EDL 273 - Field Based Learning Assignment

Spring, 2018

The purpose of this assignment is for students to have an opportunity to learn about the
development of a responsive strategic school improvement plan using cycles of the Plan-Do-
Study-Act process.

Part Ia: Plan – Collect and Chart Data to Assess the Current Situation

Assess Current Reality

Measure Data What does the data mean?

FAST – WPM This is the first year in our
for fluency % of students meeting expected benchmark in this testing district that the Fast
period. assessment is given for all
In K/1 it is the Grade Fall Winter students – including those in
EarlyReading Kinder 79.7% 80.0% grades 3-5.
Composite test 1st 86.8% 83.7%
given in place of From the fall to winter
FAST – similar
2nd 83.8% 82.8% period, grades K-3 stayed
assessment 3rd 85.4% 86.2% consistent in their
based on 4th 84.1% 77.2% performance by not going
phonics. 5th 78.1% 90.6% up/down in proficiency levels
by more than 3.1 percent.
School-wide:
Fall – 82.9 % of students meeting benchmark Grade 4 had a 6.9% drop in
Winter – 83.5% of students meeting benchmark proficiency, while fifth grade
went up by 12.5%.
AReading – This is the first year that this
measure of test has been given in the
comprehension district, so it will become our
and overall Grade Fall Winter baseline data as cohorts are
reading ability. Kinder Not 80.0% followed to the next grade
Given level.
1st 76.9% 83.7%
Overall, this data had a
2nd 75.7% 80.8% decent increase in grades one
3rd 89.3% 87.2% and two, while either staying
4th 88.1% 87.1% very similar or dropping a
5th 81.9% 82.2% few percentage points in the
School-wide: upper grade levels.
Fall – 82.5% of students meeting benchmark
Winter – 83.5% of students meeting benchmark

BAS – This assessment shows the

Benchmark percentage of students that
Assessment Grade Fall Winter are reading at their expected
System – Kinder Not 74.7% benchmark level for the given
measure of Given testing period.
accuracy and
comprehension
1st 78.6% 86.4% Similar to the last
in reading 2nd 86.4% 90.7% assessment, grades 1 and 2
3rd 86.2% 85.1%
 4th 92.6% 89.5% showed a significant jump in
5th 91.4% 90.4% proficiency percentage.
School-wide:
Fall – 87.2% of students meeting benchmark Grades 3-5 all showed a
Winter – 86.2 % of students meeting benchmark small decrease in percentage
points from the fall to winter
testing period.
Iowa Grade Not Proficient Advanced # of Last year’s Iowa Assessment
Assessment Data Proficient Proficient Students data shows each grade level’s
in reading across 3rd 10.8% 58.6% 30.6% 111 progress as they move
cohorts in grades (16- towards 5th grade.
3-5. This year’s 17) Unfortunately, this year’s
data is not data is not back yet, so it is
included as we Grade Not Proficient Advanced # of difficult to analyze for all
took the Iowa Proficient Proficient Students current students/groups
Assessments 3rd – 14.3% 52.7% 33.0% 112 within our building.
after spring (15-
break. 16) Speaking towards students
4th – 14.2% 34.9% 50.9% 106 that are currently in our
(16- building (the second chart,)
17) there was a very slight
decrease in students that were
Grade Not Proficient Advanced # of not proficient, but there was a
Proficient Proficient Students huge jump in students that
3rd – 12.8% 48.9% 38.3% 94 moved from proficient to
(14- advanced proficient.
15)
4th – 6.7% 37.1% 56.2% 89 In the third chart, the
percentage of students that
(15-
were not proficient in fifth
16)
grade had a jump up, while
5th – 12.6% 32.6% 54.7% 95
the percentage of students
(16-
that were proficient and
17)
advanced proficient went
down.

Due to not yet having the

results of this year’s
assessment, I will not use this
yet for strategic planning, but
these trends in data will be
something to monitor.

1. What do the data say about students’ current level of performance?

The data shows that students in our school are in the 80-90% proficient range in general,
and there was not a tremendous amount of growth school-wide from the fall to winter
testing periods. Between the first three assessments, first and second grade seem to be
making the most growth, while third through fifth grade seem to be staying stationary or
even trending slightly downward based on the results.

2. What might be causing the current results?

 One cause of these results may be the lack of phonemic awareness and other early
literacy skills that often are not taught in the upper grade levels. From conversations that
have taken place with our instructional leadership team, there was a gap for a few years
in the district on these skills being explicitly taught in the early grades, and these students
are now in the upper elementary grades. There is a start to a plan in place to remedy this
for next year, which will be covered later.

Another cause behind these results is the fact that texts continue to increase in complexity
as students move throughout the grade levels, and the vocabulary/skills that students need
to complete many assigned tasks increase exponentially. Our school has a system of
interventions in place when students really struggle, but there is not a
consistent/systematic method of teaching small group reading to our students.

Part Ib: Plan – Define the Current Situation

1. What is the problem/opportunity for improvement and why are you selecting it?
An area for opportunity for improvement jumps out the most to me in our fluency scores
(the first measure.) I am choosing this because it is where our data is the lowest, and
some of the biggest dips have taken place, so I believe that it has the highest leverage for
change for the most students in our school. This is also an area that we have discussed as
having possible gaps, so it is a logical place to start.

2. How is this opportunity for improvement connected to the mission and vision of the
school?
One of our core beliefs at our school is that every student can and will learn at high
levels. Providing students access and direct instruction in the area of phonics will
overcome some gap areas in fluency, which will provide students the opportunity to
easier access more demanding texts.

3. What is currently being done to address the issue?

Our upper grades (grades 3-5) have taken some time this semester during our PLC Plus
days to learn about a fluency intervention that can be applied next year to a whole group
setting, which is called 95 Percent. There is a small group intervention component to this
that myself and one other teacher has dabbled in, but most staff has not received training
with it. Most teachers in the school use repeated readings for a fluency intervention. It is
up to staff this year to give the whole group portion a try if they would like to, but it will
be required next year. In the lower grades (K-2,) each classroom has their own way of
teaching phonics, so there is not a systematic approach to phonics instruction.
Students that “fell out” on the screening assessment at the beginning and middle of the
year are progress monitored weekly, and we have grade level data meetings to discuss
progress being made with each of these individual students. We use the four-point
decision making method – if the arrows towards the student’s goal on our progress
monitoring site are green, then their specific intervention continues. If there are four red
arrows in a row, then the intervention needs to be altered.
 4. What SMART goal(s) will you set for improvement?
a. Specific
b. Measureable d. Relevant
c. Attainable e. Time Bound (annual goals)
Since it is the end of the year, this goal is written for next year – the current data will follow the
same cohorts up a grade level as one of these assessments is new school-wide, and another one is
new for grades 3-5.

By the end of next school year (2018-19,) 100% of students K-5 will meet the year-end
benchmark for fluency, as measured by the FAST assessment.

Part II: Do – Plan Improvement Strategies

1. What improvement (change) strategies will you implement in the next 45-60 days?
Over the next 45-60 days, our staff PD will look a little bit different. In grades K-2, the
focus for their PD will be to work in grade level as well as vertical teams in order to map
out their phonics instruction, as well as how they will be teaching this. The best way to
do this may be to use a progression to chart out what specific phonetic skills each grade
level will be responsible for covering in-depth. This doesn’t mean that they will only
teach these skills; these will be their “must-haves.” The other skills can be reviewed and
incorporated as each grade level may think necessary. Finally, after the progression has
been developed and teams have had the chance to decide the best practice for teaching,
teachers will collaboratively work with our two instructional coaches to allow them to
observe one other teacher in their grade level as well as a teacher in a different grade
level teach a short phonics lesson. This will allow teachers to provide reflective feedback
to determine what strengths are in their teaching, as well as what areas may need to be
refined a little bit more as we look towards next steps.

In grades 3-5, teachers will continue their learning/trying out of the 95 percent whole
group, and learning around the small group component of this will be required for all
staff as well; these components focus a lot on psuedowords to learn how consonants and
vowels go together to make specific syllables and sounds, so there is a new layer of
challenge for all students in this. Many students are picking up on the syllable types and
sounds within the short whole group lesson, but there are students that need a little bit
more intensive support – whether they are identified through our FAST screener or
through the teacher’s observational data within the whole group lesson. After learning
has taken place in this component, teachers in grades 3-5 will take part in the same
process that the K-2 teachers went through – observing two different teachers to
determine best practices to keep and areas to tweak.

2. What professional development might be needed to prepare staff for the

implementation of this work?
 The biggest piece of that our school will need throughout this process is simply time. K-
2 teachers need to have the chance to work in both grade level and vertical teams to
determine what must be taught at each level as well as how it will be taught. Grades 3-5
may need a little bit more training, as each teacher will get an entire kit for the small
group portion that they will have no idea what to do with.
Before we begin to roll out the implementation, it will be important for the instructional
leadership team to determine and communicate the “why” for this change. It all relates
back to our building goals and focus, as we want to ensure that all students are able to
learn at high levels.

3. What has caused you to select those strategies?

I chose these specific strategies for a few reasons. The K-2 strategy was selected to
ensure that a systematic approach was taken for phonics instruction; before, teachers may
have been teaching different skills, even if they were in the same grade level. This
change will ensure that all students are learning the same skills in the same grade. In 3-5,
we have already done some learning with the whole group component of 95 percent, so
most teachers have a little bit of familiarity with it. Adding in the small group
component may seem a little bit daunting at first, but it will provide these teachers with
another tool for teaching phonics, which are often hard to come by in these grade levels!

4. By what method will you gather data to determine if the improvement strategies are
working?
Since much of this learning will take place at the beginning of next year, the biggest
method that we will use to gather our data will be the initial FAST screener. This will be
the assessment that determines many students that are going to need additional phonetic
and fluency help beyond our whole group instruction.

After this screener, students that don’t meet the benchmark will be progress monitored
weekly, and their results will continue to be analyzed monthly by the building leadership
and PLC teams in our data meetings. Students without IEPs that have consistently not
met the benchmark during multiple screenings will have a GEI (General Education
Intervention) created. This will allow these students to have an individualize plan and
goal in place to ensure steps are being taken to ensure their success.

.
 45-Day Action Plan:
Strategies for Improvement

Annual SMART Goal.

By the end of next school year (2018-19,) 100% of students K-5 will meet the year-end benchmark for
fluency, as measured by the FAST assessment.

45-Day SMART Goal.

By October 31st, 100 percent of students that missed the beginning of the year benchmark will have
positive trends towards their end of the year goal, as measured by weekly FAST progress monitoring.
(example of the graph provided below.)
Person(s)
Tactic Metric Goal Date
Responsible
Professional Learning Attendance of staff 100% staff 08/25, 09/12, Principal
sessions (every other attendance 09/26, 10/10, Instructional
Wednesday Morning) Consensogram given at end of 100% of staff and 10/24 Coaches
each PD session confident in their Teachers
learning
Plan created for Weekly plan for each grade 100% of staff Weekly from Teachers
implementation of phonics level submit plan September 10th Principal
learning Walk-Through Data (weekly) 100% of staff begin – October 31st
implementation of
learning
Teachers will observe two Observation form (strengths 100% of staff Between Instructional
other teachers teach a and opportunities to improve) observe two 09/2018 and Coaches
phonics lesson different teachers 10/2018 Teachers
Weekly Progress FastBridge Progress 100% of below Weekly Teachers
Monitoring Monitoring website benchmark students between Students
are monitored September 10th
weekly – October 31st
Monthly data meetings School-wide data form 100% of below Once a month Principal
benchmark students’ in September Instructional
progress is analyzed and October – Coaches
using the four-point date will vary Teachers
decision process. based on grade
Notes:

Part III: Study – Determine the Effectiveness of the Plan

------You cannot complete this as you do not have any “real” data related to your plan.---

1. What data gives evidence of plan’s effectiveness?

2. What data gives evidence of plan’s lack of effectiveness?
3. Were all strategies implemented with fidelity? Why or why not?

Part IV: Act – Determine the Next 45 to 60 Day Action Plan Based on Your Results

------You cannot complete this as you do not have any “real” data related to your plan.---

1. What strategies will you continue in the next 45 to 60 day action plan? Why?
 2. What strategies will you discontinue in the next 45 to 60 day action plan? Why?
3. What additional strategies will you add in the next 45 to 60 day action plan? Why?
4. How will you sustain improvements found to be effective?

Example Progress Graph to be used for 45-day SMART Goal

 Reflection

Overall, this was a great activity to begin diving into school-wide data, rather than just

my own classroom and/or grade level data. I did have a few struggles along the way, however!

One of the biggest struggles came simply from the time of year that it currently is. We are right

in the middle of our end of year assessment windows, so many of the action steps and goals that I

added in were based only on the fall and winter data. Having one more data point would have

been ideal going into next year. While I did struggle with this specifically, I did see many

benefits by completing this process.

In the past, I have not been exposed to a lot of school improvement plans. I was on the

Instructional Leadership Team this past year, but we did not go through a process like this; we

created the building goals at our retreat in June, and that was it. There was no way to

continuously measure our progress towards the goals, and there also wasn’t specific indicators

and actions steps that needed to be completed along the way to give us the best chance that we

had of reaching our goals. One of the main differences that I saw came within the PDSA

process. At the June meeting, we looked at last year’s data, but we did not have any

conversations about what that data was really telling us, or about why that data may have been

the way that it was. This is such an important step in the process as it allows building leaders to

really look at and analyze the data, rather than just saying this is where we currently are and

moving on. The final difference that I have seen on this template is the connection to the

mission and vision the school. Unfortunately, our school currently does not have a mission or

vision as we just use what the district provides. Many staff members (myself included) could

hardly tell anyone what that vision is. This is one area that I hope to have a conversation about
with our leadership team this year as creating a solid and clear vision is one of the most effective

ways to guide any initiatives and work that we do within the school.

Going through the improvement planning process has multiple benefits for schools. The

first one I hit on in the previous section; the PDSA process really makes you go through and

analyze the data instead of glossing over it and moving on to create a plan. In addition to this, I

enjoyed the 45-day action plan. This spelled out specific steps that needed to be taken in order to

meet our goals, and it really made me plan out what the implementation would look like by

requiring specific dates and metrics that would be required. Finally, I really liked the section of

the action plan that spelled out the stakeholders that were responsible. This step made it clear to

everyone in the building – teachers, coaches, and leaders – who was responsible for what, and it

made everyone’s job focused on the goals at hand.

While this process and specific template has numerous benefits, there are a few areas that

I would think about adding for future plans. The first major one would be to broaden the

customer focus. The overall idea of the plan is a focus on students, and while these are the main

customers of our educational system, parents and community members need to be involved as

well. During this planning process, I think that it would be beneficial to gather parent input via a

survey as to what they think may need to be improved educationally within the school. These

responses may or may not line up with what our leadership team has focused on, but another

piece can be added to the plan if the team feels that it is necessary. The final improvement that I

think could be made would be to share a copy of this plan with every teacher with a subsection

of an action plan that relates to what steps they would take within their classroom to meet our

goal. This could tie into their individual development plan, and it could be things that they have

already implemented, or it could be areas that they want to do more learning about.