Annual Progress Report and Yearly Action Plan

Annual Progress Report and Yearly Action Plan

Prepared by: Fairview H S (District)

LE0751State Fiscal Year: 2018

9/10/2017 8:01:14 AM, https://reportsprd.opi.mt.gov:1443/ReportServer//CSIP/Reports/rptAnnualProgress

1 of 35

Annual Progress Report and Yearly Action Plan | LE0751 | State Fiscal Year 2018

Math2017 (Previous Year) Action PlanState the district goals for math.

Improve math proficiency of all students in the district.Define the specific measurable objectives for math.

At least 40% of all tested students in grades 3-8 (including all subgroups) will score proficient or above as measured by the SMARTER Assessment math test in the spring of 2017.

All district students in grade 11 will average at least a .2 higher (than the district average in 2015-16) on the math portion of the ACT test in the 2016-17 school year.

How is the district addressing the fundamental teaching and learning needs of the schools in the LEA, especially the academic problems of low-achieving students, using scientifically-based research strategies?

The district is addressing the fundamental teaching and learning needs of the schools in the LEA and the academic problems of low-achieving students using scientifically-based research strategies through the Continuous School Improvement Process (CSIP). The CSIP utilizes multiple components which include collecting and analyzing data, setting school improvement plan goals based on the conclusions drawn from the data, determining specific action plans and strategies based on school improvement plan goals, utilizing effective and research based instructional techniques in strategies, implementation of action plans, and monitoring and assessment of action plan progress. Integrated into the continuous school improvement plans is the necessary professional development needed to support the action plan and strategies.

The district has identified low-achieving students by analyzing student performance on a variety of assessments which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests (SBAC), AIMSweb, end of unit assessments, and various other measures designed for specific content areas. The district has identified specific concepts and areas of math and reading needing improvement for each individual student through the assessments. In addition, the teachers in the district use the AIMSweb assessments to measure each student’s progress related to the standards, common core, specific math concepts, and project material that student is


2 of 35


ready to learn.

The district uses several strategies to support and assist identified low-achieving groups and all students to improve proficiency in math. The specific strategies include: 1) use of a systemic program of interventions, 2) curriculum and instructional review based on data results (including identification of curricular areas for instructional emphasis, the adoption of new materials when appropriate, and the needed professional development), 3) complete the alignment of district standards with the Math Common Core Standards, 4) the continue upgrading and integrating technology into instruction, 5) increasing instructional use of math manipulatives, and 6) continue emphasis in instruction on open ended or application type math problems.

1) The district is in the process of implementing a program called ICU which focuses on helping students succeed in school through completion of quality assignments integrated with healthy grading practices. The program basically creates interventions for students who are not completing assignments, not doing quality work, and are not meeting the standards. The program assists teachers in developing quality assignments tied to the learning standards along with higher expectations. The program provides opportunities to students for extra time and extra help in completing assignments along with restudy and retakes of work. The goal of the program is that every student completes every assignment to expectations. The ICU program will provide support for teachers and students to improve the academic progress of each student. The ICU program is somewhat related to the RtI program in function and components.

2) The district utilizes the Power School software program (which allows parents access to student data in the district) to facilitate and communicate with parents to track and monitor student progress. The program allows teachers to communicate with parents and students concerning lesson plans, assignments, and grades. This process supports students both at school and home to improve proficiency in reading and reading.

3) The district has implemented Google Classroom, Chromebooks, and Google Docs to improve proficiency of students in math and reading. The district has purchased a ratio of 1:1 for Chromebooks to students in grades 6-12. The district has provided the professional development necessary to successfully implement and utilize these programs. The integration of technology and the accompanying apps into the curriculum has been a critical strategy in improving student proficiency.

4) The district uses a curriculum and instructional review based on data results (including identification of curricular areas for instructional emphasis, the adoption of new materials when appropriate, and the needed professional development).


3 of 35


5) The district has implemented AIMSweb testing as an assessment data base. The results assist staff in progress monitoring for all students in the district and helps staff to modify instruction to better meet the needs of students. The AIMSweb testing helps determine individual student progress related to the standards while targeting areas for improvement.

6) The district has implemented extra assistance for those students needing help to improve proficiency by reducing class size and implementing reading and math groups (break out time each day where students work at their level). The extra help and break out groups are helping students improve math proficiency.7) The district is continuing the alignment of district standards with the Math Common Core Standards during the school year with assistance from the PVCC. The district is planning to use PIR and professional development time for in-services and workshops on aligning the standards and lesson plan development. 8) The district will continue to integrate technology into the curriculum to improve math proficiency of students. The district/school will provide all staff with the professional development and equipment needed to integrate technology into curriculum and instruction to improve student academic achievement. The district technology plan correlates directly with this strategy and determines/details the professional development and equipment needed to successfully integrate technology into curriculum and instruction. Students will utilize technology to complete math programs and exercises including the SMART Board, computers, projectors, and other related technology. The district will continue the use of math online programs that are aligned with the standards to supplement student resource and curriculum materials. In addition, the district is exploring providing ipads to students as a curricular resource.

9) The district is increasing the use of math manipulatives and representational drawings to increase understanding for students. The use of math manipulative assists teachers to better demonstrate and students to better understand comparison, contrast, and patterns.

10) The district has trained all staff on Quantum Learning Strategies for math to improve student proficiency.

11) The district has implemented higher expectations for students in math district wide. The implementation of higher expectations included setting higher goals for student proficiency in math, targeting professional development for areas identified by assessments, focusing instruction on areas identified for improvement by assessments, and publicizing math goals and results to the community.


4 of 35


Describe how professional development will be used to improve instruction, and how it is aligned with the district's educational goals and objectives.

The district professional development program is used to improve instruction and is aligned with the districts educational goals and objectives. The following staff development needs were identified based on an analysis of student achievement data, as well as a review of teaching/learning needs and scientifically based research strategies through the CSIP. All training includes follow-up sessions as needed. The district uses job embedded professional development which is scheduled throughout the year through entire day, early release, and meetings. These are not limited to but include grade level and subject level group meetings where staff reviews student achievement and other data to improve instruction. Staff also uses professional development time to align curriculum, design assessments, and develop/share methods of implementing improved classroom instruction for all students.

The district data analysis, review of teaching/learning needs, and scientifically based research strategies has identified specific areas for improving student proficiency in math (the district goal) and will direct professional development at the targeted areas. The targeted areas include: professional development to strengthen the core math program, continued training to integrate the common core standards into district instruction, training in differentiation strategies to ensure access for all students to the core program, training on new technologies to enhance instruction and deepen student engagement, and in-services or PIR time to implement best practices.

The district professional development program has been extremely effective in improving student achievement because it serves a dual purpose. The district professional development program not only provides comprehensive training to staff on district and school wide programs and topics, but also provides individual training to assist staff members in their continued personal growth. The district professional development program provides high quality training and in-service for all staff. District past and planned training includes: 1) staff training for implementation of the ICU Program (a program that helps students succeed), 2) training for staff through the Prairie View Curriculum Consortium (PVCC) which provides individual and group training directly related to instruction and student learning, 3) continued training as necessary on Power School (the district student management software), 4) staff attend workshops at the annual fall MEA conference directly related to math and reading, 5) the district continues to work on curriculum alignment with a focus on developing curriculum that meets the standards, 6) the district uses on-line professional development through webinars for staff, 7) the district continues to support individual staff members in attending/taking part in training related to specific areas targeting their personal growth, and 8) continued technology training such


5 of 35


as Google Classroom and Chromebooks. The data analysis reveals that the professional development listed above has been successful in improving student proficiency through enhancement of staff instructional skills and preparation.

Describe the district's strategies for assessing student progress toward meeting all content standards.

The district has in place strategies for assessing student progress toward meeting all content standards. The district uses variety of assessments to gauge student progress on content standards which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests (SBAC), AIMSweb, end of unit assessments, and various other measures designed for specific content areas.

The district has implemented the AIMSweb program to supplement testing to gain frequent and accurate data on student progress which will allow staff to design math lessons directed at student needs. The AIMSweb program is another tool for staff to measure student progress on the math and reading standards.

The SMARTER assessment is an example of how the district uses assessments to measure student progress toward meeting all content standards. A summary of SMARTER assessment results showed that 32% of all students scored proficient in math in the spring of 2016 (Montana was at 41%) compared to 37% in 2015 (Montana was at 38%). The district dropped back slightly from 2015 to 2016 in math proficiency. Results from 2016 showed female students scored 32% proficient in 2016 compared to 33% in 2015 and were below the female state rate of 41%. Male students scored 32% in 2016 down from 40% in 2015 and below the state rate for males of 42%. Special education students scored 6% proficient both years which was below the state rate of 11% proficient. Proficiency by grades showed that grade 3 was 32% proficient, grade 4 was 15% proficient, grade 5 was 35% proficient, grade 6 was 36% proficient, grade 7 was 21% proficient, and grade 8 was 48% proficient. Grade level proficiency by gender showed that in grade 3 females were 27% proficient and males were 36%, grade 4 females were 18% proficient and males were 11%, grade 5 females were 33% proficient and males were 36%, grade 6 females were 33% proficient and males were 40%, grade 7 females were 22% proficient and males were 20%, and in grade 8 females were 63% and males were 41%.

Results on the SMARTER assessment showing the percentage of students who scored at/near or above the standards in math for concepts and procedures, problem solving and


6 of 35


modeling/data analysis, and communicating reasoning are as follows. District students scored the highest in communicating reasoning with 74.8% of all district students at/near or above the standard followed by problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 74% at/near or above the standards. District students scored the lowest in concepts and procedures with 54.3% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall district students scored 67.7% of the students at/near of above the standards in all math areas.

Female students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 75% of all female students at/near or above the standards followed by communicating reasoning at 71%. Female students scored the lowest in concepts and procedures with 59% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall female students scored 68% of the students at/near of above the standards in all math areas.

Male students scored the highest in communicating reasoning and with 78% of all male students at/near or above the standards followed by problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 74% of the students at/near or above the standards. Male students scored the lowest in concepts and procedures with 50% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall male students scored 67% of the students at/near or above the standards in all math areas.

Female students scored at a higher rate of meeting the standards than male students in all areas of math with 68% to 67%, respectively.

Breaking down these results by grade show that grade 3 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis at 86% at/near or above the standard and scored the lowest in concepts and procedures at 55%, grade 4 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 65% and the lowest in concepts and procedures at 40%, grade 5 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis along with communicating reasoning at 80% and the lowest in concepts and procedures at 75%, grade 6 scored the highest in communicating reasoning with 76% and the lowest in concepts and procedures with 56%, grade 7 scored the highest in communicating reasoning with 58% and the lowest in concepts and procedures with 37%, and grade 8 scored the highest in communicating reasoning with 92% and the lowest in concepts and procedures with 60%.

Overall SMARTER results show that district students scored slightly lower in math proficiency from 2015 to 2016. In addition, students scored the highest on communicating reasoning and the lowest on concepts and procedures. Female students scored the same as male students in proficiency. Females scoring at/near or above the standards averaged 68% in the math areas compared to males at 67%. Female students scored the highest in


7 of 35


problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 75% at/near or above the standards and the lowest on concepts and procedures with 59% while male students scored the highest on communicating reasoning with 78% and the lowest on concepts and procedures with 50%. Female students scored at the all student group and male students scored at the all student group. The highest scoring grade was grade 8 and the lowest scoring grade was grade 4. The use of assessments in the district has been a critical component of improving math achievement for students.

The district has purchased software that addresses weakness in math and reading for students and teachers to use on technology devices. Several of the programs are designed to continually assess student progress and enable the teachers to gauge student progress on the standards and modify instruction to meet student needs.

The district continually reviews the results from assessments measuring student progress on content standards to inform instruction, curriculum revisions, and use in student interventions to improve proficiency.

Analysis of DataWhat is the 3-year trend for Math achievement across the district: Grades 3-5

Gradual ImprovementWhat is the 3-year trend for Math achievement across the district: Grades 6-8

Gradual ImprovementWhat is the 3-year trend for Math achievement across the district: Grade 10

Gradual ImprovementPlease identify the district actions that may have affected the observed trends:

The three-year trend across the district for math achievement has shown continued improvement by students at all levels. The district has utilized several assessments including Smarter Balance, AIMSweb, and district/school assessments to demonstrate and support student progress in math. The results of the assessments provide instructors important information on student progress, information necessary to develop appropriate lessons, and information to use in developing targeted instructional strategies. In addition, the assessment results provide important information for curriculum revisions and updates. A summary of SMARTER assessment results for 2017 showed that district math proficiency was 29% in 2017 compared to 32% in 2016 and 37% in 2015. Female students scored 33% proficient in math in 2015 compared to 25% in 2017. Male students scored 40% proficient in 2015 compared to 32% in 2017 for math. All district students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets in 2017. Female students scored the highest in problem


8 of 35


solving and modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets. Male students scored the highest in problem solving & modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets. Male students scored 67% of the students at/near or above the standards in all math areas while female students were at 60%. All students scored 63.8% at/near or above the standards in all areas for math. Student performance in math with the percentage of students at/near or above the standards was up in problem solving for 2017. Due to space limitations in this section please see school data evaluation for a complete summary of assessment results.

The district has in place a comprehensive school improvement process which identifies programs and actions that the district can implement to support and continue the ongoing student academic progress. Several key components identified by the CSIP process and implemented in the district include: 1) the implementation and utilization of a variety of assessments (described in the paragraph above), 2) the implementation of the ICU program, 3)the utilization of intervention strategies to assist students, 4) the development, implementation, and continuation of a comprehensive professional development program for staff, 5) the use of differentiated instructional strategies to ensure success for all students, 6) student use and application of current technology in classes and projects, and 7) the adoption and implementation of the Common Core Standards.

The district implemented the ICU program during the 2016-17 school year. The focus of the ICU program is on quality assignments, quality assessments, and healthy grading practices to improve instruction. The ICU program assists teachers in creating quality assignments and assessments that are focused on the standards. The goal of the ICU program is that every student completes every assignment and the district reached that goal during the 2016-17 school year with every student completing every assignment, which is an exceptional result. The ICU program has provided support for teachers and students to improve the academic progress of each student. The ICU program is somewhat related to the RtI program in function and components.

The district professional development program has been extremely effective in improving student achievement because it serves a dual purpose. The district professional development program not only provides comprehensive training to staff on district and school wide programs and topics, but also provides individual training to assist staff members in their continued personal growth. District training includes: 1) continued staff training on the ICU Program (a program that helps students succeed), 2) training for staff through the Prairie View Curriculum Consortium (PVCC) which provides individual and group training directly related to instruction and student learning, 3) continued training as necessary on Power School (the district student management software), 4) staff attend workshops at the annual fall MEA conference directly related to math and reading, 5) the


9 of 35


district continues to work on curriculum mapping and planning, 6) the district uses on-line professional development through webinars for staff, 7) the district continues to support individual staff members in attending/taking part in training related to specific areas targeting their personal growth, and 8) continued technology training such as Google Classroom and Chromebooks. The data analysis reveals that the professional development listed above has been successful in improving student proficiency through enhancement of staff instructional skills and preparation.

District college readiness on the ACT test was 41.7% in English (state 53.7%), 37.5% in math (state 36.9%), 29.2% in reading (state 43.1%), and 37.5% in science (state 32.7%). Student scores on the ACT were 20.5 in math (state was 20.1), 17.6 in English (state was 18.6), 20.4 in science (state was 20.3), 18.5 in reading (state was 20.8), 15.5 in writing (state was 17.8), and a composite of 19.4 (state was 20).

The district utilizes the Power School software program (which allows parents access to student data in the district) to facilitate and communicate with parents to track and monitor student progress. The program allows teachers to communicate with parents and students concerning lesson plans, assignments, and grades. This process supports students both at school and home to improve proficiency in math and reading.

The district has implemented Google Classroom, Chromebooks, and Google Docs to improve proficiency of students in math and reading. The district has purchased a ratio of 1:1 for Chromebooks to students in grades 6-12. The district has provided the professional development necessary to successfully implement and utilize these programs. The integration of technology and the accompanying apps into the curriculum has been a critical strategy in improving student proficiency.

The district has implemented the Common Core Standards for Math and English/Language Arts and is continuing to work with staff on the new standards to increase their knowledge and understanding. The district is a member of the PVCC which provides support and training for staff on the Common Core Standards. District staff through PVCC meets with staff from other area schools to share ideas and best practices in working with the new standards.

The summary of district actions listed above definitely contributed to the continued improvement and good results in math proficiency for students. These actions are just a portion of the many programs and support functions in place to assist students academically in the district.

2018 (Current Year) Action Plan9/10/2017 8:01:14 AM, https://reportsprd.opi.mt.gov:1443/ReportServer//CSIP/Reports/rptAnnualProgress

10 of 35


State the district goals for math.Improve math proficiency of all students in the district.

Define the specific measurable objectives for math.At least 40% of all tested students in grades 3-8 (including all subgroups) will score proficient or above as measured by the SMARTER Assessment math test in the spring of 2018.

All district students in grade 11 will average at least a .2 higher (than the district average in 2016-17) on the math portion of the ACT test in the 2017-18 school year.


The district is addressing the fundamental teaching and learning needs of the schools in the LEA and the academic problems of low-achieving students using scientifically-based research strategies through the Continuous School Improvement Process (CSIP). The CSIP utilizes multiple components which include collecting and analyzing data, setting school improvement plan goals based on the conclusions drawn from the data, determining specific action plans and strategies based on school improvement plan goals, utilizing effective and research based instructional techniques in strategies, implementation of action plans, and monitoring and assessment of action plan progress. Integrated into the continuous school improvement plan is the necessary professional development needed to support the action plan and strategies.

The district has identified low-achieving students by analyzing student performance on a variety of assessments which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests (SBAC), AIMSweb, and various other measures designed for specific content areas. The district has identified specific concepts and areas of math and reading needing improvement for each individual student through the assessments. In addition, the teachers in the district use the assessments to measure each student’s progress related to the standards, common core, specific math and reading concepts, and project material each student is ready to learn.

The district uses several strategies to support and assist identified low-achieving groups and all students to improve proficiency in math. The specific strategies include: 1) use of


11 of 35


the ICU program, 2) the use of differentiated instructional strategies to ensure success for all students, 3) curriculum and instructional review based on data results (including identification of curricular areas for instructional emphasis, the adoption of new materials when appropriate, and the needed professional development), 4) increasing knowledge and understanding of the Math Common Core Standards for teachers, and 5) student use and application of current technology in classes and projects.

Additional strategies to assist and improve student academic progress:1) All teachers in the district are incorporating current technology in classroom instruction including Google applications. 2) The district utilizes the AIMSweb assessments extensively to gauge student progress in reading and math. Students are tested a minimum of 3 times a year (beginning, middle, and end) to provide benchmarks on student progress and to identify any areas of instruction that require modifications. 3) The district has implemented the Common Core Standards for Math and English/Language Arts and is continuing to work with staff on the new standards to increase their knowledge and understanding. 4) The district has revised the grading scale and increased expectations for students academically. The lower level of acceptable work by students was increased from 59% to 69% and students are required to rework assignments/assessments that do not score above 69%. 5) Staff members are creating lessons for students utilizing Differentiated Instruction techniques and intervention data/information. 6) The district has implemented the ICU program which focuses on helping students succeed in school through completion of quality assignments integrated with healthy grading practices. The program basically creates interventions for students who are not completing assignments, not doing quality work, and are not meeting the standards. The program assists teachers in developing quality assignments tied to the learning standards along with higher expectations. The program provides opportunities to students for extra time and extra help in completing assignments along with restudy and retakes of work. The goal of the program is that every student completes every assignment to expectations. The ICU program provides support for teachers and students to improve the academic progress of each student. The ICU program is somewhat related to the RtI program in function and components. 7) The district utilizes the Power School software program (which allows parents access to student data in the district) to facilitate and communicate with parents to track and monitor student progress. The program allows teachers to communicate with parents and students concerning lesson plans, assignments, and grades. This process supports students both at school and home to improve proficiency in math and reading.8) The district has implemented Google Classroom, Chromebooks, and Google Docs to


12 of 35


improve proficiency of students in math and reading. The district has purchased a ratio of 1:1 for Chromebooks to students in grades 6-12. The district has provided the professional development necessary to successfully implement and utilize these programs. The integration of technology and the accompanying apps into the curriculum has been a critical strategy in improving student proficiency. 9) The district continues to provide on-site/regional professional development opportunities to continue staff instructional growth.



13 of 35


The district professional development program is used to improve instruction and is aligned with the districts educational goals and objectives. The following staff development needs were identified based on an analysis of student achievement data, as well as a review of teaching/learning needs and scientifically based research strategies through the CSIP. All training includes follow-up sessions as needed. The district uses job embedded professional development which is scheduled throughout the year through entire day, early release, and faculty meetings. These are not limited to but include grade level and subject level group meetings where staff reviews student achievement and other data to improve instruction. Staff also uses professional development time to align curriculum, design assessments, and develop/share methods of implementing improved classroom instruction for all students.

The district data analysis, review of teaching/learning needs, and scientifically based research strategies has identified specific areas for improving student proficiency in math and reading (the district goal) and will direct professional development at the targeted areas. The targeted areas include: professional development to strengthen the core math program, continued training to increase knowledge and understanding of the common core standards, continued training in differentiation of instruction strategies to ensure access for all students, training on new technologies to enhance instruction and deepen student engagement, and in-services or PIR time to implement best practices.

The district professional development program has been extremely effective in improving student achievement because it serves a dual purpose. The district professional development program not only provides comprehensive training to staff on district and school wide programs and topics, but also provides individual training to assist staff members in their continued personal growth. District training includes: 1) continued staff training on the ICU Program (a program that helps students succeed), 2) training for staff through the Prairie View Curriculum Consortium (PVCC) which provides individual and group training directly related to instruction and student learning, 3) continued training as necessary on Power School (the district student management software), 4) staff attend workshops at the annual fall MEA conference directly related to math and reading, 5) the district continues to work on curriculum mapping and planning, 6) the district uses on-line professional development through webinars for staff, 7) the district continues to support individual staff members in attending/taking part in training related to specific areas targeting their personal growth, and 8) continued technology training such as Google Classroom and Chromebooks. The data analysis reveals that the professional development listed above has been successful in improving student proficiency through enhancement of staff instructional skills and preparation.


14 of 35



The district and schools have in place strategies for assessing student progress toward meeting all content standards. The district/schools use a variety of assessments to gauge student progress on content standards which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests, SBAC, AIMSweb, and various other measures designed for specific content areas. The district uses these assessments to measure student progress toward meeting content standards and to identify specific math and reading concepts in the standards that students have mastered or need further work and which concepts they are ready to learn. A summary of district assessment results illustrating how data analysis is used to measure progress on the content standard is shown below.

The district has implemented AIMSweb testing to gain frequent and accurate data on student progress related to the standards which will allow staff to design math lessons directed at student needs. The district has trained staff in the use of the AIMSweb testing program. In addition, the district has purchased software that addresses weakness in math and reading for students and teachers to use on technology devices. Several of the programs are designed to continually assess student progress and enable the teachers to gauge student progress on the standards and modify instruction to meet student needs.

The SMARTER assessment is an example of how the district uses assessments to measure student progress toward meeting all content standards. A summary of SMARTER assessment results showed that district math proficiency was 29% in 2017 compared to 32% in 2016 and 37% in 2015. Female students scored 33% proficient in math in 2015 compared to 25% in 2017. Male students scored 40% proficient in 2015 compared to 32% in 2017 for math. Special education students improved the percent proficient from 6% in 2016 to 7% in 2017 for math. Proficiency by grades showed that grade 3 was 64% proficient, grade 4 was 14% proficient, grade 5 was 14% proficient, grade 6 was 24% proficient, grade 7 was 36% proficient, and grade 8 was 21% proficient. Grade level proficiency by gender showed that in grade 3 females were 44% proficient and males were 77%, grade 4 females were 0% proficient and males were 27%, grade 5 females were 8% proficient and males were 20%, grade 6 females were 30% proficient and males were 18%, grade 7 females were 50% proficient and males were 20%, and in grade 8 females were 22% and males were 20%.


15 of 35


Results on the SMARTER assessment showing the percentage of students who scored at/near or above the standards in math for concepts and procedures, problem solving and modeling/data analysis, and communicating reasoning are as follows. All district students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets in 2017. Female students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets. Male students scored the highest in problem solving & modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets. Male students scored 67% of the students at/near or above the standards in all math areas while female students were at 60%. All students scored 63.8% at/near or above the standards in all areas for math. Student performance in math with the percentage of students at/near or above the standards was up in problem solving for 2017. Female students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 75% of all female students at/near or above the standards followed by communicating reasoning at 62%. Female students scored the lowest in concepts and procedures with 44% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall female students scored 60% of the students at/near of above the standards in all math areas.

Male students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis and with 74% of all male students at/near or above the standards followed by communicating reasoning with 69% of the students at/near or above the standards. Male students scored the lowest in concepts and procedures with 58% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall male students scored 67% of the students at/near or above the standards in all math areas.

Breaking down these results by grade show that grade 3 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis at 91% at/near or above the standard and scored the lowest in concepts and procedures at 68%, grade 4 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 68% and the lowest in concepts and procedures at 50%, grade 5 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis at 82% and the lowest in concepts and procedures at 41%, grade 6 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 52% and the lowest in communicating reasoning with 43%, grade 7 scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis with 82% and the lowest in concepts and procedures with 59%, and grade 8 scored the highest in communicating reasoning along with problem solving and modeling/data analysis at 68% and the lowest in concepts and procedures with 42%.

Overall SMARTER results show that district students scored slightly lower in math proficiency from 2015 to 2017, however, more students scored at/near or above the standards in math from 2015 to 2017 in the district. In addition, district students scored


16 of 35


the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets in 2017. Female students scored the highest in problem solving and modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets. Male students scored the highest in problem solving & modeling/data analysis and the lowest in concepts and procedures on math targets. Male students scored higher than female students in proficiency by 7%. Females scoring at/near or above the standards averaged 60% in the math areas compared to males at 67%. Male students scored 3% higher proficiency than the all student group and female students scored 4% lower than the all student group. The highest scoring grade was grade 3 and the lowest scoring grades were grades 4 and 5.


Reading2017 (Previous Year) Action PlanState the district goals for reading.

Improve reading proficiency of all students in the district.Define the specific measurable objectives for reading.

At least 60% of all tested students in grades 3-8 (including all subgroups) will score proficient or above as measured by the SMARTER Assessment ELA test in the spring of 2017.

All district students in grade 11 will average at least a .2 higher (than the district average in 2015-16) on the English portion of the ACT test in the 2016-17 school year.


The district is addressing the fundamental teaching and learning needs of the schools in the LEA and the academic problems of low-achieving students using scientifically-based research strategies through the Continuous School Improvement Process (CSIP). The CSIP utilizes multiple components which include collecting and analyzing data, setting school improvement plan goals based on the conclusions drawn from the data, determining specific action plans and strategies based on school improvement plan goals, utilizing effective and research based instructional techniques in strategies, implementation of action plans, and monitoring and assessment of action plan progress. Integrated into the


17 of 35


continuous school improvement plans is the necessary professional development needed to support the action plan and strategies.

The district has identified low-achieving students by analyzing student performance on a variety of assessments which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests (SBAC), AIMSweb, end of unit assessments, and various other measures designed for specific content areas. The district has identified specific concepts and areas of math and reading needing improvement for each individual student through the assessments. In addition, the teachers in the district use the AIMSweb assessment to measure each student’s progress related to the standards, common core, specific math concepts, and project material that student is ready to learn.

The district uses several strategies to support and assist identified low-achieving groups and all students to improve proficiency in reading. The specific strategies include: 1) use of a systemic program of interventions, 2) curriculum and instructional review based on data results (including identification of curricular areas for instructional emphasis, the adoption of new materials when appropriate, and the needed professional development), 3) complete the alignment of district standards with the English/Language Arts Common Core Standards, 4) the continue upgrading and integrating technology into instruction, and 5) continue emphasis in instruction on open ended or application type reading problems.

1) The district is in the process of implementing a program called ICU which focuses on helping students succeed in school through completion of quality assignments integrated with healthy grading practices. The program basically creates interventions for students who are not completing assignments, not doing quality work, and are not meeting the standards. The program assists teachers in developing quality assignments tied to the learning standards along with higher expectations. The program provides opportunities to students for extra time and extra help in completing assignments along with restudy and retakes of work. The goal of the program is that every student completes every assignment to expectations. The ICU program will provide support for teachers and students to improve the academic progress of each student. The ICU program is somewhat related to the RtI program in function and components.

2) The district uses a curriculum and instructional review based on data results (including identification of curricular areas for instructional emphasis, the adoption of new materials when appropriate, and the needed professional development).


18 of 35


3) The district has implemented Google Classroom, Chromebooks, and Google Docs to improve proficiency of students in math and reading. The district has purchased a ratio of 1:1 for Chromebooks to students in grades 6-12. The district has provided the professional development necessary to successfully implement and utilize these programs. The integration of technology and the accompanying apps into the curriculum has been a critical strategy in improving student proficiency.

4) The district utilizes the Power School software program (which allows parents access to student data in the district) to facilitate and communicate with parents to track and monitor student progress. The program allows teachers to communicate with parents and students concerning lesson plans, assignments, and grades. This process supports students both at school and home to improve proficiency in reading and reading.

5) The district has implemented AIMSweb testing as an assessment data base. The results assist staff in progress monitoring for all students in the district and helps staff to modify instruction to better meet the needs of students. The AIMSweb testing helps determine individual student progress related to the standards while targeting areas for improvement.

6) The district has implemented extra assistance for those students needing help to improve proficiency by reducing class size and implementing reading and math groups (break out time each day where students work at their level). The extra help and break out groups are helping students improve math proficiency.7) The district is continuing the alignment of district standards with the English/Language Arts Common Core Standards during the school year with assistance from the PVCC. The district is planning to use PIR and professional development time for in-services and workshops on aligning the standards and lesson plan development.

8) The district will continue to integrate technology into the curriculum to improve reading proficiency of students. The district/school will provide all staff with the professional development and equipment needed to integrate technology into curriculum and instruction to improve student academic achievement. The district technology plan correlates directly with this strategy and determines/details the professional development and equipment needed to successfully integrate technology into curriculum and instruction. Students will utilize technology to complete reading programs and exercises including the SMART Board, computers, projectors, and other related technology. The district will continue the use of reading online programs that are aligned with the standards to supplement student resource and curriculum materials. In addition, the district is exploring providing ipads to students as a curricular resource.


19 of 35


9) The district has trained all staff on Quantum Learning Strategies for reading to improve student proficiency.

10) The district has implemented higher expectations for students in reading district wide. The implementation of higher expectations included setting higher goals for student proficiency in reading, targeting professional development for areas identified by assessments, focusing instruction on areas identified for improvement by assessments, and publicizing reading goals and results to the community.


The district professional development program is used to improve instruction and is aligned with the districts educational goals and objectives. The following staff development needs were identified based on an analysis of student achievement data, as well as a review of teaching/learning needs and scientifically based research strategies through the CSIP. All training includes follow-up sessions as needed. The district uses job embedded professional development which is scheduled throughout the year through entire day, early release, and meetings. These are not limited to but include grade level and subject level group meetings where staff reviews student achievement and other data to improve instruction. Staff also uses professional development time to align curriculum, design assessments, and develop/share methods of implementing improved classroom instruction for all students.

The district data analysis, review of teaching/learning needs, and scientifically based research strategies has identified specific areas for improving student proficiency in reading (the district goal) and will direct professional development at the targeted areas. The targeted areas include: professional development to strengthen the core reading program, continued training to integrate the common core standards into district instruction, training in differentiation strategies to ensure access for all students to the core program, training on new technologies to enhance instruction and deepen student engagement, and in-services or PIR time to implement best practices.

The district professional development program has been extremely effective in improving student achievement because it serves a dual purpose. The district professional development program not only provides comprehensive training to staff on district and school wide programs and topics, but also provides individual training to assist staff members in their continued personal growth. The district professional development program provides high quality training and in-service for all staff. District past and planned training includes: 1) staff training for implementation of the ICU Program (a program that


20 of 35


helps students succeed), 2) training for staff through the Prairie View Curriculum Consortium (PVCC) which provides individual and group training directly related to instruction and student learning, 3) continued training as necessary on Power School (the district student management software), 4) staff attend workshops at the annual fall MEA conference directly related to math and reading, 5) the district continues to work on curriculum alignment with a focus on developing curriculum that meets the standards, 6) the district uses on-line professional development through webinars for staff, 7) the district continues to support individual staff members in attending/taking part in training related to specific areas targeting their personal growth, and 8) continued technology training such as Google Classroom and Chromebooks. The data analysis reveals that the professional development listed above has been successful in improving student proficiency through enhancement of staff instructional skills and preparation.


The district has in place strategies for assessing student progress toward meeting all content standards. The district uses variety of assessments to gauge student progress on content standards which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests (SBAC), AIMSweb, end of unit assessments, and various other measures designed for specific content areas.

The district has implemented AIMSweb testing as an assessment data base. The results assist staff in progress monitoring for all students in the district and helps staff to modify instruction to better meet the needs of students. The AIMSweb testing helps determine individual student progress related to the standards while targeting areas for improvement.

The SMARTER assessment is an example of how the district uses assessments to measure student progress toward meeting all content standards. A summary of SMARTER assessment results showed that 50% of all students scored proficient in ELA in the spring of 2016 (Montana was at 50%) compared to 47% in 2015 (Montana was at 45%). The district improved 3% from 2015 to 2016 in ELA proficiency. Results from 2016 showed that female students scored 51% proficient in 2016 up from 41% in 2015 and were just below the female state rate of 56%. Male students scored 49% in 2016 down from 52% in 2015 and 5% above the state rate for males of 44%. Special education students scored 6% proficient in 2016 down from 22% in 2015 which was below the state rate of 14% proficient.


21 of 35


Proficiency by grades showed that grade 3 was 41% proficient, grade 4 was 55% proficient, grade 5 was 50% proficient, grade 6 was 52% proficient, grade 7 was 26% proficient, and grade 8 was 68% proficient. Grade level proficiency by gender showed that in grade 3 females were 45% proficient and males were 36%, grade 4 females were 55% proficient and males were 56%, grade 5 females were 44% proficient and males were 55%, grade 6 females were 47% proficient and males were 60%, grade 7 females were 33% proficient and males were 20%, and in grade 8 females were 88% and males were 59%.

Results on the SMARTER assessment showing the percentage of students who scored at/near or above the standards in ELA for reading, writing, listening, and research/inquiry are as follows. District students scored the highest in listening with 86.3% of all district students at/near or above the standard followed by research/inquiry with 80.2% at/near or above the standards and reading with 70.3%. District students scored the lowest in writing with 68.7% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall district students scored 76.4% of the students at/near of above the standards in all ELA areas.

Female students scored the highest in listening with 89% of all female students at/near or above the standards followed by research/inquiry at 84% and writing at 78%. Female students scored the lowest in reading with 72% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall female students scored 81% of the students at/near of above the standards in all ELA areas.

Male students scored the highest in listening with 84% of all male students at/near or above the standards followed by research/inquiry at 77% and reading at 69%. Male students scored the lowest in writing with 61% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall male students scored 73% of the students at/near of above the standards in all ELA areas.

Female students scored at a higher rate of meeting the standards than male students in all areas of ELA with 81% to 73%, respectively.

Breaking down these results by grade show that grade 3 scored the highest in listening at 91% at/near or above the standard and scored the lowest in writing at 64%, grade 4 scored the highest in listening at 90% at/near or above the standard and scored the lowest in reading at 70%, grade 5 scored the highest in listening with 85% and the lowest in writing with 50%, grade 6 scored the highest in research/inquiry with 88% and the lowest in reading and writing with 76%, grade 7 scored the highest in listening with 74% and the lowest in reading with 37%, and grade 8 scored the highest in reading, listening, and research/inquiry with 92% and the lowest in writing with 72%.


22 of 35


Overall SMARTER results show that district students improved the percentage of students proficient by 3% from 2015 to 2016 in ELA. In addition, students scored the highest on listening and the lowest on writing. Female students scored higher than male students by 2% in proficiency. Females scoring at/near or above the standards averaged 81% in the ELA areas compared to males at 73%. Female students scored the highest in listening with 89% at/near or above the standards and the lowest on reading with 72% while male students scored the highest on listening with 84% and the lowest on writing with 61%. Female students scored 1% above the all student group and male students scored 1% below the all student group. The highest scoring grade was grade 8 and the lowest scoring grade was grade 7. The use of assessments in the district has been a critical component of improving reading achievement for students.

The district has purchased software that addresses weakness in math and reading for students and teachers to use on technology devices. Several of the programs are designed to continually assess student progress and enable the teachers to gauge student progress on the standards and modify instruction to meet student needs.


Analysis of DataWhat is the 3-year trend for Reading achievement across the district: Grades 3-5

Gradual ImprovementWhat is the 3-year trend for Reading achievement across the district: Grades 6-8

Gradual ImprovementWhat is the 3-year trend for Reading achievement across the district: Grade 10

Gradual ImprovementPlease identify the district actions that may have affected the observed trends:

The three-year trend across the district for reading achievement has shown continued improvement by students at all levels. The district has utilized several assessments including Smarter Balance, AIMSweb, and district/school assessments to demonstrate and support student progress in reading. The results of the assessments provide instructors important information on student progress, information necessary to develop appropriate lessons, and information to use in developing targeted instructional strategies. In addition, the assessment results provide important information for curriculum revisions and updates. A summary of SMARTER assessment results for 2017 showed that district ELA


23 of 35


proficiency was 41% in 2017 compared to 50% in 2016 and 47% in 2015. Female students improved from 41% proficient in 2015 to 42% in 2017 for ELA. Male students scored 52% proficient in 2015 compared to 39% in 2017 for ELA All district students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in reading on ELA targets in 2017. Female students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in reading on ELA targets. Male students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in writing on ELA targets. Female students scored 78% of the students at/near or above the standards in all ELA areas while male students were at 79%. All students scored 78.3% at/near or above the standards in all areas for ELA. Student performance at/near or above the standards for ELA improved in all areas except research/inquiry for 2017, including overall results which were up 1.9%. Male students showed a 6% increase in ELA in 2017 on the percentage of students at/near or above the standards. Due to space limitations in this section please see school data evaluation for a complete summary of assessment results.

The district has in place a comprehensive school improvement process which identifies programs and actions that the district can implement to support and continue the ongoing student academic progress. Several key components identified by the CSIP process and implemented in the district include: 1) the implementation and utilization of a variety of assessments (described in the paragraph above), 2) the implementation of the ICU program, 3)the utilization of intervention strategies to assist students, 4) the development, implementation, and continuation of a comprehensive professional development program for staff, 5) the use of differentiated instructional strategies to ensure success for all students, 6) student use and application of current technology in classes and projects, and 7) the adoption and implementation of the Common Core Standards.

The district implemented the ICU program during the 2016-17 school year. The focus of the ICU program is on quality assignments, quality assessments, and healthy grading practices to improve instruction. The ICU program assists teachers in creating quality assignments and assessments that are focused on the standards. The goal of the ICU program is that every student completes every assignment and the district reached that goal during the 2016-17 school year with every student completing every assignment, which is an exceptional result. The ICU program has provided support for teachers and students to improve the academic progress of each student. The ICU program is somewhat related to the RtI program in function and components.

The district professional development program has been extremely effective in improving student achievement because it serves a dual purpose. The district professional development program not only provides comprehensive training to staff on district and school wide programs and topics, but also provides individual training to assist staff members in their continued personal growth. District training includes: 1) continued staff


24 of 35


training on the ICU Program (a program that helps students succeed), 2) training for staff through the Prairie View Curriculum Consortium (PVCC) which provides individual and group training directly related to instruction and student learning, 3) continued training as necessary on Power School (the district student management software), 4) staff attend workshops at the annual fall MEA conference directly related to math and reading, 5) the district continues to work on curriculum mapping and planning, 6) the district uses on-line professional development through webinars for staff, 7) the district continues to support individual staff members in attending/taking part in training related to specific areas targeting their personal growth, and 8) continued technology training such as Google Classroom and Chromebooks. The data analysis reveals that the professional development listed above has been successful in improving student proficiency through enhancement of staff instructional skills and preparation.

The district utilizes the Power School software program (which allows parents access to student data in the district) to facilitate and communicate with parents to track and monitor student progress. The program allows teachers to communicate with parents and students concerning lesson plans, assignments, and grades. This process supports students both at school and home to improve proficiency in math and reading.

The district has implemented Google Classroom, Chromebooks, and Google Docs to improve proficiency of students in math and reading. The district has purchased a ratio of 1:1 for Chromebooks to students in grades 6-12. The district has provided the professional development necessary to successfully implement and utilize these programs. The integration of technology and the accompanying apps into the curriculum has been a critical strategy in improving student proficiency.

The district has implemented the Common Core Standards for Math and English/Language Arts and is continuing to work with staff on the new standards to increase their knowledge and understanding. The district is a member of the PVCC which provides support and training for staff on the Common Core Standards. District staff through PVCC meets with staff from other area schools to share ideas and best practices in working with the new standards.

District college readiness on the ACT test was 41.7% in English (state 53.7%), 37.5% in math (state 36.9%), 29.2% in reading (state 43.1%), and 37.5% in science (state 32.7%). Student scores on the ACT were 20.5 in math (state was 20.1), 17.6 in English (state was 18.6), 20.4 in science (state was 20.3), 18.5 in reading (state was 20.8), 15.5 in writing (state was 17.8), and a composite of 19.4 (state was 20).

The summary of district actions listed above definitely contributed to the continued


25 of 35


improvement and good results in math proficiency for students. These actions are just a portion of the many programs and support functions in place to assist students academically in the district.

2018 (Current Year) Action PlanState the district goals for reading.

Improve reading proficiency of all students in the district.Define the specific measurable objectives for reading.

At least 50% of all tested students in grades 3-8 (including all subgroups) will score proficient or above as measured by the SMARTER Assessment ELA test in the spring of 2018.

All district students in grade 11 will average at least a .2 higher (than the district average in 2016-17) on the English portion of the ACT test in the 2017-18 school year.


The district is addressing the fundamental teaching and learning needs of the schools in the LEA and the academic problems of low-achieving students using scientifically-based research strategies through the Continuous School Improvement Process (CSIP). The CSIP utilizes multiple components which include collecting and analyzing data, setting school improvement plan goals based on the conclusions drawn from the data, determining specific action plans and strategies based on school improvement plan goals, utilizing effective and research based instructional techniques in strategies, implementation of action plans, and monitoring and assessment of action plan progress. Integrated into the continuous school improvement plan is the necessary professional development needed to support the action plan and strategies.

The district has identified low-achieving students by analyzing student performance on a variety of assessments which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests (SBAC), AIMSweb, and various other measures designed for specific content areas. The district has identified specific concepts and areas of math and reading needing improvement for each individual student through


26 of 35


the assessments. In addition, the teachers in the district use the assessments to measure each student’s progress related to the standards, common core, specific math and reading concepts, and project material each student is ready to learn.

The district uses several strategies to support and assist identified low-achieving groups and all students to improve proficiency in reading. The specific strategies include: 1) use of the ICU program, 2) the use of differentiated instructional strategies to ensure success for all students, 3) curriculum and instructional review based on data results (including identification of curricular areas for instructional emphasis, the adoption of new materials when appropriate, and the needed professional development), 4) increasing knowledge and understanding of the English/Language Common Core Standards for teachers, and 5) student use and application of current technology in classes and projects.

Additional strategies to assist and improve student academic progress:1) All teachers in the district are incorporating current technology in classroom instruction including Google applications. 2) The district utilizes the AIMSweb assessments extensively to gauge student progress in reading and math. Students are tested a minimum of 3 times a year (beginning, middle, and end) to provide benchmarks on student progress and to identify any areas of instruction that require modifications. 3) The district has revised the grading scale and increased expectations for students academically. The lower level of acceptable work by students was increased from 59% to 69% and students are required to rework assignments/assessments that do not score above 69%. 4) The district has implemented the Common Core Standards for Math and English/Language Arts and is continuing to work with staff on the new standards to increase their knowledge and understanding. 5) Staff members are creating lessons for students utilizing Differentiated Instruction techniques and intervention data/information. 6) The district has implemented the ICU program which focuses on helping students succeed in school through completion of quality assignments integrated with healthy grading practices. The program basically creates interventions for students who are not completing assignments, not doing quality work, and are not meeting the standards. The program assists teachers in developing quality assignments tied to the learning standards along with higher expectations. The program provides opportunities to students for extra time and extra help in completing assignments along with restudy and retakes of work. The goal of the program is that every student completes every assignment to expectations. The ICU program provides support for teachers and students to improve the academic progress of each student. The ICU program is somewhat related to the RtI program in function and components.


27 of 35


7) The district utilizes the Power School software program (which allows parents access to student data in the district) to facilitate and communicate with parents to track and monitor student progress. The program allows teachers to communicate with parents and students concerning lesson plans, assignments, and grades. This process supports students both at school and home to improve proficiency in math and reading.8) The district has implemented Google Classroom, Chromebooks, and Google Docs to improve proficiency of students in math and reading. The district has purchased a ratio of 1:1 for Chromebooks to students in grades 6-12. The district has provided the professional development necessary to successfully implement and utilize these programs. The integration of technology and the accompanying apps into the curriculum has been a critical strategy in improving student proficiency. 9) The district continues to provide on-site/regional professional development opportunities to continue staff instructional growth.



28 of 35


The district professional development program is used to improve instruction and is aligned with the districts educational goals and objectives. The following staff development needs were identified based on an analysis of student achievement data, as well as a review of teaching/learning needs and scientifically based research strategies through the CSIP. All training includes follow-up sessions as needed. The district uses job embedded professional development which is scheduled throughout the year through entire day, early release, and faculty meetings. These are not limited to but include grade level and subject level group meetings where staff reviews student achievement and other data to improve instruction. Staff also uses professional development time to align curriculum, design assessments, and develop/share methods of implementing improved classroom instruction for all students.

The district data analysis, review of teaching/learning needs, and scientifically based research strategies has identified specific areas for improving student proficiency in math and reading (the district goal) and will direct professional development at the targeted areas. The targeted areas include: professional development to strengthen the core math and reading programs, continued training to increase knowledge and understanding of the common core standards, continued training in differentiation of instruction strategies to ensure access for all students, training on new technologies to enhance instruction and deepen student engagement, and in-services or PIR time to implement best practices.

The district professional development program has been extremely effective in improving student achievement because it serves a dual purpose. The district professional development program not only provides comprehensive training to staff on district and school wide programs and topics, but also provides individual training to assist staff members in their continued personal growth. District training includes: 1) continued staff training on the ICU Program (a program that helps students succeed), 2) training for staff through the Prairie View Curriculum Consortium (PVCC) which provides individual and group training directly related to instruction and student learning, 3) continued training as necessary on Power School (the district student management software), 4) staff attend workshops at the annual fall MEA conference directly related to math and reading, 5) the district continues to work on curriculum mapping and planning, 6) the district uses on-line professional development through webinars for staff, 7) the district continues to support individual staff members in attending/taking part in training related to specific areas targeting their personal growth, and 8) continued technology training such as Google Classroom and Chromebooks. The data analysis reveals that the professional development listed above has been successful in improving student proficiency through enhancement of staff instructional skills and preparation.


29 of 35



The district and schools have in place strategies for assessing student progress toward meeting all content standards. The district/schools use a variety of assessments to gauge student progress on content standards which include state achievement test assessments, school wide assessments, and classroom assessments (including diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments). The specific assessments options in each of these categories include: student work samples, student writing samples, student projects, group work, multiple choice tests, student portfolios, paper/pencil tests, teacher grading practices, report cards, classroom observations, criterion-referenced tests, SBAC, AIMSweb, and various other measures designed for specific content areas. The district uses these assessments to measure student progress toward meeting content standards and to identify specific math and reading concepts in the standards that students have mastered or need further work and which concepts they are ready to learn. A summary of district assessment results illustrating how data analysis is used to measure progress on the content standard is shown below.

The district has implemented AIMSweb testing to gain frequent and accurate data on student progress related to the standards which will allow staff to design reading lessons directed at student needs. The district has trained staff in the use of the AIMSweb testing program. In addition, the district has purchased software that addresses weakness in math and reading for students and teachers to use on technology devices. Several of the programs are designed to continually assess student progress and enable the teachers to gauge student progress on the standards and modify instruction to meet student needs.

The SMARTER assessment is an example of how the district uses assessments to measure student progress toward meeting all content standards. A summary of SMARTER assessment results showed that district ELA proficiency was 41% in 2017 to 50% in 2016 and 47% in 2015. Female students improved from 41% proficient in 2015 compared to 42% in 2017 for ELA. Male students scored 52% proficient in 2015 compared to 39% in 2017 for ELA. Proficiency by grades showed that grade 3 was 59% proficient, grade 4 was 29% proficient, grade 5 was 55% proficient, grade 6 was 23% proficient, grade 7 was 41% proficient, and grade 8 was 37% proficient. Grade level proficiency by gender showed that in grade 3 females were 56% proficient and males were 62%, grade 4 females were 36% proficient and males were 20%, grade 5 females were 58% proficient and males were 50%, grade 6 females were 27% proficient and males were 18%, grade 7 females were 42% proficient and males were 40%, and in grade 8 females were 33% and males were 40%.

Results on the SMARTER assessment showing the percentage of students who scored at/near or above the standards in ELA for reading, writing, listening, and research/inquiry


30 of 35


are as follows. All district students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in reading on ELA targets in 2017. Female students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in reading on ELA targets. Male students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in writing on ELA targets. Female students scored 78% of the students at/near or above the standards in all ELA areas while male students were at 79%. All students scored 78.3% at/near or above the standards in all areas for ELA. Student performance at/near or above the standards for ELA improved in all areas except research/inquiry for 2017, including overall results which were up 1.9%. Male students showed a 6% increase in ELA in 2017 on the percentage of students at/near or above the standards.

District students scored the highest in listening with 87.3% of all district students at/near or above the standard followed by research/inquiry with 78.2% at/near or above the standards and writing with 75%. District students scored the lowest in reading with 72.6% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall district students scored 78.3% of the students at/near of above the standards in all ELA areas.

Female students scored the highest in listening with 88% of all female students at/near or above the standards followed by research/inquiry at 77% and writing at 77%. Female students scored the lowest in reading with 72% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall female students scored 78% of the students at/near of above the standards in all ELA areas.

Male students scored the highest in listening with 87% of all male students at/near or above the standards followed by research/inquiry at 80% and reading at 74%. Male students scored the lowest in writing with 73% of the students scoring at/near or above the standards. Overall male students scored 79% of the students at/near of above the standards in all ELA areas.

Breaking down these results by grade show that grade 3 scored the highest in listening at 95% at/near or above the standard and scored the lowest in reading at 73%, grade 4 scored the highest in research/inquiry at 81% at/near or above the standard and scored the lowest in writing at 62%, grade 5 scored the highest in listening along with writing at 91% and the lowest in reading along with research/inquiry at 82%, grade 6 scored the highest in listening with 95% and the lowest in writing at 73%, grade 7 scored the highest in listening with 82% and the lowest in reading with 64%, and grade 8 scored the highest in listening with 84% and the lowest in writing with 58%.

Overall SMARTER results show that district students decreased the percentage of students proficient by 6% from 2015 to 2016 in ELA. However, the district increased the percentage of students scoring at/near or above the standards in 2017 for ELS. In addition, district


31 of 35


students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in reading on ELA targets in 2017. Female students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in reading on ELA targets. Male students scored the highest in listening and the lowest in writing on ELA targets. Female students scored higher than male students by 3% in proficiency. Females scoring at/near or above the standards averaged 78% in the ELA areas compared to males at 79%. Female students scored 1% above the all student group in proficiency and male students scored 2% below the all student group. The highest scoring grade was grade 3 and the lowest scoring grade was grade 6.



32 of 35


ArtsPrevious Review: 2016 - 2017Next Scheduled Review: 2022-2023Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

Career Vocational/Technical EducationPrevious Review: 2017 - 2018Next Scheduled Review: 2023-2024Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

Communication ArtsPrevious Review:Next Scheduled Review: Review of this curriculum area has not been completed.

English Language ArtsPrevious Review: 2015 - 2016Next Scheduled Review: 2021-2022Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

Health EnhancementPrevious Review: 2016 - 2017Next Scheduled Review: 2022-2023Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

Library MediaPrevious Review: 2016 - 2017Next Scheduled Review: 2022-2023Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.


33 of 35


MathematicsPrevious Review: 2015 - 2016Next Scheduled Review: 2021-2022Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

ReadingPrevious Review: 2015 - 2016Next Scheduled Review: 2021-2022Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

SciencePrevious Review: 2016 - 2017Next Scheduled Review: 2022-2023Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

Social StudiesPrevious Review: 2014 - 2015Next Scheduled Review: 2020-2021Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

TechnologyPrevious Review: 2014 - 2015Next Scheduled Review: 2020-2021Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.

Workplace CompetenciesPrevious Review: 2017 - 2018Next Scheduled Review: 2023-2024Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.


34 of 35


World LanguagesPrevious Review: 2017 - 2018Next Scheduled Review: 2023-2024Review of this curriculum area has been completed since initiation.


35 of 35


Documents

Annual Progress Report and Yearly Action Plan