-20 Phase Two: School Assurances





2019-20 Phase Two: School Assurances Report - Generated on 01/08/2020



Page 5 of 12

1. The Every Study Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires each school to report data regarding ineffective teachers. Anineffective teacher receives a summative effectiveness rate of “Ineffective” as determined through the localperformance evaluation system that meets the requirements established by KRS 157.557. An ineffective teacherconsistently fails to meet expectations as determined by a trained evaluator, in competencies identified as theperformance criteria in the Kentucky Framework for Teaching.

Responses to this assurance will be collected in the Kentucky Teacher Performance survey. Responses to each survey question should be based on data from the 2018-19 school year. Once you have completed the survey, return to the 2019-20 Phase Two: School Assurances diagnostic to certify that your school has completed the survey and to complete the remaining assurances on the diagnostic.

I certify this school has completed the Kentucky Teacher Performance survey.

YesNoN/A

Teacher Performance




Page 6 of 12

2. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed a comprehensive plan during a 1-year period or qualifies for an exception under Section 1114(b)(1) of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

YesNoN/A

3. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed a comprehensive plan with theinvolvement of parents and other members of the community to be served as well as individuals who will carryout such plan (e.g. teachers, administrators, classified staff, etc.) as required by Section 1114(b)(2) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

4. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed a comprehensive plan that willremain in effect for the duration of the school’s participation under Title I, Part A of ESSA as required by Section1114(b)(3) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

5. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed a comprehensive plan that isavailable to district leadership, parents, and the public and in an understandable and uniform format as requiredby Section 1114(b)(4) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

6. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed a comprehensive plan that, to theextent appropriate and applicable, coordinates with other federal, state, and local programs, including but notlimited to the implementation of improvement activities in schools identified for comprehensive or targetedsupport and improvement, as required by Section 1114(b)(5) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

7. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed a comprehensive plan that is basedon a comprehensive needs assessment, which included a review of academic achievement data, and includes,among other items, a description of the strategies the school will implement to address school needs as requiredby Section 1114(b)(6) of ESSA.

Title I Schoolwide Programs




Page 7 of 12

YesNoN/A

8. If the school is implementing a schoolwide program, the school developed, pursuant to Section 1114(b)(7), acomprehensive plan that includes a description of the strategies to be implemented to address school needs,including how such strategies: (1) provide opportunities for all children; (2) use methods and instructionalstrategies that strengthen the academic program in the school, increase learning time, and provide an enrichedand accelerated curriculum; and, (3) address the needs of all children through, for example, the followingactivities: school-based mental health programs; a tiered model to prevent and address behavioral problems;professional development to improve instruction and use of data from academic assessments, and to recruit andretain effective teachers; and/or, strategies for assisting preschool children transition to local elementary schoolprograms.

YesNoN/A




Page 8 of 12

9. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, participating students are identified inaccordance with Section 1115(c) and on the basis of multiple, educationally related, objective criteria.

YesNoN/A

10. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves participating studentsusing resources under Title I, Part of ESSA to meet challenging state academic standards as required by Section1115(b)(2)(A) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

11. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves, pursuant to Section1115(b)(2)(B) of ESSA, participating students using methods and instructional strategies to strengthen theacademic program of the school, which may include, for example, expanded learning time, summer programs,and/or a tiered model to prevent and address behavioral problems.

YesNoN/A

12. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves participating studentsby coordinating with and supporting the regular educational program as required by Section 1115(b)(2)(C) ofESSA.

YesNoN/A

13. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves participating studentsby providing professional development to, for example, teachers, administrators, classified staff, and/or otherschool personnel who work with participating students as required by Section 1115(b)(2)(D) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

14. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves, pursuant to Section1115(b)(2)(E) of ESSA, participating students by implementing strategies to increase the involvement of parentsof participating students in accordance with Section 1116 of ESSA.

Title I Targeted Assistance School Programs




Page 9 of 12

YesNoN/A

15. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves participating students,to the extent appropriate and applicable, by coordinating with other federal, state, and local programs, includingbut not limited to the implementation of improvement activities in schools identified for comprehensive or targetedsupport and improvement, as required by Section 1115(b)(2)(F) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A

16. If the school is implementing a targeted assistance school program, the school serves participating studentsby reviewing the progress of participating students on an ongoing basis and revising the targeted assistanceprogram, if necessary, to provide additional assistance to meet challenging state academic standards as requiredby Section 1115(b)(2)(G) of ESSA.

YesNoN/A




Page 10 of 12

17. If identified for targeted support and improvement pursuant to Section 1111(d)(2) of ESSA, the schooldeveloped and implemented a plan to improve student outcomes that, among other items, was informed by allindicators, including student performance against long-term goals; included evidence-based interventions; and,approved by local leadership. For reference, “evidence-based” is defined in ESSA Section 8101(21).

YesNoN/A

Schools Identified for Targeted Support and Improvement




Page 11 of 12

18. The school provides professional development for staff that is in accordance with the purpose of Title II ofESSA; addresses the needs of all students; and, strives to ensure all students are college, career and transitionready as intended by Section 2103 of ESSA, which governs the local use of Title II funding.

YesNoN/A

19. The school collects and publicly disseminates, in compliance with Kentucky’s Consolidated State Plan and inalignment with Section 1111(g)(1)(B), data through the School Report Card that addresses students’ access toeffective/experienced teachers.

YesNoN/A

20. The school ensures that, if the Title I application includes funding for certified or classified positions (e.g.counselors, nurses, media specialists, etc.), there is documentation indicating such is needed to improve studentachievement. This ensures the use is reasonable and necessary in compliance with the Code of FederalRegulations (CFR), including 2 CFR 200.403 and 200.405.

YesNoN/A

21. The school ensures that all teachers and paraprofessionals working in a program supported with Title I, PartA funding meet applicable state certification and licensure requirements as required by Section 1111(g)(2)(J) ofESSA.

YesNoN/A

22. The school distributes to parents and family members of participating children a written parent and familyengagement policy, agreed on by such parents, that complies with Section 1116(c)-(f) of ESSA and is in anunderstandable and uniform format as required by Section 1116(b) of ESSA. For reference, Section 1116(b) ofESSA allows existing parent and family engagement policies the school may have in place to be amended tomeet the requirements under Title I, Part A.

YesNoN/A

All School Programs




Page 12 of 12


ACE CSIP •

ACE Parent Involvement Compact •

ACE PD Plan 2019 2020 •

Attachment Summary

Athens-Chilesburg Elementary Comprehensive School Improvement Plan (CSIP) for 2019 2020

Rationale School improvement efforts are a collaborative process involving multiple stakeholders. Through the improvement planning process, leaders focus on priority needs, funding, and closing achievement gaps among identified subgroups of students. When implemented with fidelity, the Comprehensive School Improvement Plan (CSIP) cultivates an environment that promotes student growth and achievement.

Operational Definitions Goal: Long-term three to five year targets based on the required school level goals. Elementary/middle schools must have goals for proficiency, separate academic indicator, achievement gap, and growth. High schools must have goals for proficiency, separate academic indicator, achievement gap, graduation rate, and transition readiness. Long-term targets should be informed by The Needs Assessment for Schools.

Objective: Short-term target to be attained by the end of the current academic year. There can be multiple objectives for each goal.

Strategy: An approach to systematically address the process, practice, or condition that the school will focus its efforts upon in order to reach its goals or objectives. There can be multiple strategies for each objective. The strategy can be based upon Kentucky’s six (6) Key Core Work Processes listed below or another established improvement approach (i.e. Six Sigma, Shipley, Baldridge, etc.).

Activity: Actionable steps used to deploy the chosen strategy. There can be multiple activities for each strategy.

Key Core Work Processes: A series of processes identified by the Kentucky Department of Education that involve the majority of an organization’s workforce and relate to its core competencies. These are the factors that determine an organization’s success and help it prioritize areas for growth.

• KCWP 1: Design and Deploy Standards• KCWP 2: Design and Deliver Instruction• KCWP 3: Design and Deliver Assessment Literacy

• KCWP 4: Review, Analyze and Apply Data• KCWP 5: Design, Align and Deliver Support• KCWP 6: Establishing Learning Culture and Environment

Measure of Success: Criteria that shows the impact of the work. The measures may be quantitative or qualitative, but are observable in some way.

Progress Monitoring: Process used to assess the implementation of the plan, the rate of improvement, and the effectiveness of the plan. Should include timelines and responsible individuals.

Funding: Local, state, or federal funds/grants used to support (or needed to support) the improvement initiative.

Requirements for Building an Improvement Plan • There are six (6) required district goals: proficiency, separate academic indicator, achievement gap, graduation rate, growth, and transition readiness.• The required school goals include the following:

o For elementary/middle school, these include: proficiency, separate academic indicator, achievement gap, and, growth.

Explanations/Directions

Goal: Include long-term three to five year targets based on the required school level goals. Elementary/middle schools must have goals for proficiency, separate academic indicator, achievement gap, and growth. High schools must have goals for proficiency, separate academic indicator, achievement gap, graduation rate, and transition readiness. Long-term targets should be informed by The Needs Assessment for Schools.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of

Success Progress Monitoring Funding

Include short-term targets to be attained by the end of the current academic year. There can be multiple objectives for each goal.

An approach to systematically address the process, practice, or condition that the school will focus its efforts upon in order to reach its goals or objectives. There can be multiple strategies for each objective. The strategy can be based upon Kentucky’s six (6) Key Core Work Processes listed above or another established improvement approach (i.e. Six Sigma, Shipley, Baldridge, etc.).

Include actionable steps used to deploy the chosen strategy. There can be multiple activities for each strategy.

List the criteria that shows the impact of the work. The measures may be quantitative or qualitative, but are observable in some way.

Discuss the process used to assess the implementation of the plan, the rate of improvement, and the effectiveness of the plan. Should include timelines and responsible individuals. Progress monitoring ensures that plans are being revisited and an opportunity to determine whether the plan is working.

List the funding source(s) used to support (or needed to support) the improvement initiative.

1: Proficiency Goal

Goal 1: The proficiency goal for ACE will be to increase the combined reading and math proficiency from 77.2 to 97.2 by 2023 as measured by state required assessments.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 1 Increase the proficiency in combined reading from 75.8% to 80.8% in 2020.

To ensure instruction is highly effective, culturally responsive, evidence-based and provided to all students.

KCWP 1 – Instruction meets the intent of the adopted standards; Tier I instructional needs are meet; how is learning monitored; feedback and use of student data.

Item analysis on assessments to determine gaps in learning and overall proficiency on assessments.

All students and subgroups will be monitored through MTSS, PBIS, and through PLCs in order to meet the needs of all students.

Objective 2 Increase the proficiency in combined math from 78.1% to 83.1% in 2020.

To ensure continuous assessment, review, and revisions of school curricula so that all students are receiving knowledge and skills to be successful now and in the future.

KCWP 2 – Curriculum is aligned, taught at a high level of fidelity, with clear and precise learning targets, and readjustment if needs are not met based on assessments.

Regular curriculum meetings to review alignment of standards, targets, and assessment measures.

All students and subgroups will be monitored through MTSS, PBIS, and though PLCs in order to meet the needs of all students.

2: Separate Academic Indicator

Goal 2: The Separate Academic Indicator goal for ACE will be to increase proficiency from 63.7 to 83.7 by 2023 as measured by state required assessments.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 1 By 2020, ACE will increase the proficiency in Science from 44.6% to 54.6%.



Item analysis, instructional planning, content mastery, team meetings, assessment data, PDSA (plan, do study, act), TCTs, and congruent learning targets.

Simple Solutions for Science $1,900

Objective 2 By 2020, ACE will increase the proficiency in Social Studies from 76.7% to 81.7%.

To examine and interpret data, to set priorities through formative, summative, benchmark, and assessment data to determine student success.

KCWP 4 – Assessments used to determine tiered intervention needs, aligned to state standards, SMART goals, tiered movement and parent notification, monitoring of mastery, high-quality content, data notebooks, addressing non-academic barriers, and goal setting.

Charting of data, progress monitoring for mastery of content, ensure assessments match intent of content, and progress to goals.

Simple Solutions for Social Studies $1,900 (free for one year)

Objective 3 By 2020, ACE will increase the proficiency in Writing from 69.9% to 74.9%.

To provide practice for students, responsibility for their own learning, motivation, and establish a

KCWP 3 – Using a school-wide writing system (6+1) and use of same vocabulary across the grades, appropriate assessment to evaluate level of student learning (written

Ensure activities propel student learning, mastery, and achievement; help students adjust their

6 + 1 Writing Traits

Goal 2: The Separate Academic Indicator goal for ACE will be to increase proficiency from 63.7 to 83.7 by 2023 as measured by state required assessments.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding learning culture (not just grading).

response, performance assessment, student led conferences, peer tutoring, technology), regular feedback, priorities identified, products producing accurate evidence of learning, and scoring rubrics.

own learning; effective feedback, working writing folders, updated writing policy and procedures, and instructional planning.

3: Achievement Gap

Goal 3: The GAP goals for ACE will be to increase the percent of EL Reading students scoring proficient from 56.7 to 76.7 and to increase the percent of SpEd Math students scoring proficient from 34.6 to 54.6 as measured by required state assessments by 2023.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 1 By 2020, ACE will increase the percent of EL students scoring proficient in Reading from 56.7% to 61.7%. (EL Actual 28.6 – Goal by 2030 is 64.3)



Item analysis on assessments to determine gaps in learning and overall proficiency on assessments.

All students and subgroups will be monitored through MTSS, PBIS, and through PLCs in order to meet the needs of all students.

ESS - $12,000 (including staff and materials)

EL students will be monitored through

the ACCESS testing.

Goal 3: The GAP goals for ACE will be to increase the percent of EL Reading students scoring proficient from 56.7 to 76.7 and to increase the percent of SpEd Math students scoring proficient from 34.6 to 54.6 as measured by required state assessments by 2023.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 2 By 2020, ACE will increase the percent of SpEd students scoring proficient in Math from 34.6% to 39.6%.





4: Growth

Goal 4: The growth goals for ACE will be to increase the growth indicator score from 57.3% to 77.3% as measured by required state assessments by 2023.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 1 By 2020, ACE will increase the percent of students’ reading growth indicator score from 55.9% to 60.9%. (Female 54.1%; White 51.7%; FRL 57.9%) (By moving 15 students up one level and others maintaining current levels.)

To examine and interpret data, to set priorities through formative, summative, benchmark, and assessment data to determine student success.

KCWP 4 – Assessments used to determine tiered intervention needs, aligned to state standards, SMART goals, tiered movement and parent notification, monitoring of mastery, high-quality content, data notebooks, addressing non-academic barriers, and goal setting.

Charting of data, progress monitoring for mastery of content, ensure assessments match intent of content, and progress to goals.

Goal 4: The growth goals for ACE will be to increase the growth indicator score from 57.3% to 77.3% as measured by required state assessments by 2023.

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 2 By 2020, ACE will increase the percent of students’ math growth indicator scores from 58.6% to 63.6%.

(White 57.5%; SpEd 44.1%; FRL 56.1%)

(By moving 23 students up one level and others maintaining current levels.)





5: Transition Readiness

Goal 5 (State your transition readiness goal.):

Objective Strategy Activities Measure of Success Progress Monitoring Funding Objective 1

Objective 2

6: Graduation Rate

Goal 6 (State your graduation rate goal.):


Objective 2

7: Other (Optional)

Goal 7 (State your separate goal.):


Objective 2

Special Considerations for Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) Schools TSI schools must embed their subgroup(s) plan for improvement within their CSIPs. TSI stakeholders, including the principal and other school leaders, teachers, and parents, should carefully consider what must be done to ensure the subgroup(s) perform(s) at high levels in the state accountability system. In addition to identifying strategies and activities within the CSIP that address the specific needs of underperforming groups, provide narrative information regarding the additional requirements for TSI schools in the following chart: Components Of Turnaround Leadership Development And Support: Consider: How will you ensure that school leadership has or develops the skills and disposition to achieve accelerated, meaningful, and sustainable increases in student achievement for underperforming subgroups? Response:

Identification Of Critical Resources Inequities: Consider: Describe the process used to review the allocation and use of resources (people, time, and money), any resource inequities that were identified that may contribute to underperformance, and how identified resource inequities will be addressed. Response:

Targeted Subgroups and Evidence-Based Interventions: Consider: Identify the areas of need revealed by the analysis of academic and non-academic data that will be addressed through CSIP activities for your targeted subgroup(s). What evidence-based practice(s) will the school incorporate that specifically targets the subgroup(s) achievement that contributed to the TSI identification? How will we monitor the evidence-based practice to ensure it is implemented with fidelity? Complete the table below to document the evidence that supports the Activities outlined in this plan. Additional rows may be added to accommodate additional pieces of evidence. Response:

Evidence-based Activity Evidence Citation Uploaded in eProve

Train staff to implement inductive teaching strategies. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge: New York, NY. ☒

☐

☐

☐

☐

Additional Actions That Address The Causes Of Consistently Underperforming Subgroups Of Students Consider: Describe the process used to review the learning culture related to your targeted subgroup(s) and any additional actions that were determined to address the causes of underperformance. Response:

Special Considerations for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) Schools Schools identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) must complete the CSIP process and meet all applicable deadlines while identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI). Following the completion of the school audit, CSI schools must revise their CSIP to account for the improvement priorities identified by the audit team. The newly revised CSIP, referred to as a Turnaround Plan, must include the following items: (1) evidence-based interventions to be utilized to increase student performance and address the critical needs identified in the school audit, (2) a comprehensive list of persons and entities involved in the turnaround efforts and the specific roles each shall play in the school’s turnaround process, and (3) a review of resource inequities, which shall include an analysis of school level budgeting to ensure resources are adequately channeled towards school improvement (703 KAR 5:280). Each of the three aforementioned requirements must be embedded throughout the CSIP document. Once the CSIP has been revised, the turnaround plan must be submitted to the LEA for approval before it is submitted to the Commissioner of Education for final approval.

Evidence-based Practices The Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) created new expectations for evidence-based decision making at school and district levels. More specific information regarding evidence-based practices and requirements can be found on the Kentucky Department of Education’s Evidence-based Practices website. While evidence documentation in the CSIP is only required for schools identified for Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) and Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI), KDE encourages all school leaders to review evidence related to new programs, practices, or interventions being implemented in the school. In addition to documenting the evidence below, TSI and CSI schools are expected to upload a description of their evidence review process, the findings of their evidence review, and a discussion of the local implications into eProve. Specific directions regarding the documentation requirements can be found in the “Documenting Evidence under ESSA” resource available on KDE’s Evidence-based Practices website. Complete the table below to document the evidence that supports the Activities outlined in this plan. Additional rows may be added to accommodate additional pieces of evidence.

Evidence-based Activity Evidence Citation Uploaded in eProve

Train staff to implement inductive teaching strategies. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge: New York, NY. ☒

☐

☐

☐

☐

ace 2019-20 phase three: executive summary for schoolswe opened in 2006, we were on the cutting edge...

Documents