keystonecharterschool.comkeystonecharterschool.com › yahoo_site_admin › assets › ... · web...

Keystone Education Center CS

Improvement Plan

07/01/2014 - 06/30/2017

Revision for the 2016-2017 School-Year

2

School Profile

Demographics425 South Good Hope RoadGreenville, PA 16125(724)588-2511

Phase: Improvement Revision 2016-2017Federal Accountability Designation: Priority

Title I Status: YesCEO Name: Mike GentileCEO E-mail address: [email protected]

Planning CommitteeName Role

Linda Nelson Academic Recovery LiaisonKendra Gaub AdministratorMatthew Nelson AdministratorMike Gentile Administrator / CEOJoel McDowell Business RepresentativeJoel McDowell Community RepresentativeJeff Calvin Ed Specialist - Instructional TechnologyJosh Thompson Ed Specialist - School CounselorPosition Not Applicable Elementary School Teacher - Regular EducationDouglas England High School Teacher - Regular EducationEd MacElroy Middle School Teacher - Regular EducationJohn Gaub Middle School Teacher - Special EducationDawn Gerrish Parent

3

Assurances

Title I Schools

Title I Priority or Focus Schools

All Title I Schools required to complete improvement plans must assure to the Pennsylvania Department of Education the school's compliance with the following expectations by developing and implementing an improvement plan or otherwise taking actions that meet the expectations described by the Assurances listed below.

Assurances 1 through 12

The school has verified the following Assurances:

Assurance 1: This School Improvement Plan contains Action Plans that address each reason why this school failed to make Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) and/or is identified in the lowest 10% of Title I schools.

Assurance 2: The resources needed for full implementation of the action plans herein documented have been identified and the necessary approvals obtained to allow the procurement and allocation of these resources.

Assurance 3: Documentation of the resources needed for full implementation of the action plans herein documented; including specific, related budgetary information, is available for review upon request by the LEA or SEA.

Assurance 4: If designated as a Priority or Focus School the district has determined whole-school meaningful interventions directly associated with the unmet AMO(s).

Assurance 5: The school improvement plan covers a two-year period.

Assurance 6: The school has adopted and/or continued policies and practices concerning the school's core academic subjects that have the greatest likelihood of improving student achievement.

Assurance 7: High performing LEAs with varied demographic conditions have shown they share common characteristics. The following nine characteristics are embedded in the plan:

o Clear and Shared Focus

o High Standards and Expectations

4

o Effective Leadership

o High Levels of Collaboration and Communication

o Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Aligned with Standards

o Frequent Monitoring of Teaching and Learning

o Focused Professional Development

o Supportive Learning Environment

o High Levels of Community and Parent Involvement

Assurance 8: Focus Schools must implement locally developed interventions associated with a minimum of one of the below principles, while Priority Schools must implement all seven:

o Providing strong leadership by: (1) reviewing the performance of the current principal; (2) either replacing the principal if such a change is necessary to ensure strong and effective leadership or demonstrating to the State Education Agency that the current principal has a track record in improving achievement and has the ability to lead the turnaround effort; and (3) providing the principal with operational flexibility in the areas of scheduling, staff, curriculum and budget.

o Ensuring that teachers are effective and able to improve instruction by: (1) reviewing the quality of all staff and retaining only those who are determined to be effective and have the ability to be successful in the turnaround effort; and (2) preventing ineffective teachers from transferring to these schools.

o Redesign the school day, week, or year to include additional time for student learning and teacher collaboration

o Strengthen the school’s instructional program based on student needs and ensuring that the instructional program is research-based, rigorous, and aligned with state academic content standards.

o Use data to inform instruction and for continuous improvement, including providing time for collaboration on the use of data.

o Establish a school environment that improves school safety and discipline and addresses other non-academic factors that impact student achievement, such as students’ social, emotional and health needs.

o Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement

5

Assurance 9: The school improvement plan delineates responsibilities fulfilled by the school, the LEA and the SEA serving the school under the plan.

Statement 10: Establish specific annual, measurable targets for continuous and substantial progress by each relevant subgroup, which will ensure all such groups of students, update to align with the new AMOs to close the achievement gap

Statement 11: A mentoring/induction program used with teachers new to the school exists; the essential elements of the mentoring/induction program are documented and the documentation is available for review upon request by LEA or SEA authorities.

Statement 12: All parents with enrolled students will receive an annual notification letter which includes the reasons for its identification as Priority or Focus and the school’s plan to improve student achievement.

Assurance 13

The school is communicating with parents regarding school improvement efforts via the following strategies:

School web site

School newsletter

Board meeting presentations

District's annual report

District report card

Press releases to local media

Yearly letter to parents

Periodic mailings/letters, postcards, etc.

Invitations to planning (etc.) meetings

Family Night/ Open House / Back to School Night/ Meet-the-Teachers Night, etc.

Parent-Teacher Conferences

Home-school visits

Student Handbook

Assurance for Priority Schools (Annually Updated SIP)

6

The school has indicated the following response to indicate if it has completed an evaluation with the assistance of our Academic Recovery Liaison:

No

Title I Schoolwide program

The school has indicated the following response as to whether or not it intends to run a Title I Schoolwide program :

Yes

A completed Title I Schoolwide program planning addendum is required if the school is running a Title I Schoolwide program.

DOCX file uploaded.

7

Needs Assessment

School Accomplishments

Accomplishment #1:SPP score increase to 40.3 (2015) from 36.3 (2014).

Data Source: 2015 SPP

Accomplishment #2:ELA/Literature met 100% of the requirement for closing the Achievement Gap in the 2014/2015 school year.


Accomplishment #3:Reading/Literature Scoring:

HS Literature:

Increase in Proficient Level Scoring:

Overall: Increase of 3.1% (5.7% -2014 to 8.8% -2015)

ED: Increase of 9.7% (0.0% -2014 to 9.7% -2015)

Title I: Increase of 10.3% (0.0% -2014 to 10.3% -2015)

HU: Increase of 9.7% (0.0% -2014 to 9.7% -2015)

Decrease in all Groups of Below Basic level scoring:

Overall: Decrease of 28.9% (37.7% -2014 to 8.8% -2015)

IEP: Decrease of 31.2% (50.0% -2014 to 18.8% -2015)

ED: Decrease of 25.4% (35.1% -2014 to 9.7% -2015)

8

Title I: Decrease of 24.6% (34.9% -2014 to 10.3% -2015)

HU: Decrease of 31.8% (41.5% -2014 to 9.7% -2015)

8th Grade Reading:

Decrease in Below Basic level scoring of 17.1% (57.1% -2014 to 40.0% -2015)

7th Grade Reading:

Increase in Proficient Level Scoring:

ED: Increase of 2.3% (7.7% -2014 to 10.0% -2015)

IEP: Increase of 2.4% (14.3% -2014 to 16.7% -2015)

HU: Increase of 2.3% (7.7% -2014 to 10.0% -2015)

Decrease in all Groups of Below Basic Level Scoring:

Overall: Decrease of 17.1% (57.1% - 2014 to 40.0% -2015)

ED: Decrease of 21.5% (61.5% -2014 to 40.0% -2015)



HU: Decrease of 21.5% (61.5% -2014 to 40.0% -2015)

Data Source: 2015 eMetric

Accomplishment #4:Increase in 2015 Proficient/Advanced scoring from the 2014 year in PSSA Reading/Keystone Literature by 1.64% (19.35%-2013 to 25.86%-2014 to 27.50% -2015).

9


Accomplishment #5:Grade 8 Reading: There is evidence that the Below Basic group met the Standard for PA Academic Growth in 2015 with growth of 3.1 from the 2014 with growth of -1.3.

Grade 7 Reading data indicates that growth of -3.3 met the Standard for PA Academic Growth.

Data Source: 2015 PVAAS

Accomplishment #6:Science: HS Biology:

Increase in Advance level Scoring in the following groups:


ED: Increase of 3.3% (0.0% -2014 to 3.3% -2015)


HU: Increase of 3.2% (0.0% -2014 to 3.2% -2015)

Increase in Proficient level Scoring in All Groups:



ED: Increase of 6.6% (5.1% -2014 to 11.7% -2015)


HU: Increase of 7.9% (4.8% -2014 to 12.7% -2015)

Decrease in all Groups of Below Basic level scoring:

10

Overall: Decrease of 10.1% (68.6% -2014 to 58.5 -2015)

IEP: Decrease of 6.0% (91.7% -2014 to 85.7 -2015)

ED: Decrease of 10.9% (69.2% -2014 to 65.3% -2015)


HU: Decrease of 12.7% (71.4% -2014 to 58.7% -2015)

Science: Grade 8 Science:

Increase in Proficient level Scoring in All Groups:



ED: Increase of 20.8% (8.6% -2014 to 29.4% -2015)


HU: Increase of 15.5% (10.8% -2014 to 26.3% -2015)

Decrease in the following Below Basic level scoring:



ED: Decrease of 27.1% (80.0% -2014 to 52.9% -2015)

HU: Decrease of 20.5% (78.4% -2014 to 57.9% -2015)


Accomplishment #7:Algebra I:

Increase in Advanced Scoring in Overall Group of 2.4% (0.0% -2014 to 2.4% -2015)

11

Increase in Advanced Scoring in Title I Group of 3.1% (0.0% -2014 to 3.1% -2015)

Decrease in all Groups of Below Basic level scoring as indicated below:


IEP: Decrease of 35% (85.0% -2014 to 50.0% -2015)

ED: Decrease of 3.3% (57.6% -2014 to 54.3% -2015)


HU: Decrease of 3.0% (58.3% -2014 to 55.3% -2015)


Accomplishment #8:Grade 8 Math: There is evidence that the Below Basic group met the Standard for PA Academic Growth in 2015 with growth of 0.8 from the 2014 growth of 0.7.


Accomplishment #9:Special Education Program: Indicator 5 (% of instruction inside the regular classroom) was met with 82.1% in 2014 (target of 65%). Source: 2014 PennData

School Concerns

Concern #1:Grade 8 Reading scoring showed a decrease in Advanced/Proficient scoring from the previous year with the new PSSA.


ED: Decrease of 25.0% (35.5% -2014 to 10.5% -2015)



12

HU: Decrease of 22.9% (32.4% -2014 to 9.5% -2015)


Concern #2:HS Literature:

The standard for PA Academic Growth was not met in any performance level.


Concern #3:Algebra I:



Concern #4:Student academic history, attendance, and transiency/mobility of the at-risk Charter School. 2015 Semester One data indicate a transiency/mobility rate of 62%.

Data Source: 2015 Local Data/Records

Concern #5:Increase in Student Assistance Program (SAP) referrals during semester one (August to January) of 2014/2015(18 students) to semester one (August to January) of 2015/2016 (20 students) by 0.9%.

Data Source: 2015 Local Data

Concern #6:High level of high risk behaviors of student population that involve drug use, alcohol use, weapons access, depression, self-worth, and gang activity compared to local schools.

13

Data Source: 2015 Local Data and 2014 P.A.Y.S. Survey

Concern #7:2015 Graduation Rate indicates a three-year decrease. 2015 data indicates a decrease of 6.52%. 2.48%. Previous year (68.52%- 2013 to 66.04%- 2014).


Prioritized Systemic Challenges

Systemic Challenge #1 (Guiding Question #6) Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures a safe and supportive environment for all students.

Aligned Concerns:

Student academic history, attendance, and transiency/mobility of the at-risk Charter School. 2015 Semester One data indicate a transiency/mobility rate of 62%.


2015 Graduation Rate indicates a three-year decrease. 2015 data indicates a decrease of 6.52%. 2.48%. Previous year (68.52%- 2013 to 66.04%- 2014).


Increase in Student Assistance Program (SAP) referrals during semester one (August to January) of 2014/2015(18 students) to semester one (August to January) of 2015/2016 (20 students) by 0.9%.


High level of high risk behaviors of student population that involve drug use, alcohol use, weapons access, depression, self-worth, and gang activity compared to local schools.

14

Data Source: 2015 Local Data and 2014 P.A.Y.S. Survey

Systemic Challenge #2 (Guiding Question #4) Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of effective instructional practices that meet the needs of all students across all classrooms and aligns with the Pennsylvania Framework for Teaching

Aligned Concerns:

HS Literature:



Algebra I:



Grade 8 Reading scoring showed a decrease in Advanced/Proficient scoring from the previous year with the new PSSA.


ED: Decrease of 25.0% (35.5% -2014 to 10.5% -2015)



HU: Decrease of 22.9% (32.4% -2014 to 9.5% -2015)


Systemic Challenge #3 (Guiding Question #2) Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures school-wide use of data that is focused on school improvement and the academic growth of all students

Aligned Concerns:

15

HS Literature:



Algebra I:





ED: Decrease of 25.0% (35.5% -2014 to 10.5% -2015)



HU: Decrease of 22.9% (32.4% -2014 to 9.5% -2015)


Systemic Challenge #4 (Guiding Question #1) Ensure that there is a system in the school and/or district that fully ensures the principal is enabled to serve as a strong instructional leader who, in partnership with the school community (students, staff, parents, community, etc.) leads achievement growth and continuous improvement within the school.

Aligned Concerns:

Student academic history, attendance, and transiency/mobility of the at-risk Charter School. 2015 Semester One data indicate a transiency/mobility rate of 62%.


2015 Graduation Rate indicates a three-year decrease. 2015 data indicates a decrease of 6.52%. 2.48%. Previous year (68.52%- 2013 to 66.04%- 2014).

16


Increase in Student Assistance Program (SAP) referrals during semester one (August to January) of 2014/2015(18 students) to semester one (August to January) of 2015/2016 (20 students) by 0.9%.


Systemic Challenge #5 (Guiding Question #3) Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of a standards aligned curriculum framework across all classrooms for all students.

Aligned Concerns:

HS Literature:



Algebra I:





ED: Decrease of 25.0% (35.5% -2014 to 10.5% -2015)



HU: Decrease of 22.9% (32.4% -2014 to 9.5% -2015)


17

Systemic Challenge #6 (Guiding Question #5) Ensure that the organizational structure, processes, materials, equipment, and human and fiscal resources within the school align with the school’s goals for student growth and continuous school improvement.

Aligned Concerns:

HS Literature:



Algebra I:





ED: Decrease of 25.0% (35.5% -2014 to 10.5% -2015)



HU: Decrease of 22.9% (32.4% -2014 to 9.5% -2015)


18

Improvement Plan

Action Plans

Goal #1: Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures a safe and supportive environment for all students.

Related Challenges:

Establish a system within the charter school that fully ensures barriers to student learning are addressed in order to increase student achievement and graduation rates.

Indicators of Effectiveness:

Type: Annual

Data Source: Bridges Inventory Data

Specific Targets: A target of 100% of charter school students utilizing the Bridges Inventory to develop skills, abilities and interests for career awareness and exploration as part of their graduation plan.

Type: Interim

Data Source: Bridges Inventory Data

Specific Targets: A target of 100% of the faculty and administration will be provided with the individual student information to support the student with the goal of graduation and realistic post-secondary options after the assessment and profile windows.

Type: Annual

Data Source: School Data

Specific Targets: A target of an increase of 25% in each year, after the baseline year, of graduating I.E.P. students attaining the goals defined from transition and bridges surveys that are listed in their I.E.P document.

19

Strategies:

Common Assessment within Grade/Subject

Description: WWC reports the effective use of data can have a positive impact upon student achievement; using common assessments to inform teacher practice is one such use of data. (Source: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/dddm_pg_092909.pdf?) Teacher Moderation: Collaborative Assessment of Student Work and Common Assessments provide detailed looks at the development and use of common assessments. (Sources: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/Teacher_Moderation.pdf and Common Assessments: Mike Schmoker. (2006) Results Now: How We Can Achieve Unprecedented Improvements in Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD.) Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Assessment

SAS Alignment: Assessment, Instruction

Data Analysis Procedures, Data-Informed Instruction, Data Teams & Data Warehousing

Description: Using Student Achievement Data to Support Instructional Decision Making provides a WWC reporting of various strategies related to the acquisition, analysis, and application of student data. (Source: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/dddm_pg_092909.pdf )


Career Survey/Exploration/Planning through Bridges.com

Description:

The use of the Skills Survey, Interest Profiler, and Choices Planner in the Bridges.com career site will allow students to explore and plan for realistic post high school options. The student exploration will allow for the student to find personal skills and locate resource information for the skills to be matched to specific career choices. Through this programming, the student will determine the realistic options for post-secondary schooling, training, and career choices.

SAS Alignment: Standards, Assessment, Curriculum Framework, Materials & Resources, Safe and Supportive Schools

Implementation Steps:

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/dddm_pg_092909.pdf


http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Assessment

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/Teacher_Moderation.pdf


20

Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 1 - Renew Computer Based Site License

Description:

The site license for the Bridges.com Choices Planner will be renewed for the 2016/2017 school year.

Indicator of Implementation:

The renewal will indicate that the action plan step has occurred.

Indicator of Effectiveness:

The effectiveness of this step will be indicated by the usability of the program after renewal.

Date of Renewal:

8 -1- 2016: Renewal for 2016/2017 School Year

Start Date: 8/1/2016 End Date: 8/1/2016

Program Area(s): Student Services, Educational Technology

Supported Strategies:

Common Assessment within Grade/Subject Career Survey/Exploration/Planning through Bridges.com

Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 2 - Overview of the Tool During August In-Service

Description:

The Bridges.com survey information will be explained during the August in-service to all faculty and administration. This explanation will include the information that the faculty will need to support the student in their career path.


The in-service agenda will indicate the implementation of the action step.

21


The effectiveness of this step will be indicated by 100% of the faculty participating in the session covering the general description of the tool, the goal of using Bridges.com, and the distribution of the assessment calendar that identifies when the students will be assessed using the four assessment windows.


Program Area(s): Professional Education, Teacher Induction, Student Services, Educational Technology



Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 3 - Assessment

Description:

Students will be computer assessed using the Bridges.com Choices Planner during the September/October window.


The assessment log will indicate the assessment has taken place.


The effectiveness will be indicated for this step by 100% of the students completing the assessment in the assessment windows.

Assessment Dates:

7th/8th Grade: 9/12-23/16

9th Grade: 9/12-23/16

10th Grade: 9/19-28/16

11th Grade: 9/29-10/7/16

12th Grade: 10/10-21/16

22

** On-going assessment for new enrollments up to 6-2-2017





Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 4 - Grade Level Data Profiles

Description:

The Guidance Department will create a grade level data profile from the student assessment that indicates strengths, areas of need, and possible exploration options.


The assessment data and results profile will indicate implementation of the action step.


The effectiveness for this step will be indicated by 100% of the assessed students having a data profile to be stored, printed, and analyzed.

Data Profile Dates:

7th/8th Grade: 9/26/2016

9th Grade: 9/26/2016

10th Grade: 9/30/2016

11th Grade: 10/10/2016

12th Grade: 10/24/2016

** On-going for new enrollments


23






Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 5 - Analyze Data and Distribute to Faculty and Principal

Description:

The data will be disseminated to the faculty and principal by grade level during weekly meetings. Through this, the faculty and principal will be aware of the student interests and choices so that mentoring and support can occur.


The meeting agenda will indicate the data discussion.


Effectiveness of this step will be indicated by the distribution of data and profile information for each attending student, from the guidance department, to the faculty and principal after strengths, weaknesses, and choices have been analyzed.

Analysis and Distribution Dates:

9/29/2016 - 5/25/2017 (ongoing on new students to 6/2/2017)






24

Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 6 - Monitoring of the Student

Description:

The guidance department will provide on-going monitoring and follow-up of the student to support goals. The use of educational visits, campus visits, and career interest field trips will be supported through the follow-up.


The monitoring of students will be indicated through the guidance reporting and student visit rosters.


The effectiveness of this action step will be indicated by the documentation of career exploration and educational visits to make realistic determinations on post-graduation options. Changes or new exploration of student interests will also measure effectiveness of this on-going process.






Career Survey/Exploration/Planning: Step 7 - Revisit and Schedule for the 2017/2018 School Year

Description:

The Learning Style Tool implementation schedule will be determined after the 2017/2018 school calendar is approved. The training, implementation schedule and analysis time-frames will be determined.

25


The 2017/2018 Learning Style Tool Assessment Calendar will indicate the step was implemented


Program Area(s):



Goal #2: Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of effective instructional practices that meet the needs of all students across all classrooms and aligns with the Pennsylvania Framework for Teaching

Related Challenges:

Establish a system within the Charter School that fully ensures the consistent implementation of effective instructional practices across all classrooms.


Establish a system within the charter school that fully ensures students who are academically at risk are identified early and are supported by a process that provides interventions based upon student needs and includes procedures for monitoring effectiveness.

Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures school-wide use of data that is focused on school improvement and the academic growth of all students

Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures a safe and supportive environment for all students.


Type: Interim

Data Source: Collins Writing Samples

Specific Targets: The school-wide writing program will ensure that students are presented with a systematic method of responding to Constructed Response writing prompts. The target of a 35 point increase from the previous year’s school-wide writing score as indicated by drc data.

26

Strategies:




Instructional Coaching

Description:

Kansas Coaching Project: Instructional coaches are on-site professional developers who teach educators how to use proven instructional methods. To be successful in this role, coaches must be skilled in a variety of roles, including public relations guru, communicator extraordinaire, master organizer and, of course, expert educator. (Source: http://instructionalcoach.org/about/about-coaching) Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Professional+Development

SAS Alignment: Assessment, Curriculum Framework, Instruction, Materials & Resources


Collins Writing Program: Step 1 - August In-service Revisit

Description:

The Collins Writing Program will be revisited from the previous three years of training and use.


The in-service agenda will reflect implementation.


Program Area(s): Professional Education, Teacher Induction

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Professional+Development

http://instructionalcoach.org/about/about-coaching


27


Instructional Coaching

Collins Writing Program: Step 2 - Content Area Writing Review

Description:

All content teachers will revisit the Collins Writing types for students. New and returning students will receive instruction on the format and process of writing in the Collins Method. The types of writing, specific language, and FCA's will be introduced.


The lesson plans and curriculum mapping will indicate the step has taken place.


Program Area(s): Teacher Induction, Special Education, Student Services



Collins Writing Program: Step 3 - Classroom Use

Description:

The Collins Writing framework will be implemented into the planning for classroom instruction. Teachers will address Type 1 Writing in Bell-ringers, Pre-Reading/Writing activities, and Warm-ups. Type 2 Writing activities will be evident in Entrance/Exit Slips, Fact-based activity writing, and Basic writing connections to graphic organizers. Type 3 and Type 4 Writing will involve all multi-paragraph writing and peer reviewed writing. Type 5 Writing will involve publication of the writing using the Collins definition of publication.


The implementation of this action step will be evident in lesson planning, diary mapping, observation, and work samples.

28





Collins Writing Program: Step 4 - Review and Reflect

Description:

The teacher and administration will review the success and obstacles with the writing program as a school-wide initiative and as a classroom model for writing and responding to prompts. Analysis and reflection will occur in faculty meetings to determine changes that are needed for success.


The meeting agenda will indicate that review and reflection occurs in the school.





Goal #3: Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures school-wide use of data that is focused on school improvement and the academic growth of all students

Related Challenges:

Establish a system within the Charter School that fully ensures the consistent implementation of effective instructional practices across all classrooms.

29


Establish a system within the charter school that fully ensures students who are academically at risk are identified early and are supported by a process that provides interventions based upon student needs and includes procedures for monitoring effectiveness.

Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of effective instructional practices that meet the needs of all students across all classrooms and aligns with the Pennsylvania Framework for Teaching


Type: Interim

Data Source: Study Island Assessment

Specific Targets: An increase in the benchmark scoring on the Study Island benchmark assessment for I.E.P. students of 10% in each of the four administrations over the course of the school-year will indicate a positive trend in attaining the goal of moving I.E.P. students toward proficiency in the classroom and on the PSSA and Keystone Exam.

Type: Annual


Specific Targets: The target of a 5 point increase in the total school-wide score from the previous year (2016) data.

Type: Interim


Specific Targets: The target of a 5% school-wide increase of Proficient/Advanced level scoring from each of the previous quarterly assessments over the course of the school-year.

Strategies:

30


Description: WWC reports the effective use of data can have a positive impact upon student achievement; using common assessments to inform teacher practice is one such use of data. (Source: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/dddm_pg_092909.pdf?) Teacher Moderation: Collaborative Assessment of Student Work and Common Assessments provide detailed looks at the development and use of common assessments. (Sources: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/Teacher_Moderation.pdf and Common Assessments: Mike Schmoker. (2006) Results Now: How We Can Achieve Unprecedented Improvements in Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD.) Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Assessment






Study Island Assessment: Step 1 - Schedule Assessment Windows for 2016/2017 School-Year

Description:

The assessment windows for lab use by teacher during the four Study Island Assessments will be scheduled into the school assessment calendar.


Evidence of implementation will be indicated by the addition of the Study Island assessment windows into the schedule.

Planning Dates:

June 20, 2016


http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Assessment




31


Program Area(s):



Study Island Assessment: Step 2 - Renew Computer Program License

Description:

The Study Island computer program site license will be renewed through edmentum.


Purchase order and use of the Study Island Program will indicate that this step was implemented.


Program Area(s): Educational Technology



Study Island Assessment: Step 3 - In-service Training

Description:

The August in-service will consist of the use of Study Island as a school-wide assessment and as a classroom extension/enrichment tool. The faculty will receive training on the overview of the program, creating class lists and log-ins, use of the assessment, data and use of data from the assessment, and how to use the program as classroom extensions and enrichment.


32

The sign-in sheets will indicate that the faculty received the training on Study Island.


Effectiveness of this step will be indicated by 100% of the Mathematics, ELA, and Science teachers demonstrating understanding of schedule windows, eligible content for their content, and the benchmark measurement capabilities of Study Island for use in the classroom during the training.

Training Date:

August 24, 2016


Program Area(s): Teacher Induction, Special Education, Educational Technology




Study Island Assessment: Step 4 - Entering Student Data

Description:

Faculty will enter class list into the Study Island system and create generic log-ins for each student.


The roster information will indicate that each student is in the system.


Effectiveness of this step will be indicated by 100% of the rostered students being enrolled in the system for assessment to occur in the classroom using their student log-in.


33

Program Area(s): Educational Technology



Study Island Assessment: Step 5 - Computer Assessment of Students

Description:

Students will be assessed in the computer lab during the available assessment windows four times over the course of the school year.


The assessment data for each student will indicate the step has occurred.


The effectiveness of this step is indicated by 100% of the rostered students being assessed within the appropriate assessment window in ELA, Mathematics, and Science content areas.

Assessment Dates:

Window 1: 9/1-16/2016 Window 2: 11/29-12/9/2016

Window 3: 2/13-24/2017

Window 4: 4/3-12/2017


Program Area(s): Teacher Induction, Special Education, Student Services, Educational Technology



Study Island Assessment: Step 6 - Data Reports and Analyzing Data

34

Description:

The submission of data reports will occur for analysis in the data meetings. The department teachers and administration will analyze the data and make the necessary changes to instruction and programming from the data sets.


The meeting notes will indicate implementation by reporting changes made from the data analysis. The benchmark proficiency percentage information given to each member of the content team will also indicate implementation.


Effectiveness of this step will be indicated by 100% of the teachers identifying data trends within their content area and making the necessary changes for increasing student performance as documented in their reporting out during the monthly content area meeting.

Data Meeting By Wave:

Window 1 Data meeting: 9/19-22/2016 Window 2 Data meeting: 12/12-15/2016

Window 3 Data meeting: 2/27-28/2017

Window 4 Data meeting: 4/13-14/2017






Study Island Assessment: Step 7 - Data Informed Decisions for Programming

Description:

35

The Study Island benchmark data will be analyzed to determine changes necessary for change in instruction and programming.


Data meeting notes will indicate that the analysis and possible changes occurred.


The effectiveness of this step will be indicated by the data informed changes that are necessary for the school year from data provided on anchor, eligible content, concept, and open-ended scoring.





Study Island Assessment: Step 8 - Monitoring Programming Changes

Description:

After the initial data analysis, the changes in programming will be implemented to meet the needs of the student, classroom, and content area so that the target increase is met.


The monthly curriculum mapping will indicate the changes made to meet the areas of need within the classroom.


The effectiveness of this step will be indicated by student performance increases within the classroom from data-informed change and the on-going changes that the teacher will make from formative and summative measures until the next assessment wave occurs.

36

Monitoring Dates:

Wave 1 monitoring: 9/1/2016 - 11/28/2016 Wave 2 monitoring: 11/29/2016 - 2/12/2017

Wave 3 monitoring: 2/13/2017 - 4/2/2017

Wave 4 monitoring: 4/3/2017 - 6/2/2017






Study Island Assessment: Step 9 - Schedule for 2017/2018 School Year

Description:

The Study Island implementation schedule will be determined after the 20167/2018 school calendar is approved. The Study Island training, implementation schedule and analysis time-frames will be determined.


The 2017/2018 Study Island Assessment Calendar will indicate the step was implemented.


Program Area(s):



37

Goal #4: Ensure that there is a system in the school and/or district that fully ensures the principal is enabled to serve as a strong instructional leader who, in partnership with the school community (students, staff, parents, community, etc.) leads achievement growth and continuous improvement within the school.

Related Challenges:

Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of a standards aligned curriculum framework across all classrooms for all students.


Type: Interim

Data Source: The principal will meet monthly with the ELA, Mathematics, and Science faculty to review data and ensure that PA Academic Standards are being covered.

Specific Targets: The specific target of a 25% increase in each quarter for all content area teams using content area standards, literacy standards, and writing standards.

Type: Annual

Data Source: Curriculum Revision

Specific Targets: The specific target will be that 100% of the ELA, Mathematics, and Science curriculums will be revised during the summer revision window from data to make -informed changes to content and classroom instruction.

Strategies:




38



Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 1 - Gathering Data

Description:

The Principal will utilize three specific data sources for content area meetings. PVAAS, eMetric, and Study Island Benchmark assessment data will be gathered and utilized for the meetings.


Data documents will be accessed from Study Island Benchmark reporting, PVAAS Performance Level Scoring Growth, and eMetric data for use in the meetings.


Program Area(s): Teacher Induction, Student Services



Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 2 - Standards from Lesson Plans and Diary Mappings

Description:

All PA Academic Standards will be tracked by the principal monthly during the content team meetings. Standards and Eligible Content covered in the classroom will be indicated on a wall-chart for each instructor and discussed during the meeting.


Meeting sign-in sheets and inclusion of chart data will indicate implementation of this action step. Dates for scheduled meetings are listed below:

39

9-30-16 10-28-16

11-25-16

12-22-16

1-27-17

2-24-17

3-31-17

4-28-17

5-26-17





Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 3 - Review PVAAS, eMetric, and Benchmark Data by Department

Description:

The Principal will lead the department data meetings to review what the current school data is indicating in relation to scoring and instruction.


The meeting sign-in sheet and agenda/notes will indicate that the action step occurred.

Meeting Dates are as follows:

9-30-16 10-28-16

11-25-16

12-22-16

40

1-27-17

2-24-17

3-31-17

4-28-17

5-26-17


Program Area(s):



Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 4 - Analyze Data

Description:

The content area team, led by the Principal, will analyze all current data to find scoring patterns relating to systemic concerns.

Indicator of implementation:

The data meeting sign-in sheets and notes will indicate the action step occurred.


9-30-16 10-28-16

11-25-16

12-22-16

1-27-17

2-24-17

3-31-17

41

4-28-17

5-26-17


Program Area(s):



Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 5 - Data Informed Change

Description:

The content area team, led by the Principal, will make data-informed changes in content area instruction to rectify instruction related to scoring deficiencies.


The meeting sign-in sheet and notes on change will indicate the action step occurred.


9-30-16 10-28-16

11-25-16

12-22-16

1-27-17

2-24-17

3-31-17

4-28-17

5-26-17


42

Program Area(s):



Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 6 - Monitor Change

Description:

The content area team, led by the Principal, will monitor changes for effectiveness and report findings in the monthly meetings.


The meeting sign-in sheet and meeting notes will indicate that the action step occurred.


Program Area(s):



Data Team Meetings; Analysis; Informed Decisions: Step 7 - Curriculum Revision from Data

Description:

The content area team members will revise the curriculum to include all changes made from the data and monitoring.


The curriculum revisions will indicate the action step occurred.


43

Program Area(s):



Goal #5: Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of a standards aligned curriculum framework across all classrooms for all students.


Type: Interim

Data Source: Monthly Diary Mapping

Specific Targets: The target of 100% of all content area teachers providing the principal with their monthly diary maps (9 total) that include the following for each month: Concepts, Competencies, Differentiation/BDA, Academic Vocabulary, Assessments, and Standards.

Type: Annual

Data Source: Academic Vocabulary

Specific Targets: All teachers (100%)will create an academic vocabulary display in their classroom.

Strategies:

Curriculum Mapping

Description:

44

Empirical evidence of a positive statistical correlation of the use of curriculum mapping with student achievement is scarce. There was a 2001 study by the Indiana Center of Evaluation conducted for the Ohio DOE that determined curriculum alignment (defined as curriculum mapping with subsequent change in instructional practice) was the “single greatest factor in achieving improved test scores.” The following link provides a list of resources supporting the positive contributions of curriculum mapping to educational processes: http://www.curriculummapping101.com/materials/curriculum-mapping-research ; the following link provides an overview of curriculum mapping: http://webserver3.ascd.org/handbook/demo/mapping2.html Resource:http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Curriculum+Framework

SAS Alignment: Standards, Materials & Resources

Standards Aligned System - Curriculum Framework

Description:

The Curriculum Framework specifies what is to be taught for each subject in the curriculum. In Pennsylvania, Curriculum Frameworks include Big Ideas, Concepts, Competencies, and Essential Questions aligned to Standards and Assessment Anchors and, where appropriate, Eligible Content. (Source: http://www.pdesas.org/CMap/CFramework/CFramework) Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Curriculum+Framework

SAS Alignment: Curriculum Framework

Effective Practices for Teaching Academic Vocabulary

Description:

Academic vocabulary is the vocabulary critical to understanding the concepts of the content taught in schools. It is vocabulary that supports student comprehension of instructional content. Academic vocabulary exposes students to the word origins, multiple meanings of words, and reference to abstract concepts that relate and connects directly to the targeted content area. Pennsylvania Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education, Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network. (Source: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/file/view/Effc_Tch_Vocab311.pdf/528268006/Effc_Tch_Vocab311.pdf) Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Instructional+Practices



http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Instructional+Practices

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/file/view/Effc_Tch_Vocab311.pdf/528268006/Effc_Tch_Vocab311.pdf

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/file/view/Effc_Tch_Vocab311.pdf/528268006/Effc_Tch_Vocab311.pdf

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Curriculum+Framework

http://www.pdesas.org/CMap/CFramework/CFramework

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Curriculum+Framework%0D%0A

http://webserver3.ascd.org/handbook/demo/mapping2.html%20

http://www.curriculummapping101.com/materials/curriculum-mapping-research

http://www.curriculummapping101.com/materials/curriculum-mapping-research

45

Curriculum Mapping and Revision: Step 1 - In-service Explanation of Mapping Changes, B-D-A, and Academic Vocabulary

Description:

The changes in monthly curriculum mapping and content area curriculum revision will be discussed during the August 2016 in-service. A power point explanation will include the following required map components: Concepts, Competencies, Differentiation/B-D-A Strategies, Academic Vocabulary, Assessments, and Standards. A review of B-D-A will occur with a user tool for all faculty. Academic Vocabulary will be reviewed and discussed for all faculty. This will also include the protocol for displaying Academic Vocabulary in the classroom.


Implementation of this action step will be indicated by the faculty sign-in sheet and agenda.




Curriculum Mapping Standards Aligned System - Curriculum Framework Effective Practices for Teaching Academic Vocabulary

Curriculum Mapping and Revision: Step 2 - Diary Mapping

Description:

All faculty will provide monthly Diary Mappings to the principal that include the following: Concepts, Competencies, Assessments, Differentiation, and Standards/Eligible Content that was covered within the month.


Monthly Diary Mapping will be emailed to the principal on the following dates:

Aug/Sept Due: 10-3-16 October Due: 11-1-16

46

November Due: 12-1-16

December Due: 1-7-17

January Due: 2-1-17

February Due: 3-1-17

March Due: 4-3-17

April Due: 5-1-17

May Due: 6-2-17


Program Area(s): Professional Education, Teacher Induction, Special Education


Curriculum Mapping Standards Aligned System - Curriculum Framework

Curriculum Mapping and Revision: Step 3 - Content Area Curriculum Revision

Description:

The ELA, Mathematics, and Science departments will conduct a revision writing of their course curriculum using the SAS Framework. A consistent curriculum document format will be used for the revisions.


The submission of a completed course curriculum that is aligned to PA Core Standards will indicate implementation of this action step

Submission Dates:

ELA: 9-30-2016 Science: 9-30-2016

Mathematics: 9-30-2016


47

Program Area(s):


Standards Aligned System - Curriculum Framework

Goal #6: Ensure that the organizational structure, processes, materials, equipment, and human and fiscal resources within the school align with the school’s goals for student growth and continuous school improvement.

Related Challenges:

Ensure that there is a system in the school and/or district that fully ensures the principal is enabled to serve as a strong instructional leader who, in partnership with the school community (students, staff, parents, community, etc.) leads achievement growth and continuous improvement within the school.

Ensure that there is a system within the school that fully ensures consistent implementation of a standards aligned curriculum framework across all classrooms for all students.


Type: Interim

Data Source: Walk-through data meetings

Specific Targets: Walk-through data will indicate the correlation to lesson planning and monthly curriculum in relation to PA Academic Standards, Eligible Content, and Assessment Anchors utilized within best-practice based instruction with a goal of the principal meeting with 100% of the faculty observed during the same week to discuss observations from the walk-through and changes necessary for student success in a timely manner.

Type: Annual

Data Source: Year-end material requisition form

Specific Targets: All faculty (100%) will provide an academic material requisition form to the building principal for appropriate materials that will ensure that PA Academic Standards, Eligible Content, and Assessment Anchors are covered and assessed within the daily instruction to ensure student success.

48

Strategies:

Data Walkthroughs

Description:

Schedule weekly walkthroughs to classrooms and conduct a follow-up meeting to provide specific feedback and recommendations. Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Using+Data


Weekly Team Meetings

Description:

Conduct weekly team meetings that have a specific focus and product each week. Resource: http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Using+Data

SAS Alignment: Assessment, Instruction, Materials & Resources, Safe and Supportive Schools


Data Walkthroughs: Step 1 - Weekly Schedule

Description:

The Principal will identify days for the Data Walkthrough within the week.


Weekly Calendar


Program Area(s):


Data Walkthroughs

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Using+Data

http://effectivestrategies.wiki.caiu.org/Using+Data

49

Data Walkthroughs: Step 2 - Observe Classrooms

Description:

The building Principal will conduct a brief weekly walkthrough of the scheduled classrooms while looking for best-practices within quality instruction, PA Academic Standards, student concerns, and infrastructure/material issues.


Classroom walkthrough completion


Program Area(s): Teacher Induction, Student Services, Educational Technology


Data Walkthroughs

Data Walkthroughs: Step 3 - Organization of Noticed Accomplishments and Concerns

Description:

The principal will organize information and data from the data walkthrough to include noticed accomplishments and concerns within the classroom.


Pre-meeting/email notes


Program Area(s): Teacher Induction


Data Walkthroughs

50

Data Walkthroughs: Step 4 - Weekly Individual Teacher Contact Meeting / Email

Description:

The principal will meet with the observed teacher and/or email the teacher of the results from the data walkthroughs. The meeting/email will highlight the noticed accomplishments, concerns, and provide opportunity for teacher response.


The meeting schedule/email will indicate implementation of the action step.


Program Area(s): Professional Education, Teacher Induction, Student Services


Data Walkthroughs Weekly Team Meetings

Data Walkthroughs: Step 5 - Weekly Team Meeting

Description:

The building principal will conduct weekly staff meetings to discuss building issues, data walkthough findings, and needs of the faculty as a whole.


Emailed meeting minutes to all school personnel




Data Walkthroughs Weekly Team Meetings

51

Data Walkthroughs: Step 6 - Material Requisition Form

Description:

The principal will supply all faculty with a material requisition form on the first Thursday weekly meeting in May. All faculty will have the month of May to locate materials that they would like considered for purchase to ensure that students will experience success.


Requisition forms will be given during the weekly faculty meeting and the implementation of this step will be evident in the meeting meetings


Program Area(s):



Data Walkthroughs: Step 7 - Material Requisition Review and Purchase

Description:

The principal will meet with the administrative team to discuss the requested materials, their appropriateness, funding sources, and the effectiveness of increasing Keystone/PSSA assessment. Materials deemed appropriate will be given to the purchasing agent for district purchase.


Administrative meeting sign-in sheet will indicate implementation of this action step


Program Area(s):



53

Appendix: Professional Development Implementation Step DetailsNo Professional Development Implementation Steps have been identified for Keystone Education Center CS.

54

Assurance of Quality and AccountabilityWe, the undersigned, hereby certify that the school level plan for Keystone Education Center CS has been duly reviewed by a Quality Review Team convened by the Superintendent of Schools and formally approved by the district's Board of Education, per guidelines required by the Pennsylvania Department of Education.

We hereby affirm and assure the Secretary of Education that the school level plan:

Addresses all the required components prescribed by the Pennsylvania Department of Education

Meets ESEA requirements for Title I schools

Reflects sound educational practice

Has a high probability of improving student achievement

Has sufficient District leadership and support to ensure successful implementation

With this Assurance of Quality & Accountability, we, therefore, request that the Secretary of Education and the Pennsylvania Department of Education grant formal approval to implement the school level plan submitted by Keystone Education Center CS for the 2014-2017 school-year.

No signature has been provided

Superintendent/Chief Executive Officer


Board President


IU Executive Director

55

Evaluation of School Improvement PlanDescribe the success from the first year plan

The first year plan provided evidence of success in the areas of creating a common focus for the school and teachers, creating a common language for writing and assessment, and providing assessment data to be used by administration, faculty, students, and parents. These successes provided an avenue for discussion among all participants in the school for future revision and initial planning to occur. This success was evident by the fact that more people were looking at and using data to make determinations and decisions for growth to occur than ever before on a consistent basis.The most successful area of the first year plan was actually a result of a failure in the original planning. The infrastructure and system issues attached to the CDT became a barrier that was identified earlier in the school year and needed to be addressed. Through the inability to enroll students and keep consistent system connections, the decision was made through much discussion and deliberation to move to Study Island for our benchmark assessment and computer based extension activities. The failure of implementing the CDT allowed for the decision making process to involve all administration and faculty teams in an effort of using data to make the best decision possible for the plan to be followed. The move to Study Island has yielded the following positive results: Pennsylvania aligned benchmarks are being utilized as extensions and benchmark assessments; a common language in the common assessment is occurring; student growth reporting from faculty; student self-reporting of benchmarks; data decisions among content departments for both individual and class growth. A main focus of the plan involved utilizing data to make data - informed decisions. This was a need from administration, faculty, and students. The first year plan addressed this by not only providing data from various sources but also by providing a platform for data to be understood, discussed, and used to make a change that will be of benefit. The consistent sources of Study Island benchmark data, Learning Style data, and Bridges.com Career Choices data were used to provide a common data set across grade levels while creating an awareness of the student levels and overall school trends. The discussion at this level was new and provided everyone involved insight into what was successful and what needed changing. This discussion allowed for authentic data-informed-decisions to be part of the meeting and planning process. To date this is proving to be a success from the first year planning.The final area of success has been the implementation of a common writing model as a school-wide implementation. The Collins Writing program provided a consistent framework for writing and a common language. Training from the Collins Associates in August of 2014 provided explanations and implementations of the specific types of Collins Writing. Through the training, faculty created examples of each writing type and determined how to use a Type 1, Type 2, and Type 3 writing in the first-year of the plan to increase overall writing prompt scores; specifically the open-ended response prompts of the PSSA and Keystone Exams. The Type 4 and Type 5 writing will be implemented during the 2015/2016 school-year. This approach to writing has proven to be successful in the classroom with 100% of the teachers being observed using the writing method and on the writing sections of the assessments.

Describe the continuing areas of concerns from the first year plan

56

The main areas of concern relate to transiency/mobility student issues, time and infrastructure related problems. The failures or delays in implementation of the timeline revolve around technology infrastructure and unrealistic time-frames with regard to implementation and action sequences involving transient students that would require a larger support staff. These issues have proven to be barriers for the success of the plan implementation as it was rolled - out at the beginning of the school-year. To this point, all interventions are implemented at least 50%, most are in the 75% range which follows closely to where the initial planning showed we should be at this point in the school year. However, the concern with this is that the implementation dates and follow-up time-frames are not consistent to the implementation schedule. Another issue that we came to see was that of student transiency/mobility. At the end of the 2nd quarter we had a transiency rate of 58%. This required us to revisit all implementations because of the amount of new students. We did not plan using these transiency rates. We expect the implementation issues to be resolved at the beginning of the school-year, but are still concerned that once the transiency percentage increases that we will see similar inconsistency of action sequence dates from the revision of the plan.

Describe the initiatives that have been revised

The main revision was eliminating the CDT and moving to Study Island for benchmarking and classroom use. This move has proved to be successful to date, both with consistent benchmarking and student classroom use. The assessment windows have been revised due to missing the first window as scheduled in the planning action steps. After the time-frames were modified, the assessments occurred. This also caused a concern for explanations of data due to planning being related to the CDT. The first explanation of the change and what the data would look like occurred with all faculty during the fall in-service. The similarities from the CDT training were noted and the session covered what the data was saying and what needed to happen from the data sets in instruction. Both the timeline and the Study Island data training have been restructured for the plan revision.Another revision occurred with the time-frame revision for implementation and follow-up. It became evident by October that the rate of implementation and follow-up was not going to remain on-track without considerable revisiting. The time-frames were extended to meet this concern. This is a continued focus in the plan revision with Bridges.com Career Choices Planner. The initial time-frame was not possible due to attendance and computer availability. Attendance was not a consideration in original planning. Also not considered was the transiency/mobility rate, this also created an implementation with many gaps. Both of these issues have led to revisions in the second year plan.

Describe the success from the past year.

The charter school has experienced continued success with providing a common language and framework for writing. The school-wide emphasis of utilizing the Collins Writing frameworks has provided faculty and students a common language of writing that is demonstrating success in constructed response writing. The increase in the constructed response scoring is a positive data set for the school.In our first full year using the Study Island benchmark assessment, success is evident in structuring the assessment in quarterly waves. As a mid-year move from the CDT in the previous year, this year has been a success by providing the teacher and principal with accurate Pennsylvania benchmark assessment data. A major accomplishment has been the continual movement of students from the Below Basic scoring category in all assessed areas according to PVAAS and eMetric data. This movement has

57

been a major factor to the growth that we see in PVAAS. Along with the growth, the ELA has met the required percentage of the achievement gap closure for the 2015/2016 school-year.

Describe the continuing areas of concerns from the first two years.

Again, the main concern and issue for the charter school is that of transiency and mobility of our student population. As a charter school for "at-risk" students, transiency and mobility is expected, however the frameworks of school accountability in regard to the single prong school measure of the PSSA or Keystone exam provide a unique problem for a charter school that experienced a 62% turnover in students by the beginning of the second semester. The glaring concern of only enrolling students that are truant, behaviorally challenged and academically behind is further pronounced by the transiency issue. It has become increasingly difficult for faculty to maintain the pathway needed for instruction for proficiency on the high stakes type assessment while revisiting lessons from the beginning of the school-year due to transiency and mobility. Motivation to do well on the PSSA or Keystone Exam continues to be an issue with our students. As a school for "at-risk" student populations that are 3-5 years behind academically according to the Basic Achievement Skills Inventory (BASI) data, only 16% of our population have experienced success on the PSSA or Keystone Exams in previous assessments. This continued lack of proficiency in their home school district is continuing in the charter school for most. Repetitive failure and test apprehension is proving to be a very real concern for us with regard to student motivation to do well on the assessments.

Describe the initiatives that have been revised.

The use of Study Island as the charter school's benchmark assessment continues to be a revised initiative with regard to assessment windows. The modification of the windows and assessment time-frames are constantly changing in regard to the number of available computers. Infrastructure issues with the programming require greater flexibility than expected for the assessments to be given to all students. Throughout the course of the school-year 92% of the population of students are scheduled into at least one Study Island classroom, the 8% not scheduled require schedule flexibility. This is a great improvement over last years 18% of the students that were not scheduled in a Study Island classroom as part of their class day.The Bridges.com program time-lines have been revised three times in the school-year to date. As with the Study island infrastructure issues, the Bridges.com issues are the same but more profound. Assessing the entire school in Bridges and providing research time for the student has proven to be an unattainable task. Currently, small group testing in waves is providing a better assessment and usabiltiy experience for the student but still is not optimum. Next year, the schedule has changed considerably to address the grade-level assessment issues with Bridges.

keystonecharterschool.comkeystonecharterschool.com › yahoo_site_admin › assets › ... · web...

Documents