frederick county public schools · frederick county public schools maryland’s reform plan bridge...
TRANSCRIPT
Frederick County Public Schools
Maryland’s Reform Plan
Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools
2017 Annual Update
November 2017
Submitted to:
Maryland State Department of Education Division of Student, Family, and School Support
Division of Academic Policy and Innovation
Office of Finance
Submitted by:
Dr. Theresa Alban, Superintendent
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Frederick County Public Schools—2017 Bridge to Excellence Master Plan
Maryland’s Bridge to Excellence Master Plan ............................................................................. 1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1
Submission Cover Page: 2017 Master Plan Annual Update ........................................................ 2
Board of Education of Frederick County ...................................................................................... 3
2017 BTE Master Plan Local Planning Team .............................................................................. 4
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 5
Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5
About Frederick County Public Schools ................................................................................. 5
Progress Summary ............................................................................................................... 6
FCPS Strategic Plan and Measurable Goals ......................................................................... 7
Master Plan Reporting ........................................................................................................... 9
Systemic Strategies............................................................................................................. 19
School-Specific Strategies (Targeting Special Student Populations) ................................... 22
Accelerating Achievement and Equity ................................................................................. 27
Local Assessment Framework ............................................................................................ 34
Budget Narrative ................................................................................................................. 35
Finance Section ........................................................................................................................ 37
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 37
Revenue and Expenditure Analysis ..................................................................................... 37
Maryland’s Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ........................................................................... 40
Preface................................................................................................................................ 40
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 40
Special Education (Students with Disabilities) ..................................................................... 40
Limited English Proficiency (English Learners) .................................................................... 51
Monitoring/Measuring Progress ........................................................................................... 59
PARCC English Language Arts Literacy, Grades 3-5 .......................................................... 59
PARCC English Language Arts Literacy, Grades 6-8 .......................................................... 69
PARCC English Grade 10 .................................................................................................. .77
PARCC English Grade 11 ................................................................................................... 84
PARCC Mathematics, Grades 3-5 ....................................................................................... 84
PARCC Mathematics, Grades 6-8 ....................................................................................... 95
PARCC Algebra 1 ............................................................................................................. 102
PARCC Algebra 2 ............................................................................................................. 109
PARCC Geometry ............................................................................................................. 110
MSA Science Grade 5 ...................................................................................................... 110
MSA Science Grade 8 ...................................................................................................... 113
HSA Biology ...................................................................................................................... 116
HSA Government .............................................................................................................. 119
2017 Bridge to Excellence Master Plan Assessment Requirements ........................................ 126
Appendix A: House Bills 999 and 412 ..................................................................................... 134
House Bill 999 ................................................................................................................... 134
House Bill 412 and Section 7.203.3 ................................................................................... 135
Figures and Tables
Figure 1: Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2017 PARCC ELA Results (Levels 3-5)—ELA State Comparison/Rank ................................................ 10
Figure 2: Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2017 PARCC Math Results (Levels 3-5)—Math State Comparison/Rank ............................................... 10
Figure 3: Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2015-2017 PARCC ELA Results (Levels 3-5)—ELA Trend .................................................................... 11
Figure 4: Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2015-2017 PARCC Math Results (Levels 3-5)—Math Trend ................................................................. 11
Figure 5: Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Elementary ELA (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017) ........................................... 12
Figure 6. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Elementary Math (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017) .......................................... 13
Figure 7. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Middle School ELA (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017) ........................................... 14
Figure 8. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Middle School Math with Algebra 1 (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017) ................... 15
Figure 9. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC English 10 (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017) ................................................... 16
Figure 10. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Algebra 1 (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017) ................................................... 17
Figure 11. Goal 1. Biology and Government High School Assessments—2015-2017 —HSA Trends ......................................................................................................... 18
Figure 12. FCPS Continuous Improvement—ACTS Pipeline for Student Success ................... 19
Figure 13. Strategies to Enhance Instructional Leadership and Academic Achievement—Capacity Building, Coaching, Conversations, and Courage ............. 21
Figure 14. Continuous Improvement Process and Culture of Inquiry Theoretical Framework............................................................................................................... 23
Appendix B: Response to MSDE Clarifying Questions............................................................ 136ELA and Math, Students with Disabilties...........................................................................136Biology and Government, EL Students & Students Failing to Meet Performance
Standards..............................................................................................................137
Figure 15. Culture of Inquiry Framework by Chaplot, Booth, and Johnstone (2013) ................. 24
Figure 16. English Learners—Growth Trend in Enrollment ....................................................... 30
Figure 17. The “Dimensions of Diversity” Wheel ....................................................................... 33
Table 1. Achievement Gaps (%)—Identified Student Groups Compared to All Students— Based on 2015-2017 PARCC Results, Performance Band 3-5 ................................ 18
Table 2. Current Year Variance Table (MSDE Table 1.1A) .................................................... 38
Table 3. Prior Year Variance Table (MSDE Table 1.1B) ........................................................ 39
Table 4. Special Education and Psychological Services, 2016-2017 Accomplishments ......... 42
Table 5. English Learners—MSDE Criteria and Targets for AMAO I ..................................... 54
Table 6. English Learners—MSDE Criteria and Targets for AMAO 2 .................................... 55
Table 7. English Learners—Progress on Reading and Math AMO Targets ........................... 55
Table 8. 2017-2018 Resource Allocations for English Learner Support ................................. 58
Table 9. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance, 2015-2017 ............................ 60
Table 10. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities ......................................................................................... 61
Table 11. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities—Exited Services ............................................................. 62
Table 12. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners ...................................................................................................... 64
Table 13. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners—Exited Services .......................................................................... 65
Table 14. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2017), Race/Ethnicity and Special Services ........................................................................ 67
Table 15. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance, 2015-2017 ........................ 70
Table 16. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities ......................................................................................... 71
Table 17. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities—Exited Services ............................................................. 71
Table 18. English Language Arts, Grades 6-8—Strategies for 2017-2018 ............................... 72
Table 19. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners ...................................................................................................... 74
Table 20. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners—Exited Services .......................................................................... 74
Table 21. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2017), Race/Ethnicity and Special Services ........................................................................ 76
Table 22. PARCC English 10 Performance, 2015-2017 .......................................................... 78
Table 23. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities ................ 79
FCPS, Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 12
Table 24. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities— Exited Services ........................................................................................................ 79
Table 25. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017), English Learners ............................. 81
Table 26. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017), English Learners— Exited Services ........................................................................................................ 81
Table 27. PARCC English 10 Performance (2017), Race/Ethnicity and Special Services ........ 83
Table 28. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) .......................... 86
Table 29. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities ......................................................................................... 86
Table 30. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities—Exited Services ............................................................. 87
Table 31. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners ...................................................................................................... 89
Table 32. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners—Exited Services .......................................................................... 89
Table 33. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2017), Race/Ethnicity and Special Services ........................................................................ 91
Table 34. Elementary Math—Curricular Work Teams .............................................................. 93
Table 35. Elementary Math—Additional Strategies and Resources ......................................... 94
Table 36. Elementary Math—Resource Allocations ................................................................. 94
Table 37. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) ..................... 96
Table 38. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities ......................................................................................... 97
Table 39. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities—Exited Services ............................................................. 97
Table 40. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners ...................................................................................................... 99
Table 41. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017), English Learners—Exited Services .......................................................................... 99
Table 42. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2017), Race/Ethnicity and Special Services ...................................................................... 101
Table 43. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015-2017) ........................................................ 103
Table 44. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities ............... 104
Table 45. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015-2017), Students with Disabilities— Exited Services ...................................................................................................... 104
Table 46. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015-2017), English Learners ............................ 106
Table 47. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015-2017), English Learners— Exited Services ...................................................................................................... 106
Table 48. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2017), Race/Ethnicity and Special Services ....... 108
Table 49. High School Government Strategies to be Implemented in 2017-2018 .................. 123
Table 50. Maryland High School Assessment Performance Results—Biology (All Administrations) ............................................................................................... 124
Table 51. Maryland High School Assessment Performance Results—Government (All Administrations) ............................................................................................... 125
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements .................................. 126
Maryland’s Bridge to Excellence Master Plan
I NT RODUCTI ON
Authorization
The 2017 Bridge to Excellence (BTE) Master Plan Annual Update is authorized by the following:
Section 5-401, Comprehensive Master Plans, Education Article of the Annotated Code of
Maryland;
Public Law 111-5, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009;
2016 Maryland General Assembly Legislation House Bill 999, Commission on Innovation
and Excellence in Education, Chapter 702;
2016 Maryland General Assembly Legislation House Bill 412, Assessment Administration
and Provision of Information, Chapter 264; and
Section 7-203.3, Education Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland, as enacted by
Senate Bill 533/House Bill 412 of the General Assembly of 2016.
Background
In 2002, the Maryland General Assembly enacted the Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools
Act. This legislation provides a powerful framework for all 24 local education agencies (LEAs) to
increase student achievement for all students and to close the achievement gap. The BTE
legislation significantly increased state aid to public education and required each LEA to
develop a comprehensive master plan, to be updated annually. Each LEA is required to develop
and implement a comprehensive master plan that describes the goals, objectives, and
strategies that will be used to improve student achievement in each segment of the student
population. Additionally, each annual update will include detailed summaries of the alignment
between the LEA’s current year approved budget, prior year actual budget, and the master plan
goals and objectives.
In 2016, the Maryland General Assembly passed House Bill 999, the Commission on Innovation
and Excellence in Education, and House Bill 412, Assessment Administration and Provision of
Information. House Bill 999 outlines the reporting structure of the 2016 and 2017 master plan
annual updates, which limits specified requirements to be reported in the master plan for these
two years. House Bill 412 outlines assessment reporting details specified in the new Education
Article Section 7-203.3 for each assessment administered in each LEA, and the information that
shall be provided for each administrated assessment.
Additional details on House Bill 999, House Bill 412 and Section 7-203.3 revisions that must be
included in the 2016 and 2017 master plan annual updates are provided in Appendix A.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 1
BOARD OF EDUCATION
Frederick County Public Schools
Brad W. Young, President
Liz Barrett, Vice President
Michael Bunitsky
Colleen Cusimano
Ken Kerr
April Fleming Miller
Joy Schaefer
Will Anderson, Student Member
Superintendent of Schools
Theresa Alban
191 South East Street ● Frederick, Maryland 21701
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 3
2017 BTE Master Plan Local Planning Team
Name FCPS Department and Title
Michael Markoe Deputy Superintendent
System Accountability and School Improvement (SASI) Department
Jamie Aliveto Director of SASI
Natalie Gay Coordinator of Data Analysis and Research
Deborah Gilmartin Supervisor of State Assessment and Accountability
Kelly Merrbach Coordinator for Local Assessment and Intervention
Fiscal Services Department
Leslie Pellegrino Chief Financial Officer of Fiscal Services
Heather Clabaugh Budget Officer
Mellissa Rollison Financial Reporting Manager
Curriculum, Instruction, and Innovation (CII) Department
Kevin Cuppett Executive Director of CII
Colleen Beall Secondary Curriculum Specialist for Science
Colleen Bernard Secondary Curriculum Specialist for Social Studies
Peter Cincotta Secondary Curriculum Specialist for Mathematics
Chris Horne Elementary Curriculum Specialist for Science
Karen McGaha Elementary Curriculum Specialist for Language Arts/English
Debra Myers Elementary Curriculum Specialist for Mathematics
Sue Ann Nogle Secondary Curriculum Specialist for Language Arts/English
Accelerating Achievement and Equity (AAE) Department
Keith Harris Executive Director of AAE
Carol Breeze Director of Special Education and Student Support
Michelle Concepcion Director of Special Education Instruction and Student Performance
Margaret Lee Supervisor of Advanced Academics
Eric Phillips Supervisor of AAE
Larry Steinly Supervisor of English Learners (EL)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Since 2002, when the Maryland General Assembly enacted the Bridge to Excellence (BTE) in
Public Schools Act, school systems have been required to develop a comprehensive master
plan, to be updated annually. Local education agencies (LEAs) have consistently described
goals, objectives, and strategies that are used to improve student achievement for all students
and to close the achievement gap.
For the 2016 and the 2017 annual update, the format of the master plan has been modified.
House Bill 999, the Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education, and House Bill 412,
Assessment Administration and Provision of Information, are guiding the modifications and
requirements. A significant focus of the plan pertains to goals and strategies relating to the
performance of students receiving special education services and students with limited English
proficiency (i.e., English language learners). School systems must address students failing to
make progress towards meeting state performance standards. Budgetary influence as tied to
the goals continues to be a critical focus in the plan. Finally, school systems must detail all
assessments mandated by local, state, and/or federal authority.
ABOUT FREDE RI CK CO UNTY P UBLIC SCHOOLS
Frederick County Public Schools (FCPS) is a successful school system in a diverse and
growing community. Frederick County bridges rural, suburban, and urban lifestyles near
both the Washington, D.C., and Baltimore metropolitan communities.
In 2016-17, there were 41,3181 students enrolled in FCPS; thus, an increase of 665
students from the 2015-16 school year. The racial/ethnic composition of the student body
was: 61.8% white; 15.5% Hispanic/Latino; 11.9% black/African American; 5.3% Asian; 4.9%
two or more races; 0.4% American Indian/Alaskan Native; and 0.2% Native Hawaiian/Other
Pacific Islander.
FCPS serves students with varying needs, including 4,190 students with disabilities
(10%), 2,388 English learners (EL) (6%), and nearly 11,000 receiving free and/or reduced
meals (FARM) (27%)1.
Frederick County is home to 66 schools, including 36 elementary schools, 13 middle
schools, 10 high schools, three public charter schools, an alternative school, a special
education school, Flexible Evening High, and a Career and Technology Center (CTC). Plans
are underway to add two more elementary schools in the next three years.
FCPS balances top-rate academics with the personal caring and individual attention that
would be expected in a small town community. FCPS understands that the children it
educates today will be the adults caring for the community's health, homes, businesses, and
1 Based on September 30, 2016 enrollment.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 5
neighborhoods tomorrow. Frederick County's investment in public education is an
investment in its future. The FCPS operating budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 is
$578,515,5312 and nearly 47% of its funding comes from its local county government.
Of 5,771 employees (full-time equivalent), approximately 2,940 are teachers, 140 are
principals and assistant principals, 145 are counselors or psychologists, and 860 are
instructional assistants. The remainder are bus drivers, food service workers, custodians,
office staff, and other central office support and administrative staff. FCPS employees are
champions of excellence who collaborate with parents, community members, and local
businesses to create an inspiring, safe, healthy, and nurturing academic environment for
students.
P ROG RESS SUMMARY
FCPS is an outstanding school system in the state of Maryland, and nationally:
Maryland has ranked among America's top states for top-quality public education from 2009-
2017 [Education Week's Quality Counts reports].
While Maryland continues to lead the nation in Advanced Placement (AP) scores, the mean
AP exam score for FCPS students (3.19) exceeded the state (3.01) and the nation (2.87) in
2016. The percent of students with AP scores three or better (i.e., based on a five-point
scale with three typically qualifying for college credit) was 72% for FCPS (n=4,462 exams)
compared to 64% at the state and 60% nationally.
FCPS students consistently outperform their state and national peers in academic
achievement measures, such as the College Board SAT. In fact, the mean SAT score for
FCPS students in 2016 was 1558 compared to the state at 1456 and the nation at 1484.
Students in the FCPS Class of 2017 received $41.1 million in scholarship offers.
(Not all were accepted, as some students received more than one offer.)
2 Includes state contribution to teacher pension fund.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 6
The 2016 graduation rate was at a high of 92%, while the dropout rate was 4.7%.
Out of 1,000 employers surveyed, 99% indicated that FCPS students met or exceeded
workplace readiness standards.
While the master plan primarily focuses on one measure, state assessments, FCPS embraces a
culture of continuous improvement and focuses on multiple measures and outcomes when
evaluating its success. This plan highlights FCPS’ strengths but also the challenges that it
meets with critical reflection and courage.
FCP S ST RATEGIC PLAN AND MEASURABLE G OALS
While FCPS is excited to celebrate its
accomplishments, stakeholders also
recognize persistent gaps in achievement
for some student groups and embrace a
mindset of continual improvement. As
FCPS reflects on its performance from the
2016-17 school year, it is important to note
that it has completed its second year of
work with new aspirations, priorities, and
measurable goals. Along with the
aspirational goals and priorities, FCPS is
reporting regular progress on its 30
measurable goals that focus on both
quantitative and qualitative outcomes, with
many goals focusing on stakeholder
perception.
FCPS Aspirational Goals
Goal 1. FCPS will equip each and every student to be an empowered learner and engaged
citizen to achieve a positive impact in the local and global community.
Priority 1: FCPS will provide each and every student high quality instruction that fosters inquiry,creative thinking, complex problem solving, and collaboration.
Priority 2: FCPS will raise the achievement for all students and eliminate achievement gaps.
FCPS is committed to preparing its students for a variety of post-secondary opportunities. FCPS
recognizes that the quality of K-12 education will impact the lives of each of its students and the
school system embraces this responsibility. By specifying “each and every” student, FCPS is
institutionalizing a promise to ensure students possess the tools necessary to become the type
of learners and citizens that can thrive in the 21st Century. This will empower students to
positively impact the local and global stage, whether that be by pursuing further education or
entering the workforce or military.
Goal 2. FCPS will hire, support, and retain staff who champion individual, professional,
and student excellence.
Priority 3: FCPS will implement strategies to ensure a high quality and diverse workforce.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 7
Priority 4: FCPS will support all staff by providing ongoing opportunities to grow as professionalsthroughout their career.
Research repeatedly demonstrates that great people drive better outcomes for students.3
FCPS has committed itself to creating a workforce that champions excellence from
themselves, their peers, and their students. This extends beyond the teaching staff. FCPS
believes that all staff members in the school system have an impact on student success, and
supports them in expecting and achieving the same level of excellence. FCPS is
determined to hire a workforce that combines a high-quality skillset with the cultural
competency and commitment to respond to its varied student needs.
Goal 3. FCPS will pursue and utilize resources strategically and responsibly to achieve
its objectives and inspire public confidence.
Priority 5: FCPS will provide equitable distribution of resources based on the varied needs ofstudents and schools.
Priority 6: FCPS will promote clear communication and transparency in allocation of resources.
FCPS, like many school systems across the country, is not immune to the vicissitudes and
challenges of the economic climate. Rather than falling victim to the pressures of the economic
situation, FCPS is committed to being proactive. In addition to advocating for the resources it
needs, it will seek to utilize its resources in a strategic manner that ensures the greatest positive
impact on student outcomes and the broader community.
Goal 4. FCPS will nurture relationships with families and the entire community, sharing
responsibility for students’ success and demonstrating pride in all aspects of our school
system.
Priority 7: FCPS will encourage and sustain collaborations with families and the entire communityto support student success.
Priority 8: FCPS will equip staff with the knowledge and tools necessary to be positiveambassadors who build support for our goals and initiatives.
As evident in the vision statement, FCPS prides itself on being an integral part of the larger
Frederick County community. That being said, it also recognizes that strong and lasting
relationships are not guaranteed; strong relationships require work and commitment. The
school system must initiate action to include the larger community in any and all endeavors to
improve student outcomes and ensure student success. FCPS will nurture relationships with
families, individual community members, and community partners to unify support to students
while simultaneously building county-wide pride in the school system.
Goal 5. FCPS will promote a culture fostering wellness and civility for students and staff.
Priority 9: FCPS will promote and maintain a safe and respectful environment.
Priority 10: FCPS will foster personal well-being and health among students and staff throughincreased awareness and engagement on these topics.
FCPS cannot achieve its goals without prioritizing the health and wellness of its students and
staff. Scholastic success can only be built and sustained on the bedrock of safe and healthy
3 http://www.rand.org/education/projects/measuring-teacher-effectiveness/teachers-matter.html
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 8
environments for all. This not only includes physical safety, but also extends to health and well-
being in a variety of areas, including emotional and behavioral wellness. FCPS feels these
sentiments need to be expressed explicitly as a goal because it permeates into so much of the
work that the school system does and is necessary to ensure obtainment of the vision.
MASTE R P LAN REPORTI NG
The 2017 Master Plan Annual Update contains important progress updates. However, FCPS
values a multiple-measures approach to the continuous strategic improvement (CSI) process.
Therefore, strategic plan goal reporting provided to the Board of Education (BOE) of Frederick
County will serve as the most comprehensive and current review of system progress.
The BTE Master Plan best aligns to FCPS Aspirational Goals 1 and 3.
Goal 1. FCPS will equip each and every student to be an empowered learner and engaged
citizen to achieve a positive impact in the local and global community.
Priority 1: FCPS will provide each and every student high quality instruction that fosters
inquiry, creative thinking, complex problem solving, and collaboration.
Priority 2: FCPS will raise the achievement for all students and eliminate achievement gaps.
Goal 3. FCPS will pursue and utilize resources strategically and responsibly to achieve its
objectives and inspire public confidence.
Priority 5: FCPS will provide equitable distribution of resources based on the varied needs of
students and schools.
Priority 6: FCPS will promote clear communication and transparency in allocation of
resources.
As shown in Figures 1 and 2 on page 10, FCPS consistently performs well above the state in
English language arts (ELA) and math. Note: FCPS recognizes the Maryland State Department
of Education’s (MSDE) eventual target of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for
College and Career (PARCC) performance levels 4-5 to evaluate student proficiency. However,
the FCPS 2017 Master Plan Annual Update highlights performance levels 3-5 since MSDE’s
graduation assessment requirement for students who took the test for the first time in the 2016-
17 school year included levels 3-5. Not only does FCPS outperform the state, consistent
positive trends are evident from the 2015 to 2017 PARCC administration in all but two assessed
grades and content areas (see Figures 3 and 4 on page 11).
FCPS continues to see mostly positive trends (some stagnant) in student performance on
PARCC [see Figures 5 and 6 for elementary school (pages 12-13), 7 and 8 for middle school
(pages 14-15), and 9 and 10 for high school (pages 16-17) student group trends]. In addition,
the data reveals a prevalence of positive performance trends among many FCPS student
groups. PARCC performance at the elementary and secondary levels increased among the
following student groups—American Indian, Asian, black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and
white students, as well as students receiving FARM. American Indian and white students
demonstrated increases in math performance at all three levels, while students with special
needs increased at the elementary and secondary levels.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 9
Figure 2. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2017 PARCC Math Results (Levels 3-5)—Math State Comparison/Rank
Figure 1. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2017 PARCC ELA Results (Levels 3-5)—ELA State Comparison/Rank
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 10
Figure 3. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2015-2017 PARCC ELA Results (Levels 3-5)—ELA Trend
Figure 4. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—2015-2017 PARCC Math Results (Levels 3-5)—Math Trend
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 11
Figure 5. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Elementary ELA (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 12
Figure 6. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Elementary Math (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 13
Figure 7. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Middle School ELA (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 14
Figure 10. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Algebra 1 (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 17
Figure 8. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC Middle School Math with Algebra 1 (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 15
Figure 9. Goal 1: Performance on Accountability Tests—PARCC English 10 (Levels 3-5)—Student Group Trends (2015-2017)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 16
Not only is the performance increasing among many student groups, it is increasing for the
overall student population (i.e., “all student group”). Therefore, achievement gaps by
race/ethnicity and special services still exist when compared to “all students”. Table 1 displays
the most significant and consistent gaps that are evident in the FCPS PARCC data.
Table 1. Achievement Gaps (%)—Identified Student Groups Compared to All Students
Based on 2015-2017 PARCC Results, Performance Band 3-5
Black/ African
American
Hispanic/ Latino
ELL Free/
Reduced Meals
Special Education
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
15
20
16
20
17
EL
A
16 15 13 15 14 13 57 56 57 20 20 20 51 50 49
MA
TH
19 15 16 15 14 15 47 45 50 19 20 20 45 45 44
In previous years, High School Assessment (HSA) results have been reported by test
performance status (i.e., only the highest score for a student taking the assessment was
included) by the end of grade 12. However, for both 2016 and 2017 master plan updates, HSA
data are analyzed and reported to parallel PARCC reporting (i.e., each test score for any
student who took the test that year is reported). Thus, Figure 11 data shows all administrations
of HSA in a testing year, including multiple assessments taken by a student (as opposed to the
highest score for a student). As demonstrated by three years of data in Figure 11, student
performance on Biology and Government HSA remains strong.
Figure 11. Goal 1. Biology and Government High School Assessments—2015-2017—HSA Trends
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 18
SY STEMI C ST RATEGIES
FCPS’ Division of Academics, Communication, Technology, and Student Achievement (ACTS)4
has recognized that the CSI process must be focused and research-based. Central leaders
have established a multi-year plan to focus professional learning across the school system for
central leadership, school-based leadership, and teachers. There have been significant efforts
across the system to collaborate and coordinate such that all professional learning is connected
and meaningful.
FCPS is implementing a multi-layered, yet highly integrated, approach to closing achievement
gaps. The following frameworks and actions will align the work across central office
departments and ultimately improve schools for students. Figure 12 below illustrates the
strategies being used by FCPS to guide improvement efforts. Four core strategies—accelerated
learning process (ALP), cultural proficiency, Framework for Teaching, and personalized
learning—are guiding all learning and improvement in FCPS schools. A brief description of each
core strategy, i.e., a “compelling why” statement, is provided next.
4 Comprised of the Accelerating Achievement and Equity (AAE), Curriculum, Instruction and Innovation (CII), School
Administration and Leadership (SAL), Communications, Community Engagement & Marketing, Technology Infrastructure (TI), and System Accountability and School Improvement (SASI) departments.
Figure 12. FCPS Continuous Improvement—ACTS Pipeline for Student Success
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 19
Accelerated Learning Process
In response to the need for a systemic process that provides ongoing job-embedded
professional learning, educator collaboration, and continuous, collective assessment of student
learning with the specific goal of transforming teaching and learning, FCPS created the ALP.
This process requires regular meetings that offer an opportunity for educators to:
Monitor student learning.
Administer data-driven decisions that promote differentiated instruction.
Share instructional best practices.
Examine student work.
The ALP is designed to ensure systemic terminology, protocols, and research-based practices.
Cultural Proficiency
FCPS students are entitled to a welcoming, inclusive environment where they are highly
engaged in learning and afforded equitable opportunities to participate in a full range of
activities, curricula, and services. FCPS must honor, respect, and value diversity while ensuring
high academic standards and achievement levels for all students.
FCPS must actively:
Promote curriculum that fosters cultural competency.
Expect respect for students’ identities and backgrounds.
Tailor instruction to support diverse learning styles.
Ensure highly effective educators for all students.
Differentiate resources to support varying school and student needs.
Framework for Teaching
The Framework for Teaching5 is an instrument to support and enhance the professional growth
of teachers as they continuously strive towards increased student achievement. When used
with fidelity, the instrument offers a common language that promotes coaching conversations
between teacher and evaluator; thus, resulting in an increase in overall teacher effectiveness. It
shifts the traditional paradigm associated with teacher observation from evaluative to a coaching
model that encompasses goal setting and individualized professional growth in the areas of
planning, classroom management, instruction, and professionalism. These elements assure a
comprehensive arrangement for professional learning.
Personalized Learning
Personalized learning is intended to facilitate the academic success of each student by first
determining the learning needs, interests, and aspirations of individual students, and then
creating learning experiences that are customized, to a greater or lesser extent, for each
5 http://www.danielsongroup.org/framework/
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 20
student. Blended learning is the practice of leveraging technology to create a personalized,
competency-based learning experience, including increased student ownership over the time,
place, path, and/or pace of learning. Blended learning brings the best of traditional instruction
together with the most relevant and appropriate online and technology-supported instructional
innovations to create a variety of integrated instructional experiences
ACTS Division’s Strategies to Support System Initiatives
As FCPS division leaders work to engage system and school leaders (as well as teachers in this
work), they champion four strategies to enhance instructional leadership and accelerate
academic achievement for all FCPS students. The four strategies include: (a) capacity building,
(b) coaching, (c) conversations, and (d) courage (see Figure 13). These strategies will support
attainment of FCPS aspirational goals and advance ACTS’ four identified initiatives—ALP,
cultural proficiency with a growth mindset, Framework for Teaching, and personalized learning.
Figure 13 represents the four values that must be embraced to move FCPS forward in learning
and aligned actions.
Figure 13. Strategies to Enhance Instructional Leadership and Academic Achievement—Capacity Building, Coaching, Conversations, and Courage
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 21
S CHOOL -SPECI FI C ST RATEGIES ( T A R G E T I N G S P E C I A L S T U D E N T P O P U L A T I O N S )
Collaborative Improvement Process
As a school system, FCPS has many foundational pieces in place to drive continuous
improvement in schools. Data systems are available to provide easy access to essential data
points identified by system leaders, system targets have been set, and a continuous strategic
improvement planning tool exists to support improvement aligned with the FCPS Strategic Plan.
Finally, school teams have shifted from a one-time event to continuous progress monitoring and
adjusting school plans on an as-needed basis.
CIP Workgroup
While FCPS has some critical components in place to be well-poised for the implementation of
Maryland’s Consolidated State Accountability Plan under the new Every Student Succeeds Act
(ESSA), a diverse group of stakeholders gathered to plan the system’s new Collaborative
Improvement Process (CIP). The CIP will be leveraged to support schools identified as
Targeted School Improvement or Comprehensive School Improvement by the state.
CIP Research-Based Approach
The CIP workgroup reviewed extensive research on school improvement, turnaround schools,
and leadership. Using this knowledge as well as knowledge gained from the collective practical
experience of the workgroup, the CIP Plan was proposed. The essence of the CIP Plan is
captured by the thinking from a 2013 study by Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom6:
“Collaborative district cultures nourished by networks and PLCs, according to this study,
stimulate the learning of new forms of instruction and support staff members as they struggle to
implement what they learn. Finally, this study found that a focus on setting targets for improving
learning and uses of evidence by monitoring progress towards these targets, in the absence of
such collaborative district cultures, actually had negative effects on student achievement. So
careful data use for diagnosing weaknesses, setting targets, and monitoring progress?
Absolutely. Multiple sources of data about achievement and improvement strategies? Very
important! But in a collaborative and supportive district context? Essential.”
In a review of the research on school improvement and turnaround schools, it is clear that a
focus on high-yield leadership, high-yield instruction, and building a culture of belief should
provide a framework for the work done in schools. In an article on principal and teacher
effectiveness and school turnarounds, New Leaders for New Schools (2009)7 claim “nearly 60%
of a school’s impact on student achievement is attributable to principal and teacher
effectiveness” and that in order to have breakthroughs in achievement gains, principals need
“strong training programs committed to ongoing improvement as well as policy and system
contexts to support this new vision of effectiveness.”
While many of the previous intervention efforts for FCPS schools have focused on ensuring
quality instruction, previous efforts may not have explicitly focused on leadership and a culture
6 https://www.scoe.org/files/Strong_Districts-Excerpt.pdf 7 http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED532064.pdf
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 22
of belief. In a study commissioned by The Wallace Foundation (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, &
Wahlstrom, 20048), the authors state:
“It turns out that leadership not only matters: it is second only to teaching among school-related
factors in its impact on student learning and “the impact of leadership tends to be greatest in
schools where the learning needs of students are most acute.”
School systems across the country know the importance of school leadership and often work to
put the best leaders in schools with the greatest needs. However, what makes a school leader
effective? The new 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders9 (released by the
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) promote ten standards with 83
effective leader statements. The NPBEA claims these standards “can be a guiding force to
states and leadership preparation programs as they identify and develop the specific
knowledge, skills, dispositions, and other characteristics required of educational leaders to
achieve real student success in school.” By using these standards as a starting point, the CIP
will narrow the focus on high-yield leadership according to the research.
FCPS already has a strong focus on high-yield instruction and uses the 2013 Framework for
Teaching to narrow the focus for school leaders as they explore the concept of quality
instruction in their schools. Finally, one of the components identified by The Urban Excellence
Framework (2009)7 that is critical to achieving transformative results is “developing an
achievement- and belief-based school-wide culture” in which “every aspect of the school’s
work reinforces the messages, “school is important,” “you can do it,” “we’re here to help,” and
“you and we are responsible for your success.”
CIP Theoretical Framework
By using a collaborative culture of inquiry focused on high-yield instruction, high-yield
8 http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/How-Leadership-Influences-Student-Learning.pdf 9 http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2015/ProfessionalStandardsforEducationalLeaders2015forNPBEAFINAL.pdf
Figure 14. Continuous Improvement Process and Culture of Inquiry Theoretical Framework
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 23
leadership, and ensuring a culture of belief (see Figure 14), FCPS will achieve the measurable
goals in the FCPS Strategic Plan and ensure FCPS schools meet with success in the state’s
accountability plan.
Culture of Inquiry Process
In the typical CSI process, school teams review data, analyze data to prioritize needs, and then
develop an action plan that is routinely monitored and revised. The Culture of Inquiry process
requires a deeper dive into evidence in an attempt to allow actions to be more impactful. While
the three areas for study are defined—instruction, leadership, and culture—school teams would
use their analysis of the data to identify a focused inquiry area. Once an area of leadership,
instruction, and culture is selected, individuals or teams would determine additional evidence to
gather. A collaborative team would explore this evidence to translate the collective insight into
action. See Figure 15 for illustration of this process. Upon measuring this impact (via additional
aligned evidence), teams either continue to adjust actions based on insights or establish a new
area for focused inquiry. According to Chaplot, Booth, and Johnstone (2013)10, building a
culture of inquiry allows stakeholders to:
“Construct thoughtful questions to better understand the student experience, face realities
about the status quo, collect and examine various types of data, interpret the evidence
among colleagues, and collectively engage in passionate discourse on how to interpret this
evidence and use it to inform action.”
Linking Youth to New eXperiences (LYNX) at Frederick High
It was a deliberate decision to have the Linking Youth to New eXperiences (LYNX) high school
be a comprehensive public school that encompassed all students within the school, not just a
select student population. The overarching goal was to create a totally new model for the 21st
Century high school experience that could be replicated. While LYNX at Frederick High School
10 http://www.completionbydesign.org/sites/default/files/site-uploads/main-site/pdf/ncii-inquiry-guides-building-a-culture-of-inquiry.pdf
Define a Focus of Inquiry
Gather Relevant and Meaningful Evidence
Engage a Broad Range of Practitioners in Exploring the
Evidence
Translate Collective
Insight into Action
Measure the Impact of
Action
Need Continued Refinement Ready for New Inquiry Focus
Figure 15. Culture of Inquiry Framework by Chaplot, Booth, and Johnstone (2013)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 24
(FHS) is being highlighted as a school-specific strategy, it is imperative to note the intention of
FCPS is to replicate this model.
LYNX Goals
The goal of the LYNX program is to accelerate achievement and ensure equity for students. To
accomplish this goal, the program aims to:
Provide individualized, self-directed learning opportunities for every student in
accordance with a personal plan for success that is developed by each student with the
assistance of education and business advocates and parents or guardians.
Allow the student to select academic course work, the method of instruction, and the
pace of learning that works best for the individual student.
Allow the student to participate in and move between project-based learning (PBL)
experiences at the high school and college levels and work, internship, or apprenticeship
experiences focused on college and career readiness competencies as an integral part
of the student’s curriculum.
LYNX Main Program Components
The LYNX Program has four main components:
1. Flexible Schedule—Provide a flexible schedule to
meet the diverse needs of students.
Students at LYNX will have flexibility within a
framework or structure to construct a schedule from
available course offerings that meets their unique
needs and interests. There is no “typical student” at
LYNX; therefore, there is no “typical day.” Students
can schedule face-to-face courses and access
technology and online options during evening hours
in the learning lab. Students may also schedule off-site learning experiences during the
day, such as Career and Technology Education (CTE), dual enrollment, and
opportunities with business partners.
2. Innovative Instruction—Offer innovative instruction (learning) and assessment options
for students.
Students at LYNX will have innovative instruction and assessment options to personalize
their learning experiences. Students in Year 1 will have access to traditional coursework,
blended learning, course options through Frederick County Virtual School (FCVS), and
PBL. Students will also have the ability to explore the option of meeting some course
requirements with “competency by demonstrated mastery.” Transdisciplinary courses,
competency-based learning, and individualized online options are in the development
stages for the future at LYNX.
3. Advocacy—Provide strong advocacy with a focus on personal plans for success.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 25
Students at LYNX will pursue their personal plans for success in school, work, and life
with the continuous support of a coherent network of adults. From grade 8 through
graduation, students will chart their educational path in partnership with parents and
family members, school-based advocates, and business and community partners. At
LYNX, the ultimate goal is for students to advocate for themselves.
4. Partnerships—Utilize business and community partnerships to link students to
experiences.
Students at LYNX will be provided real-world learning experiences with business and
community partners in a variety of settings. From their first year at LYNX through
graduation, students engage with business and community partners through school-
based virtual interactions, field trips, job shadowing experiences, internships,
apprenticeships, and work-study opportunities.
Why Frederick High School?
After careful examination, FHS was selected as the first school for initial implementation of the
LYNX program. FHS, located in an urban area of Frederick County, serves a large majority-
minority student population. In fact, 38% of the first LYNX cohort (n=297) are Hispanic/Latino,
26% are white, 20% are black/African American,
9% are Asian, and 7% are two or more races.
Approximately 15% are EL students and to a
lesser degree, 7% are students with disabilities.
In addition to a diverse student population,
there is evidence of significant achievement
gaps at FHS as measured by various data
points—performance on state assessments,
graduation and dropout rates, and college
enrollment. Considering the many challenges
faced by FHS and its students, implementation
of a new school model, such as LYNX, was
viewed as the best opportunity to support
school improvement while increasing student
achievement and promoting college and career
readiness. Other factors aiding in this
determination were the support by FCPS
leadership and staff, FCPS’ existing relationship with educational and business communities,
and the construction of a new facility for FHS. The design of LYNX will transform FHS, a
majority-minority public high school, into a dynamic learning community encompassing
students, educators, advocates, and families valuing and promoting a “student-first climate.”
LYNX Legislation
In order for LYNX to go from being a mere concept to reality, legislation was necessary to
provide the FCPS superintendent and the BOE of Frederick County unprecedented flexibility to
provide personalized learning opportunities for every student. In May 2016, Senate Bill 1126
was passed to authorize the creation of the Frederick County LYNX School. The legislation
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 26
indicates that the LYNX School is a public high school under the authority of the FCPS
superintendent and the local BOE. The legislation acknowledges the purpose of the program.
Senate Bill 1126 required the superintendent to submit an implementation plan—describing the
program, proposed curriculum, evaluation procedures, performance standards, and graduation
standards—for the LYNX School by September 30, 2016. With the exception of a few state
regulations [i.e., Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) personnel, school year/day, and
assessment requirements], the bill authorized waivers to state regulations in other areas in
order to carry out the plan. Most importantly, this allowed the LYNX School to provide flexibility
for students to earn credit for approved learning experiences that are standards-based,
curricula-aligned, and competency-demonstrated rather than rely exclusively on Carnegie units
as the sole performance measure by which students may earn credit.
LYNX Implementation
After a planning year in 2016-17, the 2017-18 freshman class at FHS are the first LYNX cohort
to enter the school. FCPS staff are excited to continue to innovate as FCPS accelerates
learning for all students and eliminate achievement gaps.
ACCE LE RAT ING ACHIEVEME NT AND E QUI TY
As shared in the 2016 Master Plan Annual Update, FCPS created a department for Accelerating
Achievement and Equity (AAE). The department includes advanced academics staff, special
education staff, and EL staff, as well as, staff working to accelerate achievement and equity for
all students with a focus on building cultural proficiency. The sections that follow provide an
overview of the goals set forth in the 2016-17 school year by the AAE department, related
accomplishments, and alignment to the FCPS Strategic Plan.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 27
In addition to the work of the AAE department, the following section also discusses
Collaborative Professional Learning (CPL), which is a systemic collaboration between the
departments of AAE, Curriculum, Instruction and Innovation (CII), School Administration and
Leadership (SAL), and the System Accountability and School Improvement (SASI) to support
schools working with students struggling to meet grade level standards.
Special Education (Students with Disabilities)
FCPS has made great strides in the Special Education and Psychological Services department
(within AAE). With the addition of another director focused primarily on instructional outcomes
for students, along with the continued focus on compliance, thus far, FCPS has been able to
accomplish many things as noted below.
Highly Effective Staff and Professional Learning
Special Education Observation/Evaluation Framework. The Special Education
Teacher Observation/Evaluation Form and corresponding rubric were revised to align
with current standards and expectation for teaching students with disabilities. A
workgroup, led by the President of the Frederick County Teachers Associations (FCTA)
and the executive director of AAE, comprised of teachers and administrators from all
levels and types of programs and related service providers completed these revisions in
2016-17 (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4).
Professional Learning. In the 2016-17 school year, professional learning for all FCPS employees was ongoing and included (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4):
- Monthly sessions for benefited and non-benefitted special education instructional
assistants (SEIA) were offered system-wide and by feeder. Twenty-five sessions
were conducted and over 500 SEIAs attended. Session topics included: the role
of the SEIA, data collection, disability awareness, behavior strategies, and
fostering student independence.
- Sessions with special education and general education teachers on a variety of
topics related to meeting the instructional needs of students with disabilities.
- Monthly training with school-based administrators on how to support the needs of
struggling learners.
- Monthly training for all central office special education staff to better equip staff in
responding to the needs of school-based staff, families, and the community at-
large.
Standards-Based Individual Education Programs (IEPs). During the February
professional learning day, all special education teachers and related service providers
engaged in a full-day training on developing high-quality standards-based IEPs to
address the individual functional and academic needs of students. An internal audit of
close to 400 confidential files was completed. Follow-up training opportunities will occur
throughout the remainder of the year. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 28
Curriculum and Service Delivery
Elementary Level ELA Literacy Workgroup. This workgroup has established
guidelines for effective implementation of an elementary ELA program that provides
additional instructional time for struggling learners. Selected schools (5 elementary) will
field test the literacy program with data analysis and progress monitoring to evaluate
program effectiveness in 2017-18. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Speech and Language Workgroup. This workgroup has established guidelines in
order to promote an equitable and consistent service delivery model for effective
implementation of speech and language services. Selected schools will field test the
implementation of the model and then model speech schedules through recommended
guidelines during 2017-18. The recommendations will support standardized
implementation and practice. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Special Education Staffing Model. The special education staffing model was revised
and will assign staff based on caseload size per special education teacher. This model
will be implemented in 2017-18. Teachers will realize an overall reduced number of
students for whom they are responsible for providing case management. (Aligned to
FCPS Aspirational Goal 3, Priority 5)
Streamlining the SEIA Request Process. The SEIA request process was streamlined
to make the process less burdensome and to accelerate the timeline when a decision is
made. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 3, Priority 5)
Behavioral Interventions and Supports (BIS). In 2016-17, BIS were implemented in schools. There are currently five certified BIS staff working to support all students. To date, BIS staff has provided consultation and direct services for 199 students (87 of those students are provided ongoing support). On average, FCPS receives 16.6 new referrals per month. Over 1,200 visits to schools have been made to observe
students, consult with school teams, and to provide professional learning and
instructional coaching to staff. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 3, Priority 5)
Behavioral Intervention Plans (BIPs). The BIPs processes for staff and students were
updated in 2016-17. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 5, Priority 9)
Parent/Family Engagement
Several parent/family engagement-related activities occurred in 2016-17. These included (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 4, Priority 7):
Two family engagement nights were held for students, families, and staff that focused on
developing skills for Pyramid Program students for transition into college and careers.
Family engagement nights for families to learn about and meet with outside agencies
that support transitional assistance. In addition, families were invited to a SUCCESS
dinner to allow students to showcase their skills. This student-hosted event, well-
attended by families and staff, included roundtable discussions for parents.
Two early childhood family nights were offered in an effort to increase family
partnerships with teachers and/or related services providers.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 29
A parent survey was developed and administered to gather feedback from parents to
guide continuous improvement regarding the IEP process.
Continuous Progress Monitoring
Efforts that support compliance, data analysis, and progress monitoring are ongoing. Some of
these efforts include (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4):
State Performance Plans (SPP) and Annual Performance Reports (APR). In
collaboration with MSDE, compliance with SPPs and APRs are monitored through the
Notice of Performance Reports. The information is shared and analyzed by staff in the
special education/AAE department in small and large group forums and through
collaboration between special education and general education departments.
Data Analysis and Monitoring. FCPS student and systemic data are monitored and
analyzed through eSchool, RADAR11, and the online IEP by the special education/AAE
department and through collaboration between special education and general education
departments.
Site Visits. Site visits to all specialized and general special education programs were
conducted in 2016-17. These visits have provided opportunities to gather information
and insight on the successes and challenges of meeting the needs of students with
disabilities and to receive feedback from staff on necessary program enhancements and
improvements.
English Learners (Limited English Proficient)
As goals and accomplishments are considered, it is imperative to acknowledge EL enrollment is
an ongoing challenge for FCPS as it has been somewhat unpredictable (see enrollment trends
in Figure 16). FHS alone enrolled 100+ new EL students, many with limited or no formal
schooling, over a four-month period this fall/winter.
11 A FCPS-developed data access tool, Resource for Accountability, Data Analysis, and Reporting (RADAR).
2061
2440
1807
2105
2354
750
1250
1750
2250
2750
1-Aug 31-Oct June
2016-17
2015-16
2014-15
2013-14
2012-13
2011-12
2010-11
2009-10
Figure 16. English Learners—Growth Trend in Enrollment
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 30
Even with this challenge, FCPS met established MSDE EL performance standards for both
AMAOs 1 and 2. Further, all students who took English 12 during the summer of 2017 to meet
graduation requirements passed.
EL students are assessed on the same content as all other students and scored in the same
manner as all other students. EL students also must take mainstream assessments after only
one year in the United States. In addition, approximately 10-15% of elementary, 15-20% middle,
and 25-35% of high school EL students have limited or interrupted formal schooling upon
enrolling in FCPS. Therefore, success on PARCC assessments is an onerous challenge for this
student group. PARCC assessments require strong academic language skills in the assessed
areas. Research states that ELs typically learn conversational English within one to two years;
however, academic language/vocabulary skills take five to seven years on average to achieve
success at grade level in English. EL students with interrupted or no formal schooling can take
seven to ten years to reach grade level English language literacy. This data holds true
regardless of the student’s home language, country of origin, and socioeconomic status. In
order for FCPS to accelerate achievement for EL students, strategies and services beyond the
core curriculum program will be required.
Accomplishments from the 2016-17 school year include the following:
Curriculum and Service Delivery
An EL alternative program’s innovative design provides a more flexible schedule and
language development through PBL to support acculturation to Frederick County and
long-term goals of seeking employment or a GED. Program implementation is contingent
on available funding. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 1, Priority 2)
Two newly mathematic courses (Foundations) were developed to be implemented in
2017-18 at the secondary level to help students advance faster in this area. (Aligned to
FCPS Aspirational Goal 1, Priority 2)
EL middle school curriculum has been updated with consistent formative assessments.
(Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 1, Priority 2)
Plans were developed to decentralize the secondary EL program during 2017-18 at
Governor Thomas Johnson High School and Governor Thomas Johnson Middle School.
(Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 3, Priority 5)
The ELLevation platform, which organizes all EL information and data into one
dashboard, was successfully implemented. This allows for teachers, specialists, and
administrators to collaborate on individual EL instruction plan and goals, communicate
with parents and access district wide aggregate assessment data. Teacher training has
begun to ensure that the platform is used to its fullest potential. (Aligned to FCPS
Aspirational Goal 4, Priority 7)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 31
Professional Learning
Phase II of the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) was implemented at
designated schools. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 3, Priority 5)
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards Meeting State Performance
Standards
Achievement Targets and Equity
The ACTS division leadership team conducts ongoing work to collaboratively establish rigorous
and measurable achievement targets for all student groups. Progress monitoring towards
attainment of these targets occurs as part of regularly scheduled ACTS division leadership
meetings with CII, AAE, SASI, and SAL leaders, as well as the larger Administrative
Leadership (AL) and Instructional Leadership (IL), Multiplier, and school-based leadership
meetings (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 1, Priority 2).
Professional Learning
During 2016-17, several professional learning opportunities related to building cultural
proficiency and ensuring equity were provided to FCPS staff. Specifically, the AAE department:
Provided sessions on competency building on cultural proficiency for all FCPS school-
based administrators, teacher-leaders, and Business Services Group (BSG) members
(aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4). This included:
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 32
- Twenty-one meetings12 with administrators at various leadership meetings—AL,
IL, Superintendent’s Leadership Team (SLT), and Multipliers
- Twenty-one meetings12 with teacher-leaders—Education Equity Act, cultural
proficiency representative
- Ten meetings12 with school-based, teacher groups, and/or central office teams
- Two meetings12 with community groups
- Various small team meetings, led by the equity teacher specialist and AAE
supervisor, with community groups [e.g., YMCA, Boys & Girls Club, Police
Activity League (PAL), Frederick City Police/Fire & Rescue]
Began work with BSG staff and Human Resources to assess the degree to which FCPS
practices are culturally proficient (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 3).
- Professional learning sessions and collaboration occurred with SASI, Fiscal, and
Construction Management groups.
- SLT and AL meetings provided an opportunity to work with members of BSG.
During the course of the year, professional learning was provided to equity
representatives from each FCPS school on at least five different occasions at educator
effectiveness academy (EEA) meetings and half-day sessions.
The equity teacher specialist was able to conduct two book studies using Culturally
Proficient Teaching & The
Brain with at least 30
school-based equity
representatives.
The “Dimensions of Diversity”
wheel shows the complexity of the
diversity filters through which we
process stimuli and information.
That, in turn, leads to the
assumptions we make (usually
about the behaviors of other
people), which ultimately drive our
own behaviors, which have an
impact on others. Internal, external
and organizational factors make
each of us who we are.
Figure 17 is an illustration of the
dimension wheel that is used by
12 Number of sessions conducted in 2016-2017 with specified group.
Figure 17. Dimensions of Diversity Wheel
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 33
AAE department staff when conducting professional learning throughout FCPS on cultural and
equitable practices.
Community Partnerships
The AAE department aims to continue establishing and solidifying relationships within the
community, Maryland school districts, and organizations connected to the work of cultural
proficiency and minority achievement (aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 4, Priority 7).
Presentations and/or meetings occurred with the following groups:
Eliminating Achievement Gaps (EAG); Frederick Center; Family Involvement Title 1
Team (FITT); YMCA; PAL; City Police; Fire and Rescue; Sheriff's Department; Boys &
Girls Club; Frederick County Government; Frederick Rotary
Maryland school districts—Carroll, Howard, Baltimore, Winchester (West Va.), Berkeley
(West Va.); Part of the Education That is Multicultural Act (ETMA) MSDE group
Corwin Publishing to provide professional learning on cultural proficiency.
Collaborative Professional Learning for Intervention
While FCPS has always had a strong Response to Intervention (RtI) model in place to support
any student who may not be achieving at grade level standard, staff are excited to be
participating in Collaborative Professional Learning (CPL) for Intervention in 2017-18. Staff in
the departments of AAE, CII, SAL, and SASI are collaborating to plan, train, and support all
schools as they work with students struggling to meet grade level standards. This professional
learning opportunity pulls together FCPS staff—a content specialist, a special education
teacher, an EL teacher, an interventionist, and the building leader—to build and/or reinforce the
concept of a core literacy team or core math team who will work together to respond to student
needs.
FCPS leaders hold a strong belief that it is only with collective capacity and convergence of skill
sets that will own the learning of each student and ultimately begin to close achievement gaps.
CPL for Intervention is an avenue for accomplishing this goal. Regardless of whether or not a
student is identified with a disability, classified as an English learner, has a learner profile for a
student who may have dyslexia, dyscalculia, or dysgraphia, and/or is a student who is simply
not meeting grade level standards in ELA or mathematics, these core teams will develop their
expertise to intervene for any student.
LOCAL ASSESSME NT FRAME WORK
As a routine practice, FCPS monitors and responds to achievement data throughout the school
year. The FCPS local assessment framework has played a critical role in the system’s ability to
monitor performance and inform action. Accelerating achievement and ensuring equity for all
students is at the forefront of the work in FCPS as detailed in the strategic plan.
To this end, FCPS central office staff conduct regular reviews of systemic data to facilitate a
timely response and support for schools. Staff from the SAL, AAE, CII, and SASI departments
meet to review school and student performance as local assessment results are collected
throughout the year. Schools are responsible for meeting systemic targets in their CSI plans and
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 34
use FCPS local assessments to monitor progress along the way. For a comprehensive look at
FCPS required assessments, see Table 52 on page 126.
BUDGET NARRATI VE
System Priorities
The FCPS Strategic Plan served as the foundational document for developing the FY2018
budget as well as planning efforts. The plan includes five aspirational goals and correlating
priorities that reflect the core vision of FCPS schools and students (see FCPS Strategic Plan
and Measurable Goals).
Fiscal Outlook
Enrollment
Over the past several years, FCPS has experienced minimal increases in student enrollment.
However, according to projections, FCPS is entering a period of growth. From 2016 to 2017,
there was an increase of more than 600 students. According to projections, FCPS will need to
accommodate for approximately 3,900 new students between 2016 and 2026. Thus, FCPS will
need additional capital funding during these years considering many of FCPS schools are
currently at or near capacity. In addition to needing funding for new facilities, ongoing
maintenance in the operating budget will be strained as the majority of existing facilities are over
25 years old. Although both state and local formula funding are designed to address enrollment
growth, the additional revenues often lag behind the need.
Unemployment
Unemployment in Frederick County has decreased from a high of 6.8% in 2009 (at the height of
the recession) to a current rate of 3.7%. This rate is below the state unemployment rate, and
almost a full percentage point below the national rate. This faster-than-average decline in
unemployment is often attributed to the proximity of the county to both Baltimore and
Washington D.C., and consequently Frederick County’s per capita income remains in the top
third of all Maryland counties.
Poverty
The number of students who qualified for FARM increased 1.4% from 10,965 students in
October 2015 to 11,115 students in October 201613. The overall FARM percent of total
enrollment remained relatively flat, decreasing slightly from 26.92% to 26.84%13. The FARM
rate is attributable to local economic conditions as well as FCPS management’s efforts to
improve communication and identification techniques for the program. The increase in students
receiving FARM allows FCPS to provide nutritious meals to its neediest students which ultimate
leads to improved student performance.
13 Source: Food and Nutrition Services
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 35
Special Needs
The number of students with disabilities increased from 4,424 students in October 2015 to 4,499
in October 2016, a 1.70% increase14. The overall FY2018 Operating Budget included a
$3,916,531 increase in the category of special education. This 6.7% increase over the prior
year’s budget is reflective of the increasing demand for special education services.
English Language Learners
The number of EL students continues to increase. A significant number of students new to
Frederick County have limited English language skills. This year, FCPS will open the school
year with approximately 3,100 EL students in the system15. Typically, that enrollment number
continues growing throughout the school year. In addition, there are 1,787 EL students, not
included in the 3,100 count, who have exited the EL program within the past two school years.
The restructuring of the ELL office will continue to support the instructional programs for
students.
The adopted FY2018 budget includes expenditures that the BOE of Frederick County believes
are needed to continue to provide quality educational services to the students of FCPS in
FY2018. It reflects feedback obtained from engaging individuals from all sectors with a stake in
public education.
In FY2018, FCPS receives more than maintenance of effort (MOE) funding from Frederick
County Government ($10 million more than MOE). The state funding increases by
approximately $7 million, with the majority of the increase due to the increase enrollment
reflected in the State Share of Current Expenses. With a recognition of salary savings due to
staff turnover and the support of Frederick County Government, the BOE of Frederick County is
able to fund its priority of continuing the transition to a new teacher salary scale, thus insuring its
commitment to quality education for all FCPS students.
Climate Changes and Impact
FCPS’ fiscal climate is expected to remain stable in FY2018. The goals identified in the strategic
plan will help to guide the allocation of scarce educational resources. FCPS’ strategic goals are
aligned to master plan goals and objectives. Providing each and every student with high quality
instruction, raising the achievement, and eliminating achievement gaps will remain a master
plan priority for FCPS.
14 Source: Fiscal Services
15 Source: Office of English Learners
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 36
FINANCE SECTION
I N T R O D U C T I O N
The following finance section, in conjunction with the budget narrative information in the
executive summary, includes a current year variance table (see Table 2 on page 38), a prior
year variance table (see Table 3 on page 39), and responses to the analyzing questions.
Together, these documents illustrate FCPS’ alignment of the annual budget with the master
plan priorities.
R E V E N U E A N D E X P E N D I T U R E A N A L Y S I S
Actual revenues met expectations. Total revenues were $5.2 million under budget. Federal,
state, and other local revenues were under budget because the FCPS revenue lines included
added authority to allow for unanticipated federal and local funding. Local revenue was also
under budget due to the lower value of Frederick County in-kind services provided to FCPS.
Standards and Assessments
Actual expenditures were $714,758 less than the planned amount. Actual expenditures reflect
the distribution of funds that were budgeted in the curriculum offices and expensed by the
elementary and secondary schools.
Data Systems
Actual expenditures were as planned as FCPS continues its expansion of the one-to-one device
initiative.
Great Teachers
Actual expenditures were $2.4 million less than the planned amount. This variance is the salary
savings from staff vacancies and turnover. In addition, this area includes added budget authority
for restricted grants.
Mandatory Cost of Doing Business
Actual expenditures were $12 million less than the planned amount. Savings came from
employee benefits costing less than expected due to staff turnover. Other savings occurred in
vehicle fuel and building utilities. In addition, this area includes added budget authority for
restricted grants.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 37
Table 2. Current Year Variance Table (MSDE Table 1.1A)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 38
Table 3. Prior Year Variance Table (MSDE Table 1.1B)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 39
MARYLAND’S GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES
P RE FACE
The following section of the 2017 Master Plan Annual Update is submitted in accordance with
requirements specified under House Bill 999, which includes goals, objectives, and strategies
regarding the performance of students receiving special education services, students with
limited English proficiency [LEP; hereafter, English learner (EL)], and students failing to meet or
failing to make progress towards meeting state performance standards. In lieu of state
performance standards, local education agencies (LEAs) were instructed to compare student
group data to the student population as a whole.
Goals/objectives, accomplishments, challenges, and strategies/changes are provided for each
assessed content area (elementary and secondary, where applicable)—English language arts
(ELA), mathematics, science, and social studies (secondary only).
It is important to note that while some content areas have specific goals and strategies for
students receiving special education services and EL students, many of the goals and strategies
are implemented system-wide and pertain to all curricular areas. Thus, stand-alone sections,
capturing these goals and strategies, are provided for special education and limited English
proficiency.
I NT RODUCTI ON
The mission of Frederick County Public Schools (FCPS) is to reach its students with exceptional
teaching and caring support, challenge them to achieve their potential, and prepare them for
success in a global society. FCPS developed its aspirational goals and priorities to help achieve
this mission. As FCPS moves forward, it remains committed to ensuring equity and opportunity
for all of its students.
SPE CI AL EDUCATI ON ( S T U D E N T S W I T H D I S A B I L I T I E S )
Overall Goals and Objectives
It is the expectation that students who receive special education services experience the same
level of instruction, assessment and success on state and local assessments as their general
education peers with the implementation of accommodations and modifications as outlined in
their Individual Education Program (IEP). FCPS is implementing multiple strategies to close the
achievement gap by ensuring that students who receive special education services access the
curriculum in the least restrictive environment, collaborating with all stakeholders, analyzing
data and monitoring progress, implementing evidence-based interventions, and providing
professional learning for all staff.
One of the main responsibility of Special Education and Psychological Services staff within the
Accelerating Achievement and Equity (AAE) department is to pursue and implement innovative
and efficient ways to better support the academic, communication, social, and emotional needs
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 40
of all students with disabilities. In addition, staff are responsible for ensuring a greater balance is
given to ensure that compliance is maintained while meeting the appropriate instructional
outcomes for the students such that they are provided with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and
experiences to be empowered learners.
Overall Accomplishments
The Special Education and Psychological Services staff have made great strides over the past
year, with the addition of another director whose focus is primarily on instructional outcomes for
students. Thus far, with an increased focus on instruction and a continued focus on compliance,
the accomplishments are evident by students with disabilities who are approaching, meeting,
and/or exceeding the grade level standards in the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for
College and Career (PARCC) ELA and math when compared to other districts in the state (see
PARCC rankings for students with disabilities below).
2017 PARCC ELA (levels 3-5)
Grade 3 ranked third
Grade 5 ranked among the top eight
Grade 6 ranked among the top eight
Grade 7 ranked among the top eight
Grade 8 ranked fifth
English 10 ranked third
2017 PARCC Math (levels 3-5)
Grade 3 ranked fifth
Grade 4 ranked fifth
Grade 5 ranked fourth
Grade 7 ranked second
Grade 8 ranked fourth
Algebra 1 ranked third
Other programmatic accomplishments for the 2016-17 school year are described in Table 4.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 41
Table 4. Special Education and Psychological Services, 2016-2017 Accomplishments
Special Education Observation/Evaluation Framework (Revised)
A workgroup was established and co-chaired by the president of the Frederick County Teachers Association (FCTA)and the executive director of AAE. The participants included teachers and administrators from all levels and types ofprograms and related service providers. The workgroup revised the Special Education TeacherObservation/Evaluation form and corresponding rubric to align with current standards and expectations for teachingstudents with disabilities. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Compliance and Data Analysis (ongoing)
Compliance with State Performance Plans (SPP) and Annual Performance Reports (APR) is monitored throughcollaboration with MSDE via notice of performance reports. The information is shared and analyzed in large andsmall group forums and through collaboration between special education and general education staff. (Aligned toFCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
FCPS student and systemic data are monitored and analyzed through eSchool, RADAR16, and the online IEPthrough collaboration between special education and general education staff. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2,Priority 4)
Professional Learning for FCPS Employees
Special education instructional assistants (SEIA) were offered monthly sessions for benefitted and non-benefittedSEIAs, by feeder patterns and system-wide. Since the 2016-17 school year, 25 sessions were offered and attendedby over 500 SEIAs. Training on the following topics were provided: role of the SEIA, data collection, disabilityawareness, behavior strategies, and fostering student independence. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2,Priority 4)
Special education teachers, related service providers, and general education teachers participated in a variety oftopics related to meeting the instructional needs of students with disabilities and supporting the implementation ofcompliance indicators. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
School-based administrators participated in ongoing training on how to support the needs of struggling learners andoversee implementation of compliance indicators. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Special education staff from central office participated in monthly training to better equip staff in responding to theneeds of school-based staff, families, and the community at-large. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Service Delivery/
Programs
The SEIA request process was streamlined in order to make the process for schools less burdensome and to
accelerate the timeline when a decision is rendered. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 3, Priority 5)
The Speech and Language Program Workgroup was formed to establish guidelines in order to promote an
equitable and consistent service delivery model for effective implementation of speech and language services.
Selected schools will field test the implementation of the service delivery model and model speech schedules
16 A data access tool, Resource for Accountability, Data Analysis, and Reporting (RADAR), was developed by FCPS to support system and school staff in regularly reviewing student, school, and
system level data to monitor progress and to respond to results.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 42
Table 4. Special Education and Psychological Services, 2016-2017 Accomplishments
through recommended guidelines during 2017-18. The recommendations will support standardized implementation
and practice. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Behavioral
Interventions
Behavioral interventions and supports (BIS) for schools was implemented. There are five certified staff members
working to support all students. To date, BIS staff has provided consultation and direct services for 199 students.
Actively supporting 87 of those students on an ongoing basis. On average, the team receives 16.6 new referrals per
month through the online referral process, in addition to administrator and “emergency” situation referrals. The team
made 1,217 visits to schools to observe students, consult with school teams, and provide professional learning and
instructional coaching to staff. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs) Processes for staff and students were updated. (Aligned to FCPS AspirationalGoal 5, Priority 9)
Assessments Assessment support was offered to all schools in an effort to assist students and staff during the state assessment windows to meet the testing accommodations of the needs of students with disabilities.
Family
Engagement/Outreach
Family engagement nights were held for families to learn about transition to postsecondary opportunities and meet
with outside agencies that support transitional assistance. In addition, families attended a SUCCESS dinner to allow
students to showcase their skills. This student-hosted event included an opportunity for roundtable discussion for
parents, and was well-attended by families and staff. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 4, Priority 7)
Two family engagement nights that focused on developing skills for students enrolled in the Pyramid Program to
support transition into college and careers were held for students, families, and staff. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational
Goal 4, Priority 7)
Two early childhood family nights were held in an effort to increase family partnerships with other agencies andteachers and/or related services providers. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 4, Priority 7)
Collaboration There was an increase in collaborative work with other FCPS departments (SAL, CII, and SASI) to support the
needs of students with disabilities. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 1, Priority 2)
Evaluation and
Feedback
Site visits to all specialized and general education program were conducted. These visits provided opportunities to
gather information and insight on the successes and challenges of meeting the needs of students with disabilities
and to receive feedback from staff on necessary program enhancements and improvements. (Aligned to FCPS
Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
A FCPS parent survey was developed and implemented to gather feedback from parents to guide continuousimprovement regarding the IEP process. (Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 4, Priority 7)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 43
Overall Challenges*While FCPS students with disabilities continue to show progress, challenges remain. Significant
achievement gaps exist for students with disabilities in the areas of elementary and secondary
ELA and math (when compared to the “all student” group).
Elementary ELA and Math
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC ELA, grades 3-5, indicate that 31% of students
who have disabilities performed at a level three or higher in comparison to 78% of “all” students.
In addition, 69% of students with disabilities who participated in PARCC ELA did not meet or
partially met expectations.
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC math, grades 3-5, indicate that 39% of students
who have disabilities performed at a level three or higher in comparison to 79% of “all” students.
In addition, 61% of students with disabilities who participated in PARCC math did not meet or
partially met expectations.
Secondary ELA and Math
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC ELA, grades 6-8, indicate that 20% of students
who have disabilities performed at a level three or higher in comparison to 74% of “all” students.
In addition, 80% of students with disabilities who participated in PARCC ELA did not meet or
partially met expectations.
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC math, grades 6-8, indicate that 21% of students
who have disabilities performed at a level three or higher in comparison to 72% of “all” students.
In addition, 79% of students with disabilities who participated in PARCC math did not meet or
partially met expectations.
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC English 10 indicate that 37% of students who
have disabilities performed at a level three or higher in comparison to 82% of “all” students. In
addition, 63% of students with disabilities who participated in PARCC Algebra 1 did not meet or
partially met expectations.
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC Algebra 1 indicate that 41% of students who have
disabilities performed at a level three or higher in comparison to 80% of “all” students. In
addition, 59% of students with disabilities who participated in PARCC Algebra 1 did not meet or
partially met expectations.
Global Strategies and Changes
In support of FCPS’ goal that students receiving special education services will have the same
level of academic success on state and local assessments as their general education peers,
FCPS will newly implement (or in some cases, continue implementation) the following
processes and/or strategies moving forward.
Transition to Standards Aligned to Individual Education Programs
During a system-wide professional learning day in 2017, all FCPS special education teachers
and related service providers engaged in a full-day training on developing high-quality
*For additional information on challenges with students with disabilties in ELA and math,see Appendix B: Response to MSDE Clarifying Questions.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 44
standards-aligned IEPs to specifically address the individual functional and academic needs of
students. FCPS created a standards-aligned monitoring tool to measure special educators’
proficiencies in developing standards-aligned IEPs.
Overall accountability for student learning is a shared responsibility. It is necessary that all
teachers are knowledgeable of and responsible for effective instruction, which is aligned with
curricular standards and implemented with fidelity. It is essential that teachers practices are
supported by way of job-embedded learning opportunities including observable “look fors”,
fidelity checks, data analysis, and progress monitoring. Trained teachers will use a team
meeting approach for the dissemination of information regarding best practices.
Moving forward, FCPS will provide professional learning opportunities for special educators to
refine their skillsets in the development of standards-aligned IEPs. Mastery of this skill is vital in
order to eliminate the achievement gap between general education and special education
students and move students closer to achieving grade/content standards.
Ongoing monitoring and analysis using this tool will occur to identify patterns of improved
practice. Special education central office team members will meet with school teams to address
areas identified through baseline data as areas of improvement. An internal audit of
approximately 400 confidential files were completed. Follow-up training opportunities will occur
throughout the school year.
This is a cost-neutral strategy that does not require resource allocations. (Aligned to FCPS
Aspirational Goal 2, Priority 4)
Special Education Staffing Model
There are currently 4,425 students identified with disabilities in FCPS—over 2,100 at
elementary, 900 at middle, and 1,200 at high school level. In order to provide services for
these students, FCPS needed to explore a staffing formula that considers the need to
differentiate the educational needs of students with disabilities with the aim of providing
increased staffing for schools with greater complexity factors.
In 2017-18, implementation of the special education staffing model will involve:
Expansion of elementary specialized programs—Pyramid and prekindergarten.
Addition of 13 coordinators of specialized programs to support students and staff in
specialized programs (inclusive special education preschools, Challenges, Learning for
Life, and Pyramid programs).
Implementation of a caseload staffing model that will assign special education teaching
staff based on the caseload size per special education teacher. An individual teacher will
realize an overall reduced number of students for whom they are responsible for
providing instruction and case management.
In addition to the yearly state assessment, teachers administer benchmark assessments
throughout the school year to monitor student progress. These assessments provide multiple
data points to measure student progress system-wide.
This is a cost-neutral strategy that does not require resource allocations.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 45
Elementary ELA Literacy Program
In its work with students, FCPS will equip each and every student to be an empowered learner
and an engaged citizen, to achieve a positive impact in the local and global community. A
streamlined literacy program will allow for equitable delivery of services and curriculum while
allowing students the same opportunities for success.
Literacy is the gateway to all other learning. In order to become proficient readers and writers,
students need high quality core instruction and, if necessary, intervention. Students who are not
proficient readers by the end of third grade will likely struggle throughout their schooling and are
at risk for not graduating on time. The first step to improving student achievement is to ensure
that all students have access to high-quality reading instruction and interventions based on best
practice, data, and content knowledge. Communication is also an essential skill for success.
Strong oral and written communication skills are critical in today's postsecondary opportunities.
In 2017-18, FCPS will field test a universal service delivery model for an elementary ELA
literacy program to ensure equitable delivery of a comprehensive program. Five elementary
schools identified core literacy teams to collaboratively deepen their understanding of the
content standards and the use of formative/quantitative assessment data to drive instruction and
student grouping practices.
The FCPS Elementary Literacy Workgroup will identify key elements of high-quality literacy
instruction. These elements will align with best practices and will be implemented with fidelity
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 46
across all elementary schools. They also require a strong professional learning system for
teachers and ongoing monitoring of implementation across elementary schools. A direct
correlation between IEP goals and the general education curriculum will allow students with
disabilities to move closer to closing the achievement gap that exists with their general
education peers. If students with disabilities receive instruction in the general education
curriculum, then they will decrease the existing achievement gap.
Progress will be monitored and analyzed five times per school year. Bi-monthly sessions will
occur between September 2017 and May 2018 (no session in December). Literacy teams will
meet with field test schools to collect and analyze quarterly data on student progress. The
benchmarks and county assessments will be used to monitor student progress.
(Costs: restricted # 84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gaps, $10,620)
Secondary ELA Workgroup
In 2017-18, FCPS will form a secondary ELA workgroup. The same rationale for the elementary
literacy program is used for the purpose of forming this workgoup—literacy is the gateway to all
other learning. The FCPS Secondary Literacy Workgroup will identify key elements of high-
quality literacy instruction. These elements will align with best practices and will be implemented
with fidelity across all secondary schools. They also require a strong professional learning
system for teachers and ongoing monitoring of implementation across schools.
FCPS will provide professional learning opportunities for one special education teacher per
secondary school to further develop their understanding of the ELA standards along with the
secondary literacy specialists at each school. This collaboration will provide special educators
and literacy specialists an opportunity to learn about the standards and discuss how the
standards connect to their work in intervention classroom instruction, and specialized
instruction.
The literacy team will meet quarterly with the school team to review and analyze data from local
benchmark assessment to plan for continuous improvement and progress monitoring.
(Costs: restricted, #84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gap, $23,973)
Elementary Math Workgroup
In order to become flexible mathematical thinkers, students need high-quality core instruction
and, if necessary, intervention. The first step to improving student achievement is to ensure that
all students have access to high-quality instruction and interventions based on best practices,
data, and content knowledge. Communication is also an essential skill for success. Strong oral
and written communication skills are critical in today's workplace.
The FCPS Elementary Math Workgroup will identify key elements of high-quality mathematics
instruction. These elements will align with best practices and will be implemented with fidelity
across all elementary schools. They also require a strong professional learning system for
teachers and ongoing monitoring of implementation across elementary schools.
The ultimate purpose of this workgroup is to equip each and every student to be an empowered
learner and an engaged citizen, to achieve a positive impact in the local and global community.
The focus will be two pronged, to increase academic success of struggling learners as they
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 47
navigate the rigorous content standards and educate imaginative learners who grasp concepts
and have the ability and willingness to investigate ideas and solve real-life problems.
Additionally, equip teachers in individual schools to maintain commitment to high expectations
of students; create personalized learning environments; collaborate with other teachers within
the school and the surrounding community; and encourage effective teaching by means of
active inquiry and in-depth learning.
FCPS will provide professional learning opportunities for one special education teacher per
elementary school to further develop their understanding of the mathematics standards along
with the elementary math instructional leaders at each school. This collaboration will provide
special educators and elementary math instructional leaders an opportunity to learn about the
standards and discuss how the standards connect to their work in intervention, classroom
instruction, and specialized instruction.
The workgroup will meet at least five times per school year to research and determine best
practices to ensure struggling learners have access to additional time for high quality instruction
and interventions. The workgroup will then identify approximately five to six schools across all
levels to field test implementation guidelines.
(Costs: restricted, #84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gap, $23,973)
Additional Strategies for Special Education in 2017-2018
Access to the General Education Curriculum. Students with disabilities participating in
the Maryland state assessment, PARCC, receive instruction and assessment with their
general education peers. Instructional programs are implemented in collaboration with
elementary and secondary general educators and special educators. Supplementary aids,
services, and supports are monitored and provided, as necessary, for all students to access
their individualized programs. Accommodations for students with disabilities as listed in their
IEPs and are implemented by general and special educators in collaboration with one
another.
Speech-language pathologists, school therapists, school psychologists and other related
services staff provide individual, small group, and whole class therapy sessions to students
with disabilities in response to IEP needs. Curriculum material is incorporated into the
sessions, as appropriate, to support the speech and language, mental health, emotional,
and behavioral needs of students through evidence-based practice across all curricular
areas.
Collaboration with General Educators. Collaboration between general educators, special
educators, speech-language pathologists, school psychologists, school therapists, and
teacher specialists is implemented across all levels through IEP development and
instructional delivery. The special education staff in the AAE department work collaboratively
with the CII department by conducting joint departmental meetings to plan for curriculum
and instruction and to develop and plan for professional learning for special education and
general education staff. Professional development opportunities are provided by the AAE
and CII departments to all necessary stakeholders. School leadership teams are trained in
data analysis and include general and special educators in order to identify, service, and
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 48
monitor student specific achievement. The teams not only include general and special
educators but content specialists as well. In FCPS, co-teaching is highly valued and
encouraged as the service delivery model that is most effective to close the achievement
gap for students with disabilities. In the next school year, cross-departmental collaboration
will continue in an effort to narrow the achievement gap (cost-neutral).
Strategies Used to Address the Achievement Gap. Data collection and analysis related
to students identified with intellectual disabilities, emotional disabilities, and autism is
ongoing. This process focuses on providing access to age and developmentally-appropriate
instruction through culturally-relevant practices and strategies. School teams analyze
school-level data with the aim of determining services that best address student needs and
promote student achievement. School psychologists and school therapists work closely with
school staff and directly with students to ensure that students receive appropriate evidence-
based interventions that target their areas of disability. Additionally, the AAE department, in
collaboration with the SASI department, analyzes student and school-level achievement
data to ensure that student-specific IEP progress, formative and summative district
assessments, and state-wide testing participation data are considered when developing
student instructional programs and interventions.
Special education paraprofessionals, administrators, and educators need to be equipped
with the knowledge and tools necessary to support all students and increase student
achievement.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 49
The following are activities and funds associated with targeted grants to improve the
academic achievement outcomes of students receiving special education services.
- The MSDE Local Application of Federal Funds Grant continues to support FCPS goal to
increase parental awareness of agencies and organizations that offer support and
assistance to parents of students with disabilities. FCPS staff and trained professionals
from local agencies will provide workshops and informational materials to enhance the
parental knowledge of students with disabilities related to transition, family support,
accommodations, writing SMART IEPs, behavior or sensory issues, ADHD, and other
special education issues, etc. (Cost: restricted, 84-027A, Family Partnerships, $18,000)
- The AAE department secured a group subscription, Read & Write for Google Chrome™,
to support 3,000 students with disabilities. Students with disabilities will benefit from the
use of this technology tool to gain confidence with reading, writing, studying, and
research. (Costs: unrestricted local funds, $30,000)
- The Pyramid Program provides integrated supports to students with significant social
and emotional needs. Intensive special education and therapeutic services are provided
in a small structured setting within a general education school. Students have
opportunities for inclusion in general education classes with non-disabled peers, as
appropriate, and most are pursuing a high school diploma. The Transitional Planning
Grant will provide ongoing professional learning opportunities to secondary
administrators and teachers in the Pyramid Programs to implement social/emotional
lessons focused on self-advocacy, self-awareness, and self-determination with students
enrolled in a specialized program that provides intensive special education and
therapeutic support in a small, structured setting. These lessons specifically designed for
FCPS are titled “Passport to My Future.” The majority of students enrolled in the
Pyramid programs have a primary disability of emotional disability (ED) or have ED as
part of a multiple disability. In addition, professional learning opportunities will provide
secondary special education staff, transition educators, and school counselors a more
robust approach on the development of digital portfolios. This will provide students with
disabilities a tool to collect, house, and support post-secondary opportunities. FCPS
transition leaders will attend the Division on Career Development and Transition
conference to stay current on recent research in order to enhance the development and
content of students’ transition plans. FCPS will provide professional learning
opportunities to secondary special education staff to enhance the development and
content of students transition plans. (Costs: restricted, 84-027A, Secondary Transition,
$45,839)
Interventions, Enrichments, and Supports to Address Diverse Learning Needs. FCPS
will utilize sensory rooms and incorporate strategies and techniques to allow students with
disabilities opportunities to de-escalate and regain emotional control in order to return to
their instructional settings. Implementing evidence-based strategies with students who
require frequent breaks and/or changes to their sensory input during the instructional day,
specifically students identified with autism or an emotional disability, may allow them to
develop coping and self-regulation strategies in order to decrease time spent away from
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 50
instruction. Special education personnel must increase the intensity and frequency of
specialized instruction, targeted intervening supports and progress monitoring to address
the learning needs of students with emotional/behavior goals. Access to a sensory room will
provide an alternate location for students to de-escalate and in turn not require restraint
and/or seclusion as frequently. (Cost: restricted, #84-027A, Sensory Supports, $44,867)
Professional Learning. All individuals working with students must be provided ongoing
opportunities to grow as professionals. Special education teachers and paraprofessionals,
administrators, and general education teachers will be equipped with the knowledge and
tools necessary to support all students in order to increase student achievement (cost-
neutral).
In particular, in 2017-18, professional learning opportunities will continue to keep
administrators apprised of legal updates and strategies for management and oversight of
the IEP/504 plan process. Ongoing special educator and SEIA training will also occur.
Monitoring of attendance and evaluation feedback at the conclusion of each training session
will provide ongoing feedback to measure successful planning and implementation and to
make necessary adjustments, as appropriate (cost-neutral).
Other strategies to be continued or newly implemented in 2017-18 include (cost-neutral; no
additional resource allocations required):
- Monitor the three-year plan and increase progress reporting.
- Provide ongoing internal audit of confidential files and standards-based IEPs.
- Implement speech and language field test and program.
- Develop and implement a staffing model for SEIA allocation.
- Conduct site visits focusing on instruction and implementation of the IEPs.
- Communicate a process to schools to guide and support parents new to the IEP
process.
- Hold ongoing family engagement nights.
LIMIT ED E NG LISH P ROFICIENCY ( E N G L I S H L E A R N E R S )
Overall Goals and Objectives
Within the AAE department, the English Language Learning office supports systemic
instructional programming focusing on eliminating the achievement gap and helping all students
to become contributing members of society. In support of this systemic effort, FCPS will
continue to build the capacity of administrators, teachers, and paraprofessionals to instruct and
support EL students toward attainment of the Maryland College and Career-Ready Standards
(MCCRS) while attaining proficiency in English.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 51
FCPS EL instruction promotes successful integration into mainstream academic programs for
prekindergarten to grade 12 students whose first (or primary) language is not English and/or
who have limited English language proficiency.
Overall Accomplishments
In 2016-17, there were a number of goals met, accomplishments, and enhancements related to the support of the EL student population.
Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 1:
The MSDE EL performance standards for both making progress towards proficiency in
English (AMAO 1) and attaining proficiency (AMAO 2) in English were met (see Tables
5 and 6). In this area of achievement, FCPS continues to be consistent.
An EL Alternative Program’s innovative design provides a more flexible schedule and
language development through project-based learning to support acculturation to
Frederick County and long-term goals of seeking employment or a GED. Program
implementation is contingent on available funding.
Middle school EL curriculum has been updated with consistent formative assessments.
Additional EL high school class options were created in the summer of 2017 through
collaborative efforts of teachers from different disciplines. In addition, two mathematics
courses (Foundations) that help ELs with interrupted education or limited formal
schooling were developed so that those students will advance faster in this area.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 52
All sixteen EL students enrolled in English 12 (blended learning course) during the 2017
summer school passed; fifteen of those students earned a grade of B or higher.
Exited EL students at some elementary schools outperformed several other student
groups on PARCC English and math performance.
Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 3:
Plans to decentralize the secondary EL program will be implemented during the 2017-18
school year at Governor Thomas Johnson High School (GTJHS) and Governor Thomas
Johnson Middle School (GTJMS). Thus, EL students at both of these schools will no
longer be bused to Frederick High School to receive EL instructional support. Those
students will receive EL instructional support at their home school.
Phase II of the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) took place
successfully at designated schools. Phase III will begin in the fall of 2017.
Aligned to FCPS Aspirational Goal 4:
The ELLevation platform, which organizes all EL information and data into one
dashboard, was implemented. The platform helps EL instructors (teachers and
specialists) and administrators monitor the instructional progress of EL students,
collaborate on individual EL instruction plan and goals, communicate with parents and
access district-wide aggregate assessment data. Training with teachers is underway to
ensure that the platform is used to its fullest potential.
Overall Challenges
Often unpredictable, the enrollment of EL students remains an ongoing challenge for FCPS.
Figure 16 (see Executive Summary on page 30) provides insight into EL enrollment growth that
FCPS continues to experience. Frederick High School alone enrolled more than 100 new EL
students, many with limited or no formal schooling, over a 4-month period in the fall/winter of the
2016-17 school year.
EL students are assessed on the same content as all other students and scored in the same
manner as all other students. EL students also must take mainstream assessments after only
one year in the United States In addition, approximately 10-15% of elementary, 15-20% middle,
and more than 25% of high school EL students last year had limited or interrupted formal
schooling upon enrollment. Therefore, success on PARCC assessments is an onerous
challenge for this student group. PARCC assessments require strong academic language skills
in the assessed areas. Research states that ELs typically learn conversational English within
one to two years; however, academic language/vocabulary skills take five to seven years on
average to achieve success at grade level in English. EL students with interrupted or no formal
schooling can take seven to ten years to reach grade level English language literacy. This data
holds true regardless of the student’s home language, country of origin, and socioeconomic
status. In order for FCPS to accelerate achievement for EL students, strategies and services
beyond the core curriculum program will be required. As mentioned above, EL students who
have exited services can outperform other students groups after they acquire proficiency in
English.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 53
Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0
The following reports the progress of EL students on the WIDA™ Assessing Comprehension
and Communication in English State-to-State for English Language Learners (ACCESS for
ELLs) 2.0 assessment in developing and attaining English language proficiency and
achievement in reading/language arts and mathematics.
AMAO 1—Making Progress Towards Proficiency in English
For making annual measurable achievement objective (AMAO) 1 progress, Maryland uses an
overall composite proficiency level obtained from the ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 assessment.
Students are considered to have made progress if their overall composite proficiency level on
the ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 is 0.5 or higher than the overall composite proficiency level from the
previous year’s assessment administration. In order to meet the Indicator 1 target for school
year 2016-17, LEAs must show that 58% of ELs made progress.
Table 5 below illustrates FCPS’ progress made in meeting AMAO 1 for the past four school
years. Data for school year 2016-17 are not yet available. For the past four years, FCPS EL
students exceeded the state’s targets for progressing toward English proficiency.
Table 5. English Learners—MSDE Criteria and Targets for AMAO I ACCESS FOR ELLS—COMPOSITE PROFICIENCY LEVEL GAIN (0.5)
School Year State Target (%) FCPS % Met or Not Met
2012-13 54 63.47 Met
2013-14 55 69.36 Met
2014-15 56 62.60 Met
2015-16 57 58.00 Met
2016-17 58 Not available yet Not available yet
The most challenging areas for EL students on the ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 assessment are
reading and writing; students continue to show strong progress in listening and speaking on this
assessment.
AMAO 2—Attaining Proficiency in English
For determining AMAO 2 attainment, Maryland uses an overall composite proficiency level and
a literacy composite proficiency level obtained from the ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 assessment.
Students are considered to have attained English proficiency if their overall composite
proficiency level is 4.5 or higher. In order to meet the Indicator 2 target for school year
2016-17, LEAs must show that 16% of ELs have attained proficiency.
Table 6 illustrates FCPS’ progress made in AMAO 2 for the past three school years. Data
for school year 2016-17 are not yet available. For the past three years, FCPS EL students
exceeded the state’s targets for attaining proficiency in English.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 54
Table 6. English Learners Students—MSDE Criteria and Targets for AMAO 2 ACCESS FOR ELLS—COMPOSITE PROFICIENCY LEVEL (4.5)
School Year State Target (%) FCPS % Met or Not Met
2012-13 11 21.70 Met
2013-14 12 28.07 Met
2014-15 14 20.61 Met
2015-16 15 19.65 Met
2016-17 16 Not available yet Not available yet
The most challenging areas for EL students on the ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 assessment are
reading and writing; students continue to show strong progress in listening and speaking on this
assessment.
AMAO 3—Making Progress in Math and Reading for ELL Students
Table 7 illustrates whether or not EL students have made progress toward Maryland’s
accountability measures. Significant gaps for students receiving EL services remain when
compared to the PARCC ELA and math performance of “all” students. However, the
performance of the exited EL student group shows some level of progress.
Table 7: English Learners Students—Progress on Reading and Math AMO Targets
2016 AND 2017 PARCC ELA AND MATH (LEVELS 3-5)
2016 2017
Content / Grade All Students EL
Students Exited EL Students
All Students
EL Students
Exited EL Students
ELA Grades 3-5 76.2% 25.1% 72.6% 77.5% 25.8% 74.5%
ELA Grades 6-8 72.9% 8.0% 46.5% 74.1% 7.2% 44.2%
Math Grades 3-5 77.8% 38.5% 70.5% 78.6% 35.3% 73.4%
Math Grades 6-8 71.4% 13.0% 49.6% 72.0% 10.0% 45.9%
The data, rationale, timelines, strategies, and specific resource allocations used to ensure that
ELs meet the targets for the AMAOs are discussed in the goals, accomplishments, and
challenges above and the strategies listed below.
Global Strategies and Changes
To ensure that EL students are making progress towards meeting and/or exceeding standards,
several strategies will continue or will be newly implemented in the 2018 school year. FCPS EL
staff will use data from local (formative) and state (ACCESS and PARCC) assessments and
observations to continuously monitor and track the progress of these EL-specific strategies.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 55
Three-Year EL Achievement Plan
In the fall of 2014, a three-year EL achievement plan was implemented by FCPS. This plan
inspired a number of positive changes to FCPS supporting EL students. Table 8 provides a
quick overview of the resource allocations provided as a result of implementing the Three-Year
EL Achievement Plan.
In 2017-18, the EL office/AAE department will work on finalizing and implementing the next
phase of a new three-year EL action plan (cost-neutral). The new Three-Year EL Action Plan
will address the following areas while focusing on the resources listed in Table 8.
EL Programming and Compliance. Enhance and sustain staff, processes, and metrics
to better support and monitor EL programming/services in schools. Identify and create
high quality instructional models that support EL student needs. Ensure EL program is
not only meeting but also exceeding state and federal regulations.
Curriculum and EL Instruction. Create rigorous, relevant curriculum, assessments,
and supports that allow teachers to seamlessly facilitate learning experiences that
increase Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic
Language Proficiency (CALP) while building confidence and skill sets needed to feel
confident and succeed in mainstream classes.
Data and Assessment. Define quantitative and qualitative assessment measures to
inform instructional practice and monitor and guide the effectiveness of instructional
models and language development.
Additional Strategies or Changes
FCPS remains committed to accelerating achievement for each of its students. In addition to (or
in conjunction with) the new Three-Year EL Action Plan, the following goals and related
strategies will be implemented in the 2017-18 school in order to continue to support the EL
student population. Resource allocations for the strategies are unrestricted and are from local
funds for 2017-18 unless otherwise noted.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 56
Language Proficiency. Increase language proficiency growth and exits from the
program though the following:
EL teachers will have additional training/professional learning on effective usage of
the ELLevation platform, including the “document management” feature, which will
allow EL teachers to upload and monitor elements of student EL instructional plans;
Enhanced SIOP training will continue evolving to provide mainstream teachers with
better instructional support options for their EL students; and
Summer curriculum workshops will focus on the following areas:
- Newcomer academic supports/resources—staff will expand on the existing
repository of academic newcomer lessons and continue to develop and vet
resources that consistently align with and support CCRS standards.
- SIOP model professional learning modules and resource vetting—experienced
SIOP instructors will develop, revisit, and vet resources and professional learning to
support schools.
- Elementary common formatives for writing and speaking areas—staff will create
common formative assessments (primary & intermediate) for language levels 1–5;
those assessments will include language-level appropriate supports and correlate
with the WIDA writing rubric.
- “Can Do” descriptors and evidence table progressions—meld WIDA evidence
tables with “Can Do” descriptors and layer the MD K-12 Clarifications to support
academic instruction for ELs at all language levels.
- American Pop Music for ELs and Foundations of Tech for ELs—infuse academic
language and language instruction goals through these content area courses along
with effective, appropriate EL instructional supports for success in these courses.
Program Delivery/Services. Prepare for another potential decentralization effort at
other secondary schools. Facilitate successful EL programs at both GTJHS and GTJMS.
Focus additional efforts on high school EL programming. Provide quality interpreting and
translation services to the system.
Curriculum/Instructional Support. Reduce the impact that language dominance
testing has on current EL staff members so that they can be in schools each day to
provide instructional support for teachers. Create effective interventions and programs to
reduce the EL dropout rate.
EL Staffing. Work with Human Resources to continue recruiting and developing talented
EL teachers.
Professional Learning. Provide compelling SIOP professional learning for all SIOP
schools. Offer a variety of professional learning opportunities for all stakeholders.
Continue training teachers with respect to the ELLevation platform to help stakeholders
use it to its fullest potential.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 57
Table 8. 2017-2018 Resource Allocations for English Learner Support
Resource Allocation Rationale for Strategy
or Change Timeline
Method of Monitoring Progress
Funding Amount
Source of Funding
Eight Additional EL Teachers To reduce the EL student to teacher ratio and support secondary decentralization.
Summer of 2017 Teacher observation/evaluation Approximately $50,000
per teacher Unrestricted
Two 10-month EL Counselors
EL counselors are needed to provide additional support to growing EL population at both Frederick High and Governor Thomas Johnson high schools.
Summer of 2017 Counselor observation/evaluation $142,341 Unrestricted, local funds
Textbooks and Resources at High School and Middle School Levels
To support decentralization of EL services in Frederick and Governor Thomas Johnson high schools.
Summer of 2017 Formative and summative assessments related to materials
$42,841 Unrestricted, local funds
Part-Time EL Therapist To provide social emotional support for students with interrupted education and/or trauma.
Fall 2017 Regular meetings with therapist an FCPS evaluation
$65,480 Restricted, Title III grant, CFDA# 84.365A
Part-Time Language Specialist To assist in determining language dominance prior to referral for special services testing.
Fall 2017 Monitor assessments results to determine impact
$46,986
Restricted, Title III grant, CFDA #84.365A
Professional Learning (SIOP, One-Credit Courses, and More)
To continue the next stages of SIOP Implementation. To expand effective usage of WIDA English Language Development Standards. To accelerate EL student access to mainstream success.
Fall 2017- Spring 2018
Regular SIOP cadre meetings with participating Schools during the year Individual and school surveys during the year Informal classroom visits to view implementation
$42,729 Unrestricted, local funds
Coordinator of Family Partnerships/Community Partnerships (dropout prevention initiative)
To reduce the dropout rate for EL students by 10% or more.
Fall 2017- Spring 2018
Monthly monitoring of rate throughout 2017-2018
Cost neutral Cost neutral
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 58
MONIT ORING /ME ASURI NG P ROGRE SS
To monitor and track the progress of global strategies and plans specific to student groups, as
well as provide evidence, FCPS will carry out the following activities in the next year:
Quarterly reviews will be conducted for each content area utilizing local assessment data
(formative framework). Curriculum staff, assessment and improvement staff, AAE
staff, and instructional directors will be included in this process.
School continuous strategic improvement (CSI) teams are required to conduct regular
progress reviews of their own strategies and report formative data within their fluid plans.
Implementation of strategies are monitored through informal walk-through tools and
quantitative formative data.
Quarterly visits are conducted by instructional directors. Meetings are held with
principals to discuss progress and to discuss any adjustments that are needed related to
the strategies.
Monthly meetings for math and ELA and quarterly meetings for science and social
studies are held by central content specialists with school-based liaisons (e.g., literacy
specialists, math specialists, department chairs, etc.) to discuss progress of strategies
that have been implemented.
In all scenarios, FCPS embraces the continuous strategic process. Joint directors across all
FCPS departments within the ACTS division meet weekly to ensure successful implementation
of noted strategies and achievement results. This group will adjust professional learning plans,
provide clarification in communications, and/or address any barriers to successful
implementation of strategies.
P ARCC E NG LISH LANG UAGE ARTS/LITE RACY Grad es 3 -5
Overall Goals and Objectives
FCPS is committed to ensuring that all students become independent readers and writers for
many different purposes. Students will use their literacy skills to negotiate an increasingly
complex and information-rich world. Students will refine and apply their knowledge of reading,
writing, speaking, and listening by engaging in a variety of diverse texts and writing for authentic
purposes and audiences. Students will find joy in reading and writing.
The FCPS elementary ELA program is based on research and best practices for instruction and
assessment. The goals and objectives of FCPS elementary ELA program are to:
Produce independent and strategic readers and writers;
Provide students with the necessary foundational skills in reading and writing;
Accelerate the reading and writing achievement of all students in language arts;
Differentiate for students who are not yet meeting language arts expectations; and
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 59
Provide teachers curricular resources and assessments that are aligned to the Maryland
College and Career (MCCR) framework.
Overall Accomplishments
A review of PARCC data from 2015 to 2017 reflects several accomplishments in elementary
ELA. From 2016 to 2017, increases in performance (levels 3-5 and 4-5) in PARCC elementary
ELA occurred in grades 3-5 (see Table 9). With the exception of grade 3, three-year trend data
also show an increase in performance in PARCC elementary ELA.
Table 9. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance SCHOOL YEAR 2015-2017
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Grade 3 76.7 72.0 73.9▼ 56.2 48.2 49.8▼
Grade 4 77.3 78.8 79.2▲ 49.4 52.5 53.5▲
Grade 5 77.6 77.9 79.2▲ 49.8 51.1 55.6▲
Grades 3-5 77.2 76.2 77.5▲ 51.8 50.6 53.0▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
In 2017, FCPS continued to outperform the state in PARCC in each performance band (i.e.,
levels 3-5 and 4-5) in elementary ELA (see Figure 1 on page 10).
Grade 3—Levels 3-5: 73.9% and 61.6%; Levels 4-5: 49.8% and 39.8% (FCPS and state,
respectively)
Grade 4—Levels 3-5: 79.2% and 67.3%; Levels 4-5: 53.5% and 41.9% (FCPS and state,
respectively)
Grade 5—Levels 3-5: 79.2% and 66.6%; Levels 4-5: 55.6% and 41.4% (FCPS and state,
respectively)
In addition to overall PARCC performance levels, PARCC sub-claims, i.e., components of the
ELA assessment, are available for analysis. For ELA, these sub-claims are reading information,
reading literature, reading vocabulary, written expression, and written knowledge of language.
One goal of the MCCR framework is to provide elementary students with a balance (50/50) in
reading literature and reading information. In analyzing these data, there appears to be a strong
percent of students who met or exceeded expectations on the PARCC sub-claims. For
elementary grades 3-5, similar performance in reading informational or literacy text continues to
be evident. This reflects the emphasis placed on providing explicit writing instruction during the
language arts instructional block.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 60
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in ELA, grades 3-5, are consistent with
the overall goals and objectives for all FCPS students receiving special education services.
Accomplishments
PARCC data continues to reflect success in elementary ELA among students with disabilities
when compared to the state performance. In 2017, students with disabilities in grades 3-5
outperformed the state in elementary ELA. This was also true in 2015 and 2016 with the
exception of grade 4 in 2015.
Grade 3—Levels 3-5: 34.6% and 23.4%; Levels 4-5: 15.5% and 10.4% (FCPS and state,
respectively)
Grade 4—Levels 3-5: 30.7% and 23.9%; Levels 4-5: 12.0% and 8.4% (FCPS and state,
respectively)
Grade 5—Levels 3-5: 27.4% and 21.2%; Levels 4-5: 9.4% and 6.7% (FCPS and state,
respectively)
Likewise, accomplishments can be noted when analyzing three-year PARCC trends among
students with disabilities taking PARCC elementary ELA. Positive trends are evident in each
elementary grade from 2015 to 2017 (see Table 10).
Table 10. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
3 4 5 3-5 3 4 5 3-5
2015 30.0 22.6 22.9 25.1 13.9 7.1 6.5 9.1
2016 27.2 29.3 24.6 27.0 14.3 10.8 8.0 10.9
2017 34.6▲ 30.7▲ 27.4▲ 30.9▲ 15.5▲ 12.0▲ 9.4▲ 12.3▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Table 11 shows the PARCC elementary ELA performance among students who have exited
special education services. Similar to students currently receiving special education services,
three-year PARCC trends are positive in each performance band. Of noteworthy, approximately
74% of students who exited special education services are approaching, meeting, and/or
exceeding expectations while 45% are meeting/exceeding expectations.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 61
Table 11. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 3-5 Grades 3-5
2015 73.4 37.4
2016 67.2 38.0
2017 73.5▲ 44.6▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Despite a positive comparison to state performance, challenges remain with students receiving
special education services. When comparing both performance bands (3-5 and 4-5) for FCPS, students receiving special education services (grades 3-5) and all FCPS students (grades 3-5),
data showed a significant gap in performance. In 2017, approximately 31% of students with
disabilities performed at levels 3-5 and 1 2% performed at levels 4-5 on PARCC elementary ELA
(see Table 10). This is compared to
approximately 78% of “all students” who
performed at levels 3-5 and 53% who
performed at levels 4-5.
Strategies or Changes
In its work with students, FCPS will equip
each and every student to be an
empowered learner and an engaged
citizen, to achieve a positive impact in the
local and global community. A
streamlined literacy program will allow for
equitable delivery of services and
curriculum while allowing students the
same opportunities for success.
Literacy is the gateway to all other
learning. In order to become proficient
readers and writers, students need high
quality core instruction and, if necessary,
intervention. Students who are not
proficient readers by the end of third
grade will likely struggle throughout their
schooling and are at risk for not
graduating on time. The first step to
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 62
improving student achievement is to ensure that all students have access to high-quality
reading instruction and interventions based on best practice, data, and content knowledge.
Communication is also an essential skill for success. Strong oral and written communication
skills are critical in today's postsecondary opportunities. In 2017-18, FCPS will field test a
universal service delivery model for an elementary ELA literacy program to ensure equitable
delivery of a comprehensive program. Five elementary schools identified core literacy teams to
collaboratively deepen their understanding of the content standards and the use of
formative/quantitative assessment data to drive instruction and student grouping practices.
The FCPS Elementary Literacy Workgroup will identify key elements of high-quality literacy
instruction. These elements will align with best practices and will be implemented with fidelity
across all elementary schools. They also require a strong professional learning system for
teachers and ongoing monitoring of implementation across elementary schools. A direct
correlation between IEP goals and the general education curriculum will allow students with
disabilities to move closer to closing the achievement gap that exists with their general
education peers. If students with disabilities receive instruction in the general education
curriculum, then they will decrease the existing achievement gap.
Progress will be monitored and analyzed five times per school year. Bi-monthly sessions will
occur between September 2017 and May 2018 (no session in December). Literacy teams will
meet with field test schools to collect and analyze quarterly data on student progress. The
benchmarks and county assessments will be used to monitor student progress.
(Costs: restricted # 84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gaps, $10,620)
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 63
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in elementary ELA. Refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the
Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for ELs
in grades 3-5 are consistent with
the overall goals and objectives
for all FCPS EL students.
Accomplishments
EL students in grade 3 (35%)
outperformed the state (27%) in
PARCC ELA in 2017 (i.e.
performance band 3-5). From
2015 to 2017, the percent of grade
3-5 EL students in PARCC
performance band 3-5 increased
from 20.4% to 25.8%
(see Table 12).
Table 12. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
3 4 5 3-5 3 4 5 3-5
2015 28.9 10.8 10.1 20.4 10.7 5.9 ≤5 7.6
2016 31.5 23.5 9.4 25.1 8.9 ≤5 - 5.7
2017 34.5▲ 19.4▲ 11.3▲ 25.8▲ 7.2▼ ≤5▼ ≤5▼ ≤5▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Significant gaps for ELs remain related to performance on the PARCC assessment. However,
the performance of the exited EL student group shows progress over time. In comparison to the
“all student” group (77.5%, levels 3-5), exited EL students (74.5%, levels 3-5) performed
somewhat similar in 2017 in PARCC elementary ELA (see Table 13). In several elementary
schools, this student group actually outperformed a number of other groups on the PARCC
assessment.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 64
Table 13. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 3-5 Grades 3-5
2015 74.7 40.7
2016 72.6 35.5
2017 74.5▼ 32.2▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Significant achievement gaps remain for the EL group. Research states that ELs typically learn
conversational English within one to two years; however, academic language/vocabulary skills
take five to seven years on average to achieve success at grade level in English. EL students
with interrupted or no formal schooling can take seven to ten years to reach grade level English
language literacy. This data holds true regardless of the student’s home language, country of
origin, and socioeconomic status. In order for FCPS to reduce the current achievement gap for
EL students, EL staff and mainstream instructors will need to work collaboratively, with a sense
of urgency, to narrow the current gap.
Success on PARCC assessments can be a challenge for EL students who experienced very
little to no (or interrupted) formal schooling prior to FCPS enrollment. PARCC assessments
require strong academic vocabulary skills in the assessed area. EL students with lack of formal
schooling can take several years to reach grade level English language literacy.
Strategies or Changes
Phase II of the SIOP was completed last year. FCPS will begin the next wave of SIOP
implementation at specific schools. The SIOP model is a research-based and validated model of
sheltered instruction that has been widely and successfully used across the U.S. for over 15
years. Professional learning in the SIOP model helps content area teachers plan and deliver
lessons that allow ELs to acquire academic knowledge as they develop English language
proficiency (cost-neutral). Local and state (ACCESS and PARCC) data will be used to monitor
and track the progress strategies implemented as well as the progress of EL students.
Systemic strategies continue to be implemented to ensure progress among EL students in
elementary ELA. Refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English Proficiency
section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all
students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Progress on ACCESS for ELLs
See Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 in Limited English Proficiency section.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 65
Despite reading and writing being the most challenging for EL students on the ACCESS for
ELLs 2.0 assessment, FCPS is encouraged by the performance of EL students in grade 3 on
the PARCC assessment as they outperformed the state. This performance indicates that EL
students’ progress in learning English is impacting achievement on academic measures.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards Meeting State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students failing to meet or make progress towards meeting state
performance standards are similar to the overall goals for all FCPS elementary ELA students. In
addition to these overall goals, the following are specific goals related to reading intervention.
Elementary ELA reading intervention aims to:
Encourage administrators to place highly qualified instructional teachers in reading
intervention positions according to revised job descriptions and staffing guidance.
Provide elementary intervention trainings to support curriculum connections, data literacy,
and student self-regulation.
Train elementary interventionists on developing, implementing, and monitoring customized
evidence-based instructional program (EBIP) to address students’ specific reading needs.
Support and monitor elementary intervention tagging within the student information system
(SIS) for progress monitoring and longitudinal intervention history.
Encourage collaboration between special education and EL staff in the AAE department for
consistency with intervention expectations and delivery.
Accomplishments
With the exception of EL students, all student groups—by race/ethnicity and special services—
outperformed the state in grades 3-5 for ELA in 2017. In addition, all student groups except
students identifying as Pacific Islanders showed increases from 2016 to 2017 in PARCC
performance (levels 3-5) (see Figure 5 in Executive Summary). Figure 5 on page 12 also
shows that there is a positive three-year trend among the following student groups—“all”,
American Indian, Hispanic/Latino, two or more races, white, EL students, students with
disabilities, and students receiving FARM.
Challenges
Although increases were noted from 2016 to 2017, achievement gaps by race/ethnicity remain
in PARCC elementary ELA. Achievement gaps are evident among black/African American
students (65.3%, 38.9%) and Hispanic/Latino (64.4%, 35.3%) when compared to “all students”
(77.5%, 53.0%) (performance bands 3-5 and 4-5, respectively) (see Table 14).
Likewise, in comparison to “all” students, students receiving special services (students with
disabilities and EL) are not meeting state performance standards (described in prior sections). A
coherent instructional delivery model that connects the intervention to general education
classroom instruction will continue to be important. Providing professional learning for all
instructional stakeholders to understand the rigor and expectations of the MCCRS frameworks
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 66
requires time and funding. Another challenge involves implementing literacy best practices
necessary for accelerating struggling readers. This requires consistency with both intervention
programs matched to the general education classroom expectations. Materials for instruction
and materials for necessary intervention remain limited in scope and quantity. The frameworks
require all students to read and comprehend complex texts at their grade level. Accessibility
to high-quantity and high-quality reading materials remains significantly below what research
shows is needed to accelerate growth.
Table 14. PARCC Elementary ELA (Grades 3-5) Performance (2017) RACE/ETHNICITY AND SPECIAL SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 3-5 Grades 3-5
All Students 77.5 53.0
American Indian 80.5 68.3
Asian 87.9 69.5
Black/African American 65.3 38.9
Hispanic/Latino 64.4 35.3
Pacific Islander 77.8 51.9
Two or More Races 77.7 53.4
White 82.4 58.9
EL 25.8 4.9
FARM 60.2 31.7
Special Education 30.9 12.3
Strategies or Changes
The following are strategies that will either be newly implemented or continued moving forward
to ensure the progress of students who are failing to meet or make progress towards state
performance standards.
Kindergarten-Grade 5 Guide to Support EL Writers. ELA curriculum staff created
supportive instructional documents in the area of writing. These grade level documents
for K-5 provide the additional scaffolding necessary within explicit writing instruction in
order to allow struggling writers to fully participate in writing instruction. The local on-
demand writing assessment measures student growth in writing craft and writing
mechanics. These K-5 assessments are administered three times per year. The lesson
accommodations for struggling writers documents help general education teachers and
service providers to plan appropriate instruction. During the 2016 summer curriculum
workshops, the lesson accommodations for struggling writers were developed by a
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 67
group of classroom teachers, literacy specialists and EL teachers. Unrestricted funds
(curriculum writing funds) were used to pay the teachers to participate in the workshop.
The total cost of the workshop was $8,921.
Kindergarten-First Grade Comprehension Strategy Instruction. FCPS created
kindergarten and first grade comprehension strategy instruction lessons. These lessons
provide standards-based instruction for how to comprehend complex text and make
meaning which is the ultimate goal. The local reading assessment (Benchmark
Assessment System by Fountas and Pinnell) measures student growth in oral reading
accuracy and oral reading comprehension of increasingly complex text. Kindergarten
and first grade students are administered these assessments three times per year. The
kindergarten and first grade comprehension strategy instruction lessons support general
education teachers with planning standards-based reading instruction. During the 2016
summer curriculum workshops, these comprehension strategy instruction lessons were
developed by a group of classroom teachers. Unrestricted funds (curriculum writing
funds) were used to pay the teachers to participate in the workshop. The total cost of the
workshop was $13,306.
Local Benchmark/Guided Reading. Guided reading continuums for readers level A-Z
were created. These continuums outlined the specific lesson components for an
effective guided reading lesson: familiar rereading, new book introduction, reading the
text, discussing the meaning, teaching for processing, and word work. The local reading
assessment (Benchmark Assessment System by Fountas and Pinnell) measures
student growth in oral reading accuracy and oral reading comprehension of increasingly
complex text. These K-5 assessments are administered throughout the year to monitor
progress. The guided reading continuums support general education teachers with
planning differentiated small group reading instruction that is based on student need.
During the 2016 summer curriculum workshops, the guided reading continuums were
developed by literacy specialists. Unrestricted funds (curriculum writing funds) were
used to pay the literacy specialists to participate in the workshop. The total cost of the
workshop was $5,947.
In addition, the SASI department staff have created elementary ELA strategies specific to
reading intervention goals.
Shared Vision. A shared vision for reading intervention was created to define desired
achievements, to provide guidance and inspiration for advancing student achievement,
and to elicit collaboration toward common goals. The vision was created by FCPS
reading intervention teams at a professional learning session in the fall and revisited
throughout the year to verify goal alignment and monitor progress towards reading
intervention goals. The reading intervention vision was created and reviewed at quarterly
professional learning sessions. Interventionists were also trained in the intervention
placement tool and Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI). Unrestricted funds were used for
procuring substitutes so that teachers could attend these sessions. The total cost for the
year for substitutes was $3,036.20. Unrestricted funds were also used to provide
teachers workshop pay to create materials related to the intervention training and
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 68
development of and training for the intervention placement tool. The total cost for the
year for workshop pay was $7,515.73.
Intervention Placement Tool/Training. An intervention placement tool and related
training was created to ensure struggling readers were placed accurately in interventions
and that their progress in interventions was monitored to evaluate the effectiveness of
the interventions. The rollout of and training for the intervention placement tool occurred
during the quarterly professional learning sessions attended by reading intervention
teachers. These trainings allowed interventionists to verify student intervention
placement and monitor progress with the guidance of the SASI staff. (Cost-neutral)
Leveled Literacy Intervention. The SASI department acquired LLI, a research-
validated, comprehension intervention with in-depth progress monitoring capabilities, as
well as materials of instruction for corrective reading, an intervention to address students
with deficits in decoding. SASI provided ongoing training for LLI during quarterly
professional learning sessions for reading intervention teachers. Unrestricted funds were
used to purchase the intervention materials for LLI and corrective reading. The total cost
for the initial purchase in 2015-16 was $191,073.21. For 2017-18, additional costs,
totaling $73,843, were associated with intervention materials to ensure the alignment of
resources.
In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students,
including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
P ARCC E NG LISH LANG UAGE ARTS/LITE RACY Grad es 6 -8
Like elementary ELA, the FCPS secondary ELA program supports the goal of ensuring that all
students are independent readers, writers, and critical thinkers. In addition to finding joy in
reading and writing, the secondary ELA program focuses on students working toward college
and career readiness as they progress through the curriculum.
Overall Goals and Objectives
The FCPS middle school ELA program is based on research and best practices for instruction
and assessment that enable students to be successful in the 21st century. Specifically, and
similar to elementary ELA, the middle school ELA program aims to:
Produce independent and strategic readers, writers, and critical thinkers;
Provide students with the necessary skills to read and analyze a wide variety of increasingly
challenging texts including poems, short stories, nonfiction and novels;
Teach students to respond to both fiction and nonfiction by writing to express ideas via
argumentative, narrative and explanatory formats;
Accelerate the reading and writing achievement of all students in ELA;
Differentiate for students who are not yet meeting language arts expectations; and
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 69
Provide curricular resources and assessments that are aligned to the MCCRS frameworks
for ELA.
Overall Accomplishments
A review of PARCC data from 2015 to 2017 reflects several accomplishments in grades 6-8
ELA. Approximately 74% of students in grades 6-8 taking PARCC performed at a level three or
higher; 50% at four or higher (see Table 15). From 2016 to 2017, increases in performance
(levels 3-5 and 4-5) in PARCC ELA occurred in grades 6-8. With the exception of grade 6,
three-year trend data also show an increase in performance. In addition, FCPS continues to
outperform the state in grades 6-8 ELA (see Figure 1 on page 10).
Table 15. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance SCHOOL YEAR 2015-2017
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Grade 6 79.3 73.8 75.5▼ 48.1 44.1 48.8▲
Grade 7 67.7 73.2 74.6▲ 40.2 48.2 52.6▲
Grade 8 68.9 71.8 72.0▲ 41.0 47.3 49.0▲
Grades 6-8 72.0 72.9 74.1▲ 43.1 46.5 50.1▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
In addition, data shows a strong percentage of students who met or exceeded expectations on
the PARCC ELA grades 6-8 sub-claims. In comparison to 2016, the 2017 PARCC data reflects
growth in the number of students who met or exceeded expectations on most of the PARCC
sub claims with small decreases in reading literature and reading vocabulary. Similar to
elementary ELA, the data show there is a balanced performance on whether students are
reading information or literary text. Written expression and knowledge and use of language are
two areas where students have the most difficulty.
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals for students receiving special education services in grades 6-8 ELA are consistent
with the overall goals for all FCPS students with an emphasis on differentiating for students who
are not yet meeting language arts standards.
Accomplishments
In 2017, students with disabilities in grades 6 and 7 outscored the state in the performance band
of 3-5. Likewise, accomplishments are noted when analyzing three-year trends among students
with disabilities taking PARCC in grades 6-8. Overall, grades 6-8 combined showed an increase
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 70
from 2015 to 2017 (19.4% to 20.2%, respectively). When looking at performance band 4-5,
increases are evident in each grade from 2015 to 2017 (see Table 16).
Table 16. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
6 7 8 6-8 6 7 8 6-8
2015 23.3 17.6 17.3 19.4 ≤5 6.9 ≤5 ≤5
2016 20.4 19.7 23.1 21.1 ≤5 6.3 6.9 6.1
2017 23.3 22.6▲ 14.2▼ 20.2▲ ≤5▲ 9.7▲ 5.5▲ 6.3▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Table 17 shows the PARCC grades 6-8 ELA performance among students who have exited
special education services. Similar to students currently receiving special education services,
three-year trends are positive in the PARCC performance band 4-5. In 2017, about half of
students who exited special education services are performing at levels 3-5; 20% at levels 4-5.
Table 17. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 6-8 Grades 6-8
2015 54.5 17.5
2016 51.0 21.1
2017 50.4▼ 19.7▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC ELA grades 6-8 indicate that approximately 20%
of students who have disabilities were in the performance band 3-5 in comparison to 74% of all
FCPS students. Thus, 80% of students with disabilities did not meet/partially met expectations.
Strategies or Changes
Table 18 outlines the work that the ELA curriculum staff will be conducting in 2017-18 in terms
of strategies to ensure that students with disabilities are making progress towards meeting
and/or exceeding expectations.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 71
Table 18. English Language Arts, Grades 6-8—Strategies for 2017-2018 School Year
Strategy Rationale Timeline Measurement of Student
Progress Funding Source
Additional Instructional Time
As part of established FCPS secondary literacy program guidelines, additional instructional time with teacher who possess a comprehensive expertise in ELA/literacy is proven to increase reading comprehension scores.
Extended learning opportunities (ELO) take place throughout the school year either during the regular school day
or after school.
Increased success on FCPS ELA required benchmark and
PARCC scores.
During school: no funding source
After school: FCPS budget for ELO positions
Access to Research-based Reading Interventions
Early identification and placement of students into interventions based on needs are proven to increase reading comprehension scores.
Reading intervention classes are available throughout the
school year.
Increased success on FCPS ELA required benchmark, HMR Reading Inventory and PARCC
scores.
FCPS SASI budget allocations
Personalized Educational Opportunities
Instruction based on individual student data effectively meets the needs of all students.
Teacher training throughout the school year on research-based strategies such as blended learning, scaffolding of instruction and Universal Design for Learning (UDL).
Increased success on FCPS ELA required benchmark and
PARCC scores.
ELA teacher training takes place during the August Curriculum Day and throughout the school year via literacy specialist meetings All of these opportunities are part of the FCPS operating budget.
Increased Formative Assessment Opportunities
The use of formative assessments on a regular basis to adjust instruction give teachers a better picture of student needs and skill gaps.
Teacher training throughout the
school year.
Increased success on FCPS ELA required benchmark and
PARCC scores.
ELA teacher training takes place during the August Curriculum Day and throughout the school year via literacy specialist meetings All of these opportunities are part of the FCPS operating budget.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 72
Secondary ELA Workgroup
In its work with students, FCPS will equip each and every student to be an empowered learner
and an engaged citizen, to achieve a positive impact in the local and global community. Literacy
is the gateway to all other learning. In order to become proficient readers and writers students
need high quality core instruction and, if necessary, intervention. Students who are not proficient
readers by the end of third grade will likely struggle throughout their schooling and are at risk for
not graduating on time. The first steps to improving student achievement is to ensure that all
students have access to high quality reading instruction and interventions based on best
practice, data, and content knowledge. Communication is also an essential skill for success.
Strong oral and written communication skills are critical in today's workplace.
The FCPS Secondary
Literacy Workgroup will
identify key elements of
high quality literacy
instruction. These
elements will align with
best practices and will be
implemented with fidelity
across all elementary
schools. They also require
a strong professional
learning system for
teachers and ongoing
monitoring of
implementation across
elementary schools.
FCPS will provide
professional learning
opportunities for one
special education teacher per secondary school to further develop their understanding of the
ELA standards along with the secondary literacy specialists at each school. This collaboration
will provide special educators and literacy specialists an opportunity to learn about the
standards and discuss how the standards connect to their work in intervention classroom
instruction and specialized instruction.
The literacy team will meet quarterly with the school team to review and analyze data from local
benchmark assessment to plan for continuous improvement and progress monitoring. (Costs:
restricted, #84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gap, $23,973)
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in secondary ELA; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the
Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 73
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals for EL students in grades 6-8 ELA are consistent with the overall goals and objectives
for all FCPS EL students with an emphasis on differentiating for students who are not yet
meeting language arts standards. In short, EL students need to meet the same achievement
standards as all other students.
Accomplishments
Significant gaps for ELs remain related to performance on the PARCC assessment. Only 7.2%
of ELs scored proficient in this area in FCPS (see Table 19).
Table 19. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
6 7 8 6-8 6 7 8 6-8
2015 16.1 5.8 5.1 9.4 - - - -
2016 9.0 5.9 9.1 8.0 ≤ 5 ≤ 5 ≤ 5 ≤ 5▼
2017 5.5▼ 9.1▲ 7.4▲ 7.2▼ - - - -
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
However, the performance of the exited EL student group shows some progress. Forty-four
percent of exited EL students performed at a level three or higher while approximately 24%
performed at a level four or higher in 2017 in PARCC grades 6-8 ELA (see Table 20).
Table 20. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 6-8 Grades 6-8
2015 62.4 18.8
2016 46.5 12.4
2017 44.2▼ 24.4▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 74
Challenges
Significant achievement gaps remain for the EL group. Research states that ELs typically learn
conversational English within one to two years; however, academic language/vocabulary skills
take five to seven years on average to achieve success at grade level in English. EL students
with interrupted or no formal schooling can take seven to ten years to reach grade level English
language literacy. This data holds true regardless of the student’s home language, country of
origin, and socioeconomic status. In order for FCPS to reduce the current achievement gap for
EL students, EL staff and mainstream instructors will need to work collaboratively, with a sense
of urgency, to narrow the current gap.
Success on PARCC assessments can be a challenge for EL students who experienced very
little to no (or interrupted) formal schooling prior to FCPS enrollment. PARCC assessments
require strong academic vocabulary skills in the assessed area. EL students with lack of formal
schooling can take several years to reach grade level English language literacy.
Strategies or Changes
Phase II of the SIOP was completed last year. FCPS will begin the next wave of SIOP
implementation at specific schools. The SIOP model is a research-based and validated model of
sheltered instruction that has been widely and successfully used across the U.S. for over 15
years. Professional learning in the SIOP model helps content area teachers plan and deliver
lessons that allow ELs to acquire academic knowledge as they develop English language
proficiency (cost-neutral). Local and state (ACCESS and PARCC) data will used to monitor and
track the progress strategies implemented as well as the progress of EL students.
In addition to the strategies outlined in Table 18, systemic strategies are being implemented to
ensure progress among EL students in secondary ELA; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in
the Limited English Proficiency section. Also, systemic strategies are being implemented to
ensure progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Progress on ACCESS for ELLs
See Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 in Limited English Proficiency section.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards Meeting State Performance Standards
The following student groups are identified as performing at a lower achievement level in grades
6-8 ELA when compared to the overall student population: black/African American,
Hispanic/Latino, and students with disabilities, and EL students, and students receiving FARM.
Goals and Objectives
Identifying sound, research-based instructional strategies and making them available to all
student populations are the main goals for eliminating the achievement gap. The continued use
of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) as well as the move toward more personalized learning
help support classroom instruction. Early identification of students who need extra support as
well as continued work with the AAE and SASI departments round out goals for helping
students make progress toward meeting state performance goals.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 75
Additional goals related to reading intervention include the following:
Encourage administrators to place highly qualified instructional teachers in reading intervention positions;
Reinforce the recommended research-based delivery model for secondary intervention
programs;
Provide secondary intervention trainings to support curriculum connections, data literacy,
and student self-regulation;
Train secondary interventionists on utilizing embedded intervention materials;
Support and monitor secondary intervention courses within the SIS for progress monitoring
on local assessment performance; and
Collaborate with ELL and special education staff in the AAE department for consistency with
intervention expectations and delivery.
Accomplishments
Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and FARM students outperformed the same student
groups from the 2016 administration of PARCC grades 6-8 ELA (see Table 21). Figure 7 in the
Executive Summary on page 14 shows evidence of increases among all student groups
except EL students during the past three years.
Table 21. PARCC Middle School ELA (Grades 6-8) Performance (2017) RACE/ETHNICITY AND SPECIAL SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 6-8 Grades 6-8
All Students 74.1 50.1
American Indian 71.4 42.9
Asian 92.2 78.0
Black/African American 59.2 33.3
Pacific Islander 86.7 80.0
Hispanic/Latino 61.1 34.3
Two or More Races 71.5 50.4
White 78.4 54.4
EL 7.2 ≤ 5
FARM 51.6 26.2
Special Education 20.2 6.3
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 76
Challenges
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC reflects challenges among student groups
identified as performing at a lower achievement level in grades 6-8 ELA.
These data indicate that approximately:
Fifty-nine percent of black/African American students were in the performance band 3-5
in comparison to 74% of all FCPS students.
Sixty-one percent of Hispanic/Latino students were in the performance band 3-5 in
comparison to 74 of all FCPS students.
Fifty-two percent of students receiving FARM were in the performance band 3-5 in
comparison to 74% of all FCPS students.
Twenty percent of students with disabilities were in the performance band 3-5 in
comparison to 74% of all FCPS students.
Seven percent of EL students were in the performance band 3-5 in comparison to 74%
of all FCPS students.
Strategies or Changes
In addition to the strategies outlined in Table 18, systemic strategies are being implemented to
ensure progress among all students in secondary ELA and are described in the Executive
Summary and sections on Global Strategies or Changes for students with disabilities and EL
students. Also, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all
students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
P ARCC E NG LISH G RADE 10
Overall Goals and Objectives
FCPS’ high school English program is based on research and best practices for instruction and
assessment that enable students to be successful in the 21st century. The goals and objectives
of FCPS’ high school English program are similar to middle school ELA (see Overall Goals and
Objectives in PARCC English Language Arts/Literacy, Grades 6-8).
Overall Accomplishments
Data for PARCC English 10 reflects several accomplishments for the 2016-17 school year (see
Table 22). In comparison to 2016 PARCC data, the 2017 data reflects growth in the number of
students reaching proficiency levels.
Proficiency levels 4-5 increased from 56.0% in 2016 to 64.1% in 2017.
Proficiency levels 3-5 increased from 73.8% in 2016 to 81.5% in 2017.
A strong percentage of students met or exceeded expectations on the PARCC sub-claims with
students in 2017 outperforming students in 2016. In addition, FCPS rankings compared in the
state for PARCC English 10 are as follows—4th in the state (levels 3-5) and 6th in the state
(levels 4-5) in 2017.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 77
Table 22. PARCC English 10 Performance 2015-2017
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
High School 69.6 73.8 81.5▲ 50.9 56.0 64.1▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in secondary ELA are consistent with the
overall goals and objectives for students with disabilities in FCPS.
Accomplishments
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC reflects accomplishments among students with
disabilities in English 10—proficiency levels 3-5 increased from 29.3% in 2016 to 37.3% in 2017
(see Table 23). In addition, a positive trend is evident from 2015 to 2017 in both performance
bands, 3-5 and 4-5.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 78
Table 23. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
High School High School
2015 25.9 14.0
2016 29.3 9.5
2017 37.3▲ 15.8▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Table 24 shows the PARCC English 10 performance among students who have exited special
education services. Similar to students currently receiving special education services, three-year
PARCC trends are positive in each performance band. Of noteworthy, approximately 68% of
students who exited special education services are approaching, meeting, and/or exceeding
expectations while 50% are meeting/exceeding expectations.
Table 24. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
High School High School
2015 54.2 37.5
2016 60.0 30.0
2017 68.2▲ 50.0▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
A significant performance gap exists between students with disabilities (37.3%) and all FCPS
students (81.5%) in 2017.
Strategies or Changes
In 2017-18, FCPS will form a secondary ELA workgroup. The same rationale for the elementary
literacy program is used for the purpose of forming this workgroup—literacy is the gateway to all
other learning. The FCPS Secondary Literacy Workgroup will identify key elements of high
quality literacy instruction. These elements will align with best practices and will be implemented
with fidelity across all secondary schools. They also require a strong professional learning
system for teachers and ongoing monitoring of implementation across schools.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 79
FCPS will provide professional learning opportunities for one special education teacher per
secondary school to further develop their understanding of the ELA standards along with the
secondary literacy specialists at each school. This collaboration will provide special educators
and literacy specialists an opportunity to learn about the standards and discuss how the
standards connect to their work in intervention classroom instruction, and specialized
instruction.
The literacy team will meet quarterly with the school team to review and analyze data from local
benchmark assessment to plan for continuous improvement and progress monitoring.
(Costs: restricted, #84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gap, $23,973)
In addition, along with strategies outlined in Table 18 on page 72, systemic strategies are being
implemented to ensure progress among students receiving special education services in
secondary ELA. Refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Special Education section. Also,
systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students, including
special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals for EL students in English 10 are consistent with the overall goals and objectives for
all FCPS students with an emphasis on differentiating for students who are not yet meeting
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 80
language arts standards. In short, EL students need to meet the same achievement standards
as all other students.
Accomplishments
Data from the 2017 administration of PARCC reflects accomplishments among EL students in
English 10—proficiency levels 3-5 increased from 20.6% in 2015 to 25.4% in 2017 (see Table
25).
Table 25. PARCC English 10 Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
High School High School
2015 20.6 8.8
2016 13.8 1.7
2017 25.4▲ 6.3▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
The performance of the exited EL student group shows progress. Approximately 56% of exited
EL students performed at a level three or higher while 31% performed at a level four or higher in
2017 in PARCC English 10 (see Table 26).
Table 26. PARCC English 10 PARCC Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
High School High School
2015 35.3 23.5
2016 45.5 31.8
2017 56.3▲ 31.3▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Significant achievement gaps remain for the EL group. Research states that ELs typically learn
conversational English within one to two years; however, academic language/vocabulary skills
take five to seven years on average to achieve success at grade level in English. EL students
with interrupted or no formal schooling can take seven to ten years to reach grade level English
language literacy. This data holds true regardless of the student’s home language, country of
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 81
origin, and socioeconomic status. In order for FCPS to reduce the current achievement gap for
EL students, EL staff and mainstream instructors will need to work collaboratively, with a sense
of urgency, to narrow the current gap.
Success on PARCC assessments can be a challenge for EL students who experienced very
little to no (or interrupted) formal schooling prior to FCPS enrollment. PARCC assessments
require strong academic vocabulary skills in the assessed area. EL students with lack of formal
schooling can take several years to reach grade level English language literacy.
Strategies or Changes
Phase II of the SIOP was completed last year. FCPS will begin the next wave of SIOP
implementation at specific schools. The SIOP model is a research-based and validated model of
sheltered instruction that has been widely and successfully used across the U.S. for over 15
years. Professional learning in the SIOP model helps content area teachers plan and deliver
lessons that allow ELs to acquire academic knowledge as they develop English language
proficiency (cost-neutral). Local and state (ACCESS and PARCC) data will used to monitor and
track the progress strategies implemented as well as the progress of EL students.
In addition to the strategies outlined in Table 18 on page 72, systemic strategies are being
implemented to ensure progress among EL students in secondary ELA; refer to Global
Strategies or Changes in the Limited English Proficiency section. Also, systemic strategies are
being implemented to ensure progress among all students, including special populations; see
the Executive Summary.
Progress on Access for ELLs
See Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 in Limited English Proficiency section.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 82
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students failing to meet or make progress towards performance
standards in PARCC English 10 are consistent with the overall goals for all students in high
school ELA. These include a focus on reading intervention-specific goals. See Overall Goals
and Objectives in PARCC English Language Arts/Literacy, Grades 6-8.
Accomplishments
The 2017 noteworthy accomplishments of students failing to meet or make progress toward
meeting state performance standards in ELA/literacy for grade 10 include:
Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, students with disabilities, EL students, and
students receiving FARM outperformed the same student groups from the 2016
administration of PARCC English 10 (see Table 27).
Increases in performance from 2016 to 2017 are noted for all students groups (see
Figure 9 on page 16 of the Executive Summary).
Table 27. PARCC English 10 Performance (2017) RACE/ETHNICITY AND SPECIAL SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
High School High School
All Students 81.5 64.1
American Indian 86.7 66.7
Asian 93.6 80.8
Black/African American
67.9 43.8
Pacific Islander 75.0 50.0
Hispanic/Latino 69.7 47.1
Two or More Races
78.8 62.5
White 85.8 70.3
EL 25.4 6.3
FARM 60.3 35.2
Special Education
37.3 15.8
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 83
Challenges
Based on the review of 2017 PARCC data, challenges among students failing to meet or make
progress toward state performance standards in English 10 continue to exist. That is,
approximately:
Sixty-eight percent of black/African American students were in the performance band 3-5
in comparison to 82% of all FCPS students.
Seventy percent of Hispanic/Latino students were in the performance band 3-5 in
comparison to 82% of all FCPS students.
Sixty percent of FARM students were in the performance band 3-5 in comparison to 82%
of all FCPS students.
Thirty-seven percent of students with disabilities were in the performance band 3-5 in
comparison to 82% of all FCPS students.
Twenty-five percent of EL students were in the performance band 3-5 in comparison to
82% of all FCPS students.
Strategies or Changes
See Strategies or Changes in Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards Performance
Standards in PARCC English Language Arts/Literacy, Grades 6-8. In addition, systemic
strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students, including special
populations; see the Executive Summary.
P ARCC E NG LISH G RADE 11 ( O p t i o n a l R e p o r t i n g )
In addition to MSDE’s graduation assessment requirements, Maryland law requires all students
to take an assessment by the end of grade 11 to determine if the student is college and career
ready. The first year that Maryland set forth this requirement was in 2015-16. Thus, to ensure
that all students were offered a free assessment to meet the state CCR requirement, all
students taking English 11 in 2015-16 or later were offered to take the PARCC English 11
assessment [if CCR was not met by other means, such as SAT, ACT, Accuplacer or Advanced
Placement (AP) scores]. This means that not all FCPS students took PARCC English 11 in the
2016-17 school year. Beginning in the 2017-18 school year, PARCC English 11 will no longer
be administered to English 11 students who are not college and career ready. Instead, all
students in grade 11 will be offered the SAT in both English and math at no cost to the student.
P ARCC MAT HEMATI CS Grad es 3 -5
As children learn mathematics they develop skills and concepts they will use in science,
technology, business, and in a wide range of career areas. Children learn to value, understand,
and use math not only at school but also in their world and are successful in the mathematical
applications they encounter. The elementary school curriculum encourages students to enjoy
learning and doing math and helps them to apply their growing base of knowledge as successful
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 84
thinkers, problem solvers, and communicators. In encouraging the development of mathematics
proficiency, staff works to develop conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic
competence, adaptive reasoning, and a productive disposition. These attributes are developed
in all areas of study within all domains of study: counting and cardinality, number and operations
in base ten, operations and algebraic thinking, measurement and data, geometry, number and
operations-fractions.
Overall Goals and Objectives
Systemic goals exist for mathematics within the framework of state assessments and local
assessments. Targets for achievement on the PARCC assessments are listed below as well as
targets for achievement within the local assessment platform.
PARCC-Specific Goals
Using a five-year PARCC target model, elementary math will achieve annual increases
for each student group with 10 or more students.
2014-2015 baseline: FCPS will cut the gap in half from baseline to 100%; Target student
groups: FCPS will cut the gap by three quarters.
Increase the percent of students who demonstrate growth by one performance level and
the percent of students who score four and five from 2014-2015 baseline.
Local Math Assessments
Reporting will occur for measurement of mastery of quarterly unit outcomes.
For grades 1 and 2, 80% of students will score 75% or better on mastered unit outcomes
for each benchmark (one through four) and/or demonstrate an increase from 2016 to
2017.
For grades 3-5, 70% of students will score 75% or better on mastered unit outcomes for
each benchmark (one through three) and/or demonstrate an increase from 2016 to
2017.
For each student group, there will be no more than a 10% gap in performance.
Overall Accomplishments
Based upon the available data, the following accomplishments are noted (see Table 28):
Over half of all test takers (52%) scored at levels four or five, which indicates a gain from
2016.
Seventy-nine percent of test-takers performed at a level three or higher which also
indicates a gain from 2016.
Across all elementary grades, a positive three-year trend is evident in PARCC math.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 85
Table 28. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) PARCC Performance 2015-2017
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Grade 3 77.1 78.2 80.4▲ 51.6 54.6 55.4▲
Grade 4 73.0 77.8 77.7▲ 43.9 53.3 49.8▲
Grade 5 75.0 77.3 77.7▲ 43.1 51.8 50.1▲
Grades 3-5 75.0 77.8 78.6▲ 46.3 53.2 51.7▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in elementary mathematics are consistent
with the overall goals and objectives for all FCPS students receiving special education services.
Accomplishments
Students with disabilities showed a growth of 8.3% points from 2015 to 2017. In addition, over
the past three years, increases are noted for each elementary grade in PARCC math (see
Table 29).
Table 29. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
3 4 5 3-5 3 4 5 3-5
2015 37.5 26.6 29.4 31.0 12.5 7.4 5.1 8.3
2016 39.3 37.4 31.2 35.9 16.5 13.1 11.0 13.4
2017 46.5▲ 36.5▲ 34.9▲ 39.3▲ 22.6▲ 12.4▲ 10.7▲ 15.2▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Table 30 shows the PARCC math grades 3-5 performance among students who have exited
special education services. Similar to students currently receiving special education services,
three-year PARCC trends are positive in each performance band. Of noteworthy, approximately
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 86
79% of students who exited special education services are approaching, meeting, and/or
exceeding expectations while 48% are meeting or exceeding expectations.
Table 30. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 3-5 Grades 3-5
2015 75.4 43.5
2016 76.6 46.0
2017 78.9▲ 47.6▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
One of the system goals is there will be no more than a 10% gap in performance for students
with disabilities compared to their nondisabled peers. The current gap that exists between the
top performing student group and students with disabilities far exceeds 10% (78.9% for all
students compared to 39.3% for students with disabilities).
Strategies or Changes
In order to become flexible mathematical thinkers, students need high quality core instruction
and, if necessary, intervention. The first steps to improving student achievement is to ensure
that all students have access to high quality instruction and interventions based on best
practices, data, and content knowledge. Communication is also an essential skill for success.
Strong oral and written communication skills are critical in today's workplace.
The FCPS Elementary Math Workgroup will identify key elements of high quality mathematics
instruction. These elements will align with best practices and will be implemented with fidelity
across all elementary schools. They also require a strong professional learning system for
teachers and ongoing monitoring of implementation across elementary schools.
The ultimate purpose of this workgroup is to equip each and every student to be an empowered
learner and an engaged citizen, to achieve a positive impact in the local and global community.
The focus will be two pronged, to increase academic success of struggling learners as they
navigate the rigorous content standards and educate imaginative learners who grasp concepts
and have the ability and willingness to investigate ideas and solve real-life problems.
Additionally, the workgroup will equip teachers in individual schools to maintain commitment to
high expectations of students; create personalized learning environments; collaborate with other
teachers within the school and the surrounding community; and encourage effective teaching by
means of active inquiry and in-depth learning.
FCPS will provide professional learning opportunities for one special education teacher per
elementary school to further develop their understanding of the mathematics standards along
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 87
with the elementary math instructional leaders at each school. This collaboration will provide
special educators and elementary math instructional leaders an opportunity to learn about the
standards and discuss how the standards connect to their work in intervention, classroom
instruction, and specialized instruction.
The workgroup will meet at least five times per school year to research and determine best
practices to ensure struggling learners have access to additional time for high quality instruction
and interventions. The workgroup will then identify approximately five to six schools across all
levels to field test implementation guidelines.
(Costs: restricted, #84-027A, Narrowing Achievement Gap, $23,973)
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in elementary mathematics. Refer to Global Strategies or Changes in
the Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for EL students in elementary mathematics are consistent with the
overall goals and objectives for all FCPS EL students. In short, EL students need to meet the
same achievement standards as all other students. In addition, specific PARCC and local
assessment goals are described in Overall Goals and Objectives for PARCC Mathematics
Grades 3-5.
Accomplishments
Significant gaps for ELs remain related to the PARCC assessment performance. Overall, only
35.3% of all EL students scored earned a proficiency level of 3-5 on recent PARCC results (see
Table 31).
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 88
Table 31. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
3 4 5 3-5 3 4 5 3-5
2015 43.9 17.8 18.8 31.5 13.2 5.9 2.5 9.0
2016 46.6 35.4 19.8 38.5 17.4 7.1 4.7 12.4
2017 51.7▲ 19.3▲ 13.8▼ 35.3▲ 18.5▲ 3.7▼ 1.3▼ 11.0▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
However, the performance of the exited EL student group shows progress in comparison to
those currently receiving EL services (see Table 32). In several elementary schools, this
student group actually outperformed a number of other groups on the PARCC assessment.
Table 32. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 3-5 Grades 3-5
2015 74.5 41.1
2016 70.5 41.8
2017 73.4▼ 33.8▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Significant achievement gaps remain for the EL group. Research states that ELs typically learn
conversational English within one to two years; however, academic language/vocabulary skills
take five to seven years on average to achieve success at grade level in English. EL students
with interrupted or no formal schooling can take seven to ten years to reach grade level English
language literacy. This data holds true regardless of the student’s home language, country of
origin, and socioeconomic status. In order for FCPS to reduce the current achievement gap for
EL students, EL staff and mainstream instructors will need to work collaboratively, with a sense
of urgency, to narrow the current gap.
Success on PARCC assessments can be a challenge for EL students who experienced very
little to none (or interrupted) formal schooling prior to FCPS enrollment. PARCC assessments
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 89
require strong academic vocabulary skills in the assessed area. EL students with lack of formal
schooling can take several years to reach grade level English language literacy.
Strategies or Changes
Phase II of SIOP finished last year; FCPS will begin the next wave of SIOP implementation at
specific schools. The SIOP Model is a research-based and validated model of sheltered
instruction that has been widely and successfully used across the U.S. for over 15 years.
Professional learning in the SIOP Model helps content area teachers plan and deliver lessons
that allow English learners to acquire academic knowledge as they develop English language
proficiency.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among EL students in
elementary mathematics; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English
Proficiency section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress
among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Progress on Access for ELLs
See Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 in Limited English Proficiency section.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards Meeting State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
Systemic goals exist for all students for mathematics within the framework of state assessments
and local assessments. Targets for achievement on the PARCC assessments and targets for
achievement within the local assessment platform are described in Overall Goals and
Objectives for PARCC Mathematics Grades 3-5.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 90
Accomplishments
Based on the review of data (see Table 33), overall accomplishments among students failing to
meet or make progress towards state performance standards in PARCC grades 3-5 math for
the 2016-17 school year are noted below:
More than 60% of FARM, Hispanic/Latino, black/African American, and two or more
races scored within levels 3-5 (60.1%, 64.7%, 63.6% and 78.7%, respectively).
Approximately 91% of Asians, having the highest student group performance, scored
with levels 3-5.
A gap of 15% or less exists between all students and black/African American and
Hispanic/Latino student groups.
All student groups—American Indian, black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, Pacific
Islander, two or more races, white, FARM, students with disabilities—with the exception
of the EL student group, showed evidence of an increasing trend from 2015 to 2017.
Table 33. PARCC Elementary Math (Grades 3-5) Performance (2017) RACE/ETHNICITY AND SPECIAL SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 3-5 Grades 3-5
All Students 78.6 51.7
American Indian 80.5 51.2
Asian 90.5 70.9
Black/African American 63.6 32.4
Pacific Islander 77.8 51.9
Hispanic/Latino 64.7 33.4
Two or More Races 78.7 51.6
White 84.2 58.8
EL 35.3 11.0
FARM 60.1 29.0
Special Education 39.3 15.2
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 91
Challenges
Based upon available PARCC data and school-based discussions, challenges and barriers for students failing to meet standards can be related to the following root causes:
Procedural fluency;
Making sense of problems, story problems, two and three step problems;
Fraction/decimal/percent connections and equivalences;
Place value—number base ten, rule of 10;
Reasoning—concept of quantity, context of number, ability to critique/defend;
Early number sense skills—jumping decades, number sequences, flexibility in composition
and decomposition of number;
Math vocabulary and language;
Organizing data, pictures, writing, equations, etc.;
Perseverance with tasks;
Test taking skills—phobias, lack of precision;
Organizing and showing work—manipulative and visual modeling; and
Use of strategies within the operations and algebraic thinking domain.
Strategies or Changes
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students, including
special populations; see the Executive Summary. In the 2017-18 school year, the elementary
math specialist group is underway providing the structure for growth changes and strategies.
Continue focus on curricular framework established based upon Sinek and DuFour’s work
(the what, the why, and the how; and how it pertains to curriculum design).
Develop Curriculum Now homepage to identify framework, math proficiency, the
instructional block, etc.
Continue to establish the common understandings of the “what” and “how do we know.”
Proceed with unit and quarter unpacks in order develop deep conceptual understanding.
Continue to model response to data professional learning opportunities based upon state
and local data.
Facilitate an EMS book study using Hattie’s Visible Learning for Mathematics.
Facilitate collaborative professional learning opportunities within the system to include a
core math team per building. The core team includes members of school staffs critical to
special education and EL student groups.
Continue the structure within the elementary math instructional leader (EMIL) program—
EMIL Leadership Team (ELT).
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 92
Focus EMIL curricular work using a work team model with teams established to support
initiatives and growth opportunities. Team charges are directed by the curriculum specialist
for elementary mathematics, the teacher specialist for elementary mathematics, the ELT and
the EMS group related to the curriculum structure, the Curriculum Now website and
professional learning.
The ever-present implied rationale for such work is to build teacher capacity which results in
student achievement. The rationale for the comprehensive work team strategy is found
within the charge of such group (see Table 34).
Table 34. Elementary Math—Curricular Work Teams
Grade Level Work Team
Tasks
Charge/Rationale Timeline
Quarterly Assessment
Refine, revise quarterly assessments for grades 1-5 for determining growth towards target.
Per timeline established
Unit Formatives Develop form B of unit formatives for each unit grades 1-5 for the purpose of monitoring progress and informing instruction. Refine, revise existing form A unit formatives.
Establish timeline for delivery within unit window
Instructional Strategy Guide
Update site documents on Curriculum NOW to include and focus work on pedagogical resources; particularly video clips.
Per ending of each quarter
Home School Connection Resources
Refine and re-construct grade level curriculum pamphlets. Prepare for family/community events (e.g., Math Nights). Update FCPS.org parent resource site. All charges designed to support parents as “first teachers.”
Per event timeframe-Ongoing
Resource Development
Update FCPS.org. Develop a recommended classroom inventory by grade. Create technology resource page. All charges designed to support teacher and parent accessibility to curricular information.
Ongoing
Response and Advocacy Statements
Respond to current topics, issues, concerns. Provide advocacy and visionary statements when necessary in order to clarify and provide directions in process and procedures.
As-needed
Tables 35 and 36 provides the additional strategies (including rationale, associated resources,
and timelines for monitoring progress) that are being implemented in the elementary math
program to ensure student progress.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 93
Table 35. Elementary Math—Additional Strategies and Resources
Strategies Charge/Rationale Timeline
Professional learning opportunities for intervention teachers
Provide interventionists with professional learning opportunities to support growth and understanding of the “learner,” the resources, curriculum, etc.
Monthly
Tier 1 curricular materials within site
Provide general educators access to materials that enable them to respond to struggling students.
Annually
Extended learning opportunities (ELOs)
Provide before or after school math sessions for accelerating achievement towards standards.
Annually
Math intervention opportunities
Provide pull-out or push-in services to children identified at school level. Identification based upon multiple measures (PARCC, local assessments, teacher ranking, etc.).
Establish timeline for delivery within unit window
What Now—Intervention Team- Subgroup
(Math Inventory resources)
Field-test Math Inventory in three schools. Provide parameters for evidence-based instructional programs. Stabilize math structure/block within full day schedule. Charges designed to provide quality extended learning opportunities.
School year 2016-17
Pursue research based interventions
Update current resource pool containing Math Navigator and Dreambox with resources to support an evidence-based instructional practice approach.
Per ending of each quarter
Table 36. Elementary Math—Resource Allocations
Resource Allocation Funding Source of Funding
Local MSDE 3 credit math courses
FCPS professional learning budget—to be determined based upon enrollment
Unrestricted
Summer curricular workshops
FCPS Curriculum Instruction and Innovation Department funding ($25,488)
Unrestricted
School-based Elementary Math Specialist monthly professional learning meetings
FCPS elementary math budget ($36,088) Unrestricted
Materials of instruction and text
FCPS elementary math budget ($23,150) Unrestricted
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 94
P ARCC MAT HEMATI CS Grad es 6-8
Overall Goals and Objectives
The middle school mathematics program offers students strong academic preparation for
success in high school and future careers. Students learn important Pre-Algebra and Algebra 1
skills and concepts. They also continue to master skills in:
Ratio and proportional relationships.
The number systems.
Expression and equations.
Geometry.
Patterns and functions.
Statistics.
Probability.
Additionally, students build skills in the following mathematical practices:
Make sense of problems and
persevere in solving them.
Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
Construct viable arguments and
critique the reasoning of others.
Model with mathematics.
Use appropriate tools strategically.
Attend to precision.
Look for and make use of structure.
Look for and express regularity in
repeated reasoning.
Overall Accomplishments
One measure of student achievement is the results of the PARCC assessment. PARCC was
first administered in math in 2015. In 2017, 72% of students who took the PARCC assessment
in grades 6-8 combined performed at a level three or higher (n=8,650) (see Table 37).
As shown in Table 37, a positive three-year trend is evident in PARCC math grades 6, 7, and 8
when analyzing the results for both performance bands, 3-5 and 4-5. Some variation in
achievement is evident between the different grades. Students in grade 7 yielded the best
results with three-quarters (75.3%) of students performing at a level three or higher in 2017 (see
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 95
Table 37 below). Students in grade 6 had similar but slightly lower results with 73.6%
performing at a level three of higher. For grade 8, approximately 66% of students performed at a
level three or higher.
Table 37. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance 2015-2017
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Grade 6 72.7 75.7 73.6▲ 41.1 47.2 45.7▲
Grade 7 71.3 74.3 75.3▲ 35.9 41.8 42.7▲
Grade 8 59.0 62.8 66.3▲ 26.0 34.1 37.2▲
Grades 6-8 68.3 71.4 72.0▲ 35.0 41.5 42.2▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The middle school mathematics program gives all students, including students with learning
disabilities, strong academic preparation for success in high school and future careers. Students
learn important Pre-Algebra and Algebra 1 skills and concepts. They also continue to master
skills in Algebra, pattern and functions, geometry, measurement, statistics, probability, and
number relationships and computation.
Accomplishments
Approximately one-fifth (21% in each of the
last three years) of students receiving special
education services performed at a level three
or higher on PARCC math among middle
school students. These students comprise
approximately 10% of middle school students.
While the performance of student with
disabilities is low, three-year trends
demonstrate small increases in grades 7 and
8 for performance band 3-5 and grades 6 and
9 for performance band 4-5 (see Table 38).
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 96
Table 38. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
6 7 8 6-8 6 7 8 6-8
2015 22.8 22.2 17.7 21.0 6.2 7.3 ≤5 5.6
2016 24.4 20.1 17.8 20.8 7.2 7.4 5.7 6.8
2017 18.3▼ 25.3▲ 19.2▲ 20.9▼ 6.9▲ 7.1▼ 6.3▲ 6.8▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Table 39 shows the PARCC elementary math performance among students who have exited
special education services. Of noteworthy, half of students who exited special education
services are approaching, meeting, and/or exceeding expectations.
Table 39. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 6-8 Grades 6-8
2015 52.3 18.3
2016 55.2 21.0
2017 50.0▼ 17.5▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Students receiving special education services demonstrate weak results on the middle school
PARCC mathematics tests. In 2017, only 21% of these students (n=858) earned a score of
three or higher. This is essentially the same result that FCPS has seen over the past three
years. The 2017 results represent a gap of over 50% when compared with the entire test-taking
population; and an even higher gap of 58.1% with the non-disabled, test-taking population.
Students receiving special education services comprise about ten percent of the middle school
test-taking population.
Strategies or Changes
Mathematics intervention classes are available to middle school students who are significantly
below grade level in terms of demonstrated content knowledge. Teachers of mathematics
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 97
intervention classes in middle schools attend four professional development days each year.
Substitute funds are provided by the SASI department for math intervention professional
learning.
Collaboration meetings are held four times in the school year to address the needs of special
education students who struggle with mathematics. Attendees to these meetings are school
mathematics teachers, school administrators, school special education teachers, and central
office leaders in mathematics. These meetings provide professional learning to school staff with
the intent of addressing the special academic needs of students of students with learning
disabilities. These meetings provide substitute funds to the schools and these funds are
provided by the central office.
Secondary mathematics professional learning days occur two times over the course of the
school year: once in August and once in October. These meetings provide information to
teachers regarding instructional strategies and resources (digital and otherwise). These
meetings are attended by all secondary mathematics teachers and are part of their regular work
schedule over the course of the school year. No additional funding is required for these two
meetings regarding substitutes (no need for substitutes), workshop pay (meetings occur during
the school day), nor materials.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in secondary mathematics; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in
the Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The middle school mathematics
program gives all students—
including students with limited
English proficiency—strong
academic preparation for success
in high school and future careers.
Students learn important Pre-
Algebra and Algebra 1 skills and
concepts. They also continue to
master skills in Algebra, pattern
and functions, geometry,
measurement, statistics,
probability, and number
relationships and computation.
Accomplishments
Students receiving EL services demonstrate weak results on the middle school PARCC
mathematics tests. In 2017, only 10% of these students (n=249) earned a score of three or
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 98
higher. This is essentially the same result that FCPS has seen from this subgroup over the past
three years—10% in 2015, 13% in 2016, 10% in 2017 (see Table 40).
Table 40. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grade Grade
6 7 8 6-8 6 7 8 6-8
2015 10.5 9.2 9.6 9.8 ≤5 -- ≤5 ≤5
2016 14.3 12.3 12.5 13.0 ≤5 ≤5 ≤5 ≤5
2017 3.3▼ 9.1▼ 18.5▲ 10.0▲ ≤5▼ -- ≤5▲ ≤5▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
The performance of the exited EL student group shows progress over time when looking at
performance levels 4-5 (see Table 41). In addition, approximately 46% of the exited EL student
group approaching, meeting, and/or exceeding expectations on PARCC math grades 6-8.
Table 41. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (SY 2015-2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 6-8 Grades 6-8
2015 56.4 11.5
2016 49.6 16.3
2017 45.9▼ 18.8▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
Significant achievement gaps remain for the EL group. The 2017 results represent a gap of over
60 percentage points (62) when compared with the entire test-taking population; a slightly
higher gap of 64.2 percentage points with the non-EL test-taking population. Students receiving
EL services comprise less than three percent (2.9%) of the middle school test-taking population.
Research states that ELs typically learn conversational English within one to two years;
however, academic language/vocabulary skills take five to seven years on average to achieve
success at grade level in English. EL students with interrupted or no formal schooling can take
seven to ten years to reach grade level English language literacy. This data holds true
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 99
regardless of the student’s home language, country of origin, and socioeconomic status. In
order for FCPS to reduce the current achievement gap for EL students, EL staff and mainstream
instructors will need to work collaboratively, with a sense of urgency, to narrow the current gap.
Success on PARCC assessments can be a challenge for EL students who experienced very
little to none (or interrupted) formal schooling prior to FCPS enrollment. PARCC assessments
require strong academic vocabulary skills in the assessed area. EL students with lack of formal
schooling can take several years to reach grade level English language literacy.
Strategies or Changes
Phase II of SIOP finished last year; FCPS will begin the next wave of SIOP implementation at
specific schools. The SIOP model is a research-based and validated model of sheltered
instruction that has been widely and successfully used across the U.S. for over 15 years.
Professional learning in the SIOP Model helps content area teachers plan and deliver lessons
that allow ELs to acquire academic knowledge as they develop English language proficiency.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among EL students in
secondary mathematics; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English
Proficiency section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress
among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Progress on Access for ELLs
See Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 in Limited English Proficiency section.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards Meeting State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
The middle school mathematics program gives all students—including students who have failed
to meet or make progress towards state performance standards—strong academic preparation
for success in high school and future careers. Students learn important Pre-Algebra and
Algebra 1 skills and concepts. They also continue to master skills in Algebra, pattern and
functions, geometry, measurement, statistics, probability, and number relationships and
computation.
Accomplishments
One measure of students failing to meet or make progress towards state performance
standards is the results of the assessment known as the PARCC. This assessment is taken by
students in grades 6-8. It was administered for the first time in 2015 for mathematics. Of the
students taking PARCC math in grades 6-8, 72% performed at a level three or higher while
approximately 42% performed at a level four or higher (see Table 42).
Students who earn a level of “2” on this test are considered to have only partially met
expectations, and students who earn a level of “1” on this test are considered to have not yet
met expectations. In 2017, 28.0% of students in grades 6-8 (combined) earned a one or two on
their respective PARCC mathematics test.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 100
Table 42. PARCC Middle School Math (Grades 6-8) Performance (2017) RACE/ETHNICITY AND SPECIAL SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Grades 6-8 Grades 6-8
All Students 72.0 42.2
American Indian 65.0 40.0
Asian 91.2 70.1
Black/African American
54.4 22.0
Pacific Islander 73.3 53.3
Hispanic/Latino 56.2 27.4
Two or More Races 69.5 38.7
White 78.1 47.7
EL 10.0 1.2
FARM 50.1 19.3
Special Education 20.9 6.8
Challenges
Among middle school students who scored a one or two on the PARCC mathematics test
(n=2,422), 48.5% were white, 19.4% were black/African American, and 24.2% were
Hispanic/Latino. Additionally, 1.0% were in the EL group, 28.0% were students with disabilities
and 45.1% were students receiving FARM.
Strategies or Changes
Mathematics intervention classes are available to middle school students who are significantly
below grade level in terms of demonstrated content knowledge. Teachers of mathematics
intervention classes in middle schools attend four professional development days each year.
Substitute funds are provided for this purpose from the SASI department.
Secondary mathematics professional learning days occur two times over the course of the
school year: once in August and once in October. These meetings provide information to
teachers regarding instructional strategies and resources (digital and otherwise). These
meetings are attended by all secondary mathematics teachers and are part of their regular work
schedule over the course of the school year. No additional funding is required for these two
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 101
meetings regarding substitutes (no need for substitutes), workshop pay (meetings occur during
the school day), nor materials.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students, including
special populations, in the Executive Summary. In addition, systemic strategies are being
implemented to ensure progress among all students, including special populations; see the
Executive Summary.
P ARCC ALGEBRA 1
Overall Goals and Objectives
The secondary mathematics program includes and goes beyond the oft-considered
mathematical content of mere manipulation of numbers via addition, subtraction, multiplication,
and division. High school math teachers use a variety of instructional resources and technology
to help students communicate, reason, think critically, look for and identify patterns, persevere
in solving problems, construct viable arguments, critique the reasoning of others, and become
lifelong learners. It is these skills that will help students be successful and productive citizens
who can use mathematics in their daily lives.
The high school mathematics program:
Provides instruction in Algebra 1,
Geometry, and Algebra 2;
Encourages students to select electives
from a wide range of courses, such as
Advanced Algebra with Trigonometry,
Contemporary Mathematics, Pre-
Calculus, and Statistics and Probability;
Provides opportunities for advanced,
honors-level study in courses, such as
AP Calculus I and II, Calculus III, AP
Statistics, IB Math Methods and Studies, as well as other college courses; and
Encourages students to participate in curricular activities inside and outside the classroom
such as science fair and internships.
Additionally, students build skills in the following mathematical practices:
Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.
Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
Model with mathematics.
Use appropriate tools strategically.
Attend to precision.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 102
Look for and make use of structure.
Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.
Overall Accomplishments
First administered in mathematics in 2015, PARCC is one measure of student achievement in
Algebra 1. Results from the PARCC administrations continue to show an increase in
performance in Algebra 1. In 2015, approximately 72% of students (n=3,962) taking PARCC
Algebra 1 performed at a level three or higher (see Table 43). In 2017, approximately 80% of
students (n=3,226) who took the PARCC Algebra 1 assessment performed at a level three or
higher. This positive trend is also evident when looking at PARCC performance levels 4-5—
approximately 44% in 2015 to 60% in 2017.
It is important to note that there is great variation in achievement among students in different
grades taking PARCC Algebra 1. For example, in 2017, the majority (87%) of PARCC Algebra 1
test-takers are in grade 9 (n=2,280) or a lower grade (grade 7-8; n=528). Among this group of
students, approximately 86% performed at a level three or higher in 2017 (see Table 43).
Among students who took the PARCC Algebra 1 test in grade 10 or higher (n=415; 13% of test-
takers), approximately 43% performed at a level three or higher in 2017.
Table 43. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance 2015-2017
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
All Grades 71.7 76.5 80.3▲ 43.9 50.9 59.6▲
Grades 7-8 99.7 99.8 99.6▼ 96.0 97.6 98.7▲
Grades 7-9 77.7 83.8 85.8▲ 53.4 58.7 66.0▲
Grades 9-12 66.5 72.4 76.6▲ 34.3 42.5 51.9▲
Grades 10-12 57.7 44.1 43.3▼ 21.6 15.9 16.3▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goal of secondary mathematics is that there is no more than a 10% gap in performance for
students with disabilities when compared to their peers.
Accomplishments
In the last three administration years, approximately 9-10% of students taking PARCC Algebra 1
are students with IEPs. In 2017, 41% of students with disabilities taking PARCC Algebra 1
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 103
(n=315) performed at a level three or higher (see Table 44). This represents a significant
increase from the 2015 PARCC Algebra 1 results where 32% of students with disabilities taking
PARCC Algebra 1 (n=386) performed at a level three or higher.
Table 44. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015–2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
All Grades All Grades
2015 32.1 9.8
2016 40.3 15.3
2017 40.6▲ 15.2▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Table 45 shows the PARCC Algebra 1 performance among students who have exited special
education services. Of noteworthy, half of students who exited special education services are
approaching, meeting, and/or exceeding expectations, and 30% are meeting or exceeding
expectations.
Table 45. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015–2017) STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
All Grades All Grades
2015 57.6 22.0
2016 70.0 40.0
2017 51.9▼ 29.6▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
Challenges
While it is encouraging that the PARCC Algebra 1 results have greatly improved over the last
three years, a significant achievement gap between students with disabilities and those not
receiving special education services still remains.
Students receiving special education services are tested on the same content as their non-
disabled peers and the scoring regime is the same. Students with disabilities often find it difficult
to keep pace with their non-disabled peers. As a result, many of these students may not master
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 104
the content as readily. Over time, a lack of mastery of learning content makes it difficult for
students in this student group to maintain grade-level performance status.
Strategies or Changes
In the 2017-18 school year, FCPS secondary math curriculum specialists will create a
professional learning course or “experience” for current (and interested) high school Algebra 1
teachers. To aid in the development of the course, input from will be obtained from current high
school Algebra 1 teacher leaders. The course will focus on effective and rigorous instructional
methods specific to the teaching of Algebra 1. Secondary math curriculum specialists will
supervise the course and it will be administered throughout the school year.
During this time, the teacher participants will receive instruction and will implement the ideas
and strategies in their Algebra 1 classrooms. The teacher participants will focus their efforts on
addressing the individual needs of all students. Achievement results from local (Algebra 1
benchmark exams) and state-level (PARCC Algebra 1) assessments will provide data on the
results of this professional learning experience.
The total cost for the creation and administration of the course is approximately $25,500
(unrestricted)—$18,000 for teacher-leaders who be instructors/mentors for the course (i.e.,
costs for substitutes, workshop, and salary) and $7,500 for materials and equipment.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students with disabilities
in secondary mathematics; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Special Education
section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all
students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 105
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for EL students in secondary mathematics are consistent with the
overall goals and objectives for all FCPS EL students.
Accomplishments
In both 2016 and 2017, approximately 4% of PARCC Algebra 1 test-takers in 2017 were EL
students. In 2017, only about one in four (24%) of EL students performed at a level three or
higher on the PARCC Algebra 1 assessment (see Table 46). This represents a decrease from
the 2016 PARCC Algebra 1 results in which 33% of EL students performed at level three or
higher. Given the small group size (<5% of the total population), it is common to have more
extreme achievement results from year to year.
Table 46. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015–2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
All Grades All Grades
2015 32.8 7.5
2016 32.8 9.6
2017 24.1▼ 8.6▲
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
However, it is important to note that more than half of students who exited EL services and took
PARCC Algebra 1 performed at a level three or higher over the past three years—approximately
67% in 2015, 62% in 2016, and 56% in 2017 (see Table 47). The percent who performed at a
level 4-5 were approximately 44% in 2015, 31% in 2016, and 31% in 2017.
Table 47. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2015–2017) ENGLISH LEARNERS—EXITED SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
All Grades All Grades
2015 66.7 44.4
2016 61.5 30.8
2017 56.3▼ 31.3▼
▲ or ▼ denotes increase or decrease in three-year trend, 2015 to 2017
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 106
Challenges
In 2017, EL students were the lowest performing (levels 3-5, 24.1%; levels 4-5, 8.6%) among all
racial/ethnic and special services student groups. This trend is also evident in previous
administrations. It is less than one-third of the achievement level of the full population of PARCC
Algebra 1 participants (80%) and is more than 30% lower than students who receive FARM.
EL students are tested on the same content as all other students and scored in the same
manner as all other students; EL students also must take mainstream assessments after only
one year in the United States. In addition, approximately 25% of EL students attending high
school have limited or interrupted formal schooling upon enrolling in FCPS. Therefore, success
on PARCC assessments is a very difficult challenge for this student group. PARCC
assessments require strong academic vocabulary skills in the tested areas like Algebra.
Research (Thomas & Collier) states that ELs typically learn conversational English within one to
two years; however, academic vocabulary skills take five to seven years on average to achieve
success at grade level in English. EL students with interrupted or no formal schooling can take
seven to ten years to reach grade level English language literacy. This data holds true
regardless of the student’s home language, country of origin, and socioeconomic status.
Strategies or Changes
High school Algebra 1 teachers will have the opportunity to participate in a professional learning
course in the 2017-18 school year that will focus on effective and rigorous instructional methods
specific to teaching Algebra 1. Teachers will focus on their efforts on addressing the needs of all
students, including EL students. Additional details about this course are provided above; see
Strategies or Changes in the PARCC Algebra 1, Special Education section.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among EL students in
secondary math; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English Proficiency
section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all
students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Progress on Access for ELLs
See Progress on ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 in Limited English Proficiency section.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students failing to meet or make progress towards state
performance standards in secondary mathematics are consistent with the overall goals and
objectives for all FCPS students in secondary math.
Students performing at level three or below on the PARCC Algebra 1 assessment struggle to
understand the mathematical concepts sufficiently to demonstrate this understanding. They lack
the acquisition of the mathematical practices which include:
Making sense of problems.
Perseverance in solving problems.
Reasoning abstractly and quantitatively.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 107
Constructing viable arguments.
Modeling with mathematics.
Attending to precision.
Making use of math structure.
Expressing regularity in repeated reasoning.
It is the goal of FCPS secondary math to help teachers to impart these mathematical practices
to students so that students can build their abilities in these practices.
Accomplishments
From 2015 to 2017, an increase in performance on the PARCC Algebra 1 assessment can be
noted for all student groups when looking at performance levels 4-5 and all student groups
except EL students when looking at levels 3-5 (see Table 48).
Table 48. PARCC Algebra 1 Performance (2017) RACE/ETHNICITY AND SPECIAL SERVICES
Levels 3-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
Levels 4-5 (% OF STUDENTS)
All Grades
7-8 Grades
9-12 All
Grades 7-8
Grades 9-12
All Students 80.3 ≥95 76.6 59.6 ≥95 51.9
American Indian 69.2 ≥95 66.7 38.5 ≥95 33.3
Asian 91.8 ≥95 84.4 83.0 ≥95 67.8
Black/African American
63.5 ≥95 61.1 33.5 ≥95 29.2
Pacific Islander 75.0 - 75.0 50.0 - 50.0
Hispanic/Latino 64.4 ≥95 61.6 41.3 ≥95 36.9
Two or More Races
81.9 ≥95 78.5 61.4 ≥95 53.3
White 86.1 ≥95 83.2 66.8 ≥95 59.9
EL 24.1 - 24.1 8.6 - 8.6
FARM 57.8 - 55.8 31.6 94.1 28.6
Special Education
40.6 - 40.1 15.2 - 14.4
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 108
Challenges
Despite overall successes, achievement gaps in race/ethnicity and special services remains.
FCPS had 634 students (approximately 20% of the test-taking population) that performed at a
level three or lower on the PARCC Algebra 1 test. FCPS had five student groups that
demonstrated achievement lower than 80% (proficiency rating of all students performing at
levels 3-5)—black/African American (63.5%), Hispanic/Latino (64.4%), students receiving FARM
(57.8%), students with disabilities (40.6%), and EL students (25%). When examining proficiency
at levels 4-5 (59.6% for all students), similar patterns exist among the same five student groups.
Approximately 86% of white students performed at a level three or higher on PARCC Algebra 1,
which was higher than the overall test-taking student population. However, only about two-thirds
(64%) of the black/African and Hispanic/Latino students combined performed similarly. For
black/African and Hispanic/Latino students combined, this represents a 9% increase from 2016
results (54.8% vs 64.0%). However, in comparison to white students, the gap remained nearly
unchanged (21.8% gap in 2016 vs. 22.1% gap in 2017).
Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino students comprise about one-quarter (26%) of the
students who took the PARCC Algebra 1 assessment. Of similar concern is the gap between
students receiving FARM (n=737) and students who do not receive these services (57.8% vs.
87.0%), a gap of nearly 30 percentage points.
Among this group, one-third (33%) received FARM and 30% received special education
services. Nearly half (48%) of this group were black/African American or Hispanic/Latino
students and 45% were white.
Strategies and Changes
As mentioned previously, high school Algebra 1 teachers will have the opportunity to participate
in a professional learning course in the 2017-18 school year that will focus on effective and
rigorous instructional methods specific to teaching Algebra 1. Efforts will focus on addressing
the individual needs of all students, including underperforming students.
In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students,
including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
P ARCC ALGEBRA 2 ( O p t i o n a l R e p o r t i n g )
The goals and objectives for Algebra 2 are similar to those of Algebra 1. In addition to MSDE’s
graduation assessment requirements, Maryland law requires all students to take an assessment
by the end of grade 11 to determine if the student is college and career ready. The first year that
Maryland set forth this requirement was in 2015-16. Thus, to ensure that all students were
offered a free assessment to meet the state CCR requirement, all students taking Algebra 2 in
2015-16 or later were offered to take the PARCC Algebra 2 assessment (if CCR was not by
other means, such as SAT, ACT, Accuplacer or AP scores). This means that not all FCPS
students took PARCC Algebra 2 in the 2016-17 school year. However, beginning in the 2017-18
school year, Algebra 2 will no longer be administered to students who are not college and
career ready. Instead, all students in grade 11 will be offered the SAT (without the essay) in
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 109
math at no cost to the student. This opportunity will replace the PARCC Algebra 2 assessment
for juniors. It is important to note that even though PARCC Algebra 2 will be eliminated for grade
11 students, PARCC Algebra 2 will still be required for students who took Algebra 1 in middle
school. This is to meet ESSA requirements that students are assessed every year in grades 3-8
and then once in high school.
P ARCC GE OMETRY ( O p t i o n a l R e p o r t i n g )
Students taking the Geometry course develop mathematical skills and reasoning abilities
needed for problem solving; demonstrate the processes of mathematics by making connections
and applying reasoning to solve problems and to communicate their findings; choose
appropriate technological tools to solve problems, and demonstrate positive attitudes towards
mathematics in school, culture, and society.
Instruction is based on the MCCRS and student assessments are aligned to these standards.
Such assessments include frequent, formative assessments that help students and teachers to
judge the level of student understanding of concepts during the learning process, and
summative assessments that help students and teachers to measure the level of procedural and
conceptual understanding.
The Geometry course utilizes skills from mathematics classes taken in previous school years,
including Algebra 1, and it prepares students for future mathematics classes such as Algebra 2
and Pre-Calculus.
Similar to PARCC English 11 and Algebra 2, PARCC Geometry will no longer be offered to
grade 11 students as juniors will be offered the SAT in math to meet CCR requirements.
However, to meet ESSA requirements of being assessed at least once in high school, PARCC
Geometry will be offered to students who took Geometry in middle school.
MSA SCIE NCE GRADE 5
The FCPS elementary science vision states, “Teachers have the resources and knowledge they
need to teach science. Students are engaged in meaningful scientific investigations and look
forward to science every day.”
Overall Goals and Objectives
FCPS’ elementary science program aims to ensure that students learn science through
investigations and experiments, reading, technology, and problem solving. The overall goal for a
quality science education (Taking Science to School, National Research Council, 2007) is to
develop student proficiency in:
Knowing, using, and interpreting scientific explanations of the natural world (disciplinary coreideas and crosscutting concepts);
Generating and evaluating scientific evidence and explanations (practices);
Participating productively in scientific practices and discourse (practices); and
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 110
Understanding the nature and development of scientific knowledge (practices and cross-cutting concepts).
In support of classroom instruction, FCPS’ Earth and Space Science Laboratory (ESSL)
(https://education.fcps.org/essl/) provides an extension and/or enrichment to the elementary
science curriculum. All students in grades 1-5 visit the ESSL during the school year in
connection with their earth/space science unit. In addition, the FCPS Science Center also
supports instruction of life science units by delivering a variety of living organisms in the
classroom. Students in grade 5 also participate in field-based experiences facilitated through the
FCPS Outdoor School Program (http://education.fcps.org/outdoorschoolfcps/) where classroom
investigations are applied to real-world settings.
Overall Accomplishments
In the 2016-17 school year, grade 5 science standards were aligned to the new Maryland State
Science Standards (MSSS). Four new kit-based units—life, earth, space, and physical
science—were developed. Professional learning activities associated with this curriculum were
provided to each grade 5 teacher. These new units incorporate cross-cutting concepts,
disciplinary core ideas, and science and engineering practices around real-world topics. MSSS
standards support MSCCS in ELA and math. MSSS standards are “hands-on” as well as
“minds-on”. Students act like scientists in science classrooms and employ higher level thinking
strategies. The new units were also created using UDL. Students in grade 5 field-tested the new
Maryland Integrated Science Assessment (MISA) in the spring of 2017.
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in elementary science are consistent with
the overall goals and objectives for all FCPS students receiving special education services. The
MSSS were written with the intent of reaching all students. FCPS science is consistent with that
vision. Elementary school science standards are taught to all students who receive instruction in
all standards. UDL was used as curriculum units were developed.
Accomplishments
The MISA Grade 5 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Challenges
The MISA Grade 5 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Strategies and Changes
Grade 5 teachers received professional development and new hands-on, kit-based units of
instruction during the 2016-17 school year. 2017-18 will be the second year of implementation
of science curriculum aligned to the MSSS. Hands-on, kit-based units of instruction aligned to
the MSSS will be provided for each classroom at grades 3 and 4. These new curricular
resources are being created and distributed to assist teachers in reaching all students. Each
grade 3 and grade 4 teacher received a half day of professional development in August 2017
that will focus on implementing the new curriculum and differentiating instruction for all students
(unrestricted costs).
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 111
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in elementary science; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the
Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for EL students in elementary science are consistent with the overall
goals and objectives for all FCPS EL students. The MSSS were written with the intent of
reaching all students. FCPS science is consistent with that vision. Elementary school science
standards are taught to all students who receive
instruction in all standards. UDL was used as
curriculum units were developed.
Accomplishments
The MISA Grade 5 was a field test in 2016-17
and no data are currently available.
Challenges
The MISA Grade 5 was a field test in 2016-17
and no data are currently available.
Strategies and Changes
The same strategies are being implemented for
EL students as students with disabilities in terms
of professional development and new curricular
resources aligned to MSSS. Refer to Strategies
and Changes under Special Education Students
in MSA Grade 5 for additional details.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to
ensure progress among EL students in
elementary science; refer to Global Strategies or
Changes in the Limited English Proficiency section. In addition, systemic strategies are being
implemented to ensure progress among all students, including special populations; see the
Executive Summary.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students failing to meet or make progress towards state
performance standards in elementary science are consistent with the overall goals and
objectives for all FCPS students in elementary science.
Accomplishments
The MISA Grade 5 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 112
Challenges
The MISA Grade 5 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Strategies and Changes
The same strategies are being implemented for underperforming students as EL students and
students with disabilities in terms of professional development and new curricular resources
aligned to MSSS. Refer to Strategies and Changes under Special Education Students or
Limited English Proficient Students in MSA Grade 5 for additional details.
In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students,
including those failing to meet or make progress towards state performance standards, in
elementary science; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English Proficiency
and Special Education sections; also see Executive Summary.
MSA SCIE NCE GRADE 8
Students learn science by acquiring knowledge and constructing explanations of natural
phenomena. Students test those explanations and communicate findings both in oral and
written forms. Through this process, students develop a deep understanding of science that
combines knowledge and facts with reasoning and critical thinking.
Overall Goals and Objectives
FCPS’ secondary science program, specific to middle school, aims to ensure students learn to
use and apply scientific knowledge through an array of science classes. Each grade level
science course in middle school is an integrated study of life, Earth, and physical sciences
through four overarching strands—change, movement, organization, and systems. Science and
engineering practices, disciplinary core ideas, and cross-cutting practices are integrated in all
modules to provide a comprehensive, hands-on laboratory experience in middle school science.
Students also participate in field-based experiences facilitated through the FCPS Outdoor
School Program (http://education.fcps.org/outdoorschoolfcps/) where classroom investigations
are applied to real-world settings.
The overall goal for a quality science education (Taking Science to School, National Research
Council, 2007) is to develop student proficiency in:
Knowing, using, and interpreting scientific explanations of the natural world (disciplinary core
ideas and crosscutting concepts);
Generating and evaluating scientific evidence and explanations (practices);
Participating productively in scientific practices and discourse (practices); and
Understanding the nature and development of scientific knowledge (practices and cross-
cutting concepts).
Overall Accomplishments
In the 2016-17 school year, all middle school science courses were aligned to the new science
standards, MSSS. Four new integrated modules were implemented in each of the three grades.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 113
The modules integrated the science and engineering practices, cross-cutting concepts, and
disciplinary core ideas of the MSSS. Students in eighth grade field tested the new MISA.
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in secondary science are consistent with
the overall goal and objectives for students with disabilities in FCPS. The MSSS were written
the intent of all students, all standards. FCPS science is consistent with that vision. Middle
school science classes are heterogeneously grouped and all students receive instruction in all
standards. UDL was used as curriculum modules were developed.
Accomplishments
The MISA Grade 8 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Challenges
The MISA Grade 8 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Strategies and Changes
In FCPS’ second implementation year of the science curriculum aligned to the MSSS, more
curricular resources are being created and distributed to assist teachers in reaching all students.
Local course benchmarks were field tested in 2016-17 and will be used in 2017-18 to assess
student progress. The benchmarks are administered via an online platform and mimic, to the
best of FCPS’ ability, the MISA. Local benchmarks will be analyzed this year in order to identify
underperforming groups. Each middle school grade level will be receiving one full-day of
professional development in the fall focused on implementing the new curriculum and
differentiating instruction for all students. The cost of this professional development is
unrestricted funding, substitute coverage in the amount of $3,000 per day.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in secondary science; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the
Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for EL students in secondary science are consistent with the overall
goals and objectives for all FCPS EL students. The MSSS were written the intent of all students,
all standards. FCPS science is consistent with that vision. Middle school science is
heterogeneously grouped and all students receive instruction in all standards. UDL was used as
curriculum modules were developed.
Accomplishments
The MISA Grade 8 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Challenges
The MISA Grade 8 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 114
Strategies and Changes
FCPS aligned its science curriculum with MSSS in accordance with MSDE expectations and in
preparation of the MISA. Local benchmarks will be analyzed this year in order to identify
underperforming groups. Professional development on implementing the new curriculum and
differentiating instruction for all students is planned for 2017-18 (unrestricted funding; substitute
coverage in the amount of $3,000 per day).
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all FCPS EL students in
secondary science; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English Proficiency
section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all
students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
FCPS’ goals and objectives for all students, including underperforming students, is to promote
academic growth and equity while reducing the achievement gap.
Accomplishments
The MISA Grade 8 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
Challenges
The MISA Grade 8 was a field test in 2016-17 and no data are currently available.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 115
Strategies and Changes
FCPS aligned its science curriculum with MSSS in accordance with MSDE expectations and in
preparation of the MISA. To accomplish this, FCPS has developed new curricular modules.
These new units incorporated cross-cutting concepts, disciplinary core ideas, and science and
engineering practices around real-world topics. MSSS standards support MSCCS in ELA and
math. MSSS standards are “hands-on” as well as “minds-on”. Students act like scientists in
science classrooms and employ higher level thinking strategies. The new units were also
created using UDL. All middle school science courses are aligned to the MSSS.
Local benchmarks will be analyzed this year in order to identify underperforming groups.
Professional development on implementing the new curriculum and differentiating instruction for
all students is planned for 2017-18 (unrestricted funding; substitute coverage in the amount of
$3,000 per day).
In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students,
including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
HSA BIOLOGY
High school students learn science by acquiring knowledge and constructing explanations of
natural phenomena and then testing explanations and communicating findings. This process
results in a deeper understanding of science that combines knowledge and facts with reasoning
and critical thinking. These student learning experiences incorporate a variety of instructional
resources and technology. The experiences help to develop successful and productive citizens
who understand the impact of science on their daily lives.
Overall Goals and Objectives
Similar to middle school students, the goal of the FCPS’ secondary science program for high
school students is to ensure that all high school students can use and apply scientific
knowledge.
High school science classes actively involve students in learning science concepts using the
processes and tools of science to explore their scientific interests. To obtain a Maryland
diploma, three credits in laboratory science are required. Science instruction must include
instruction in earth and space science, life science, and physical science curricula to be aligned
to the MSSS and prepare for the MISA.
The goal for a quality science education (Taking Science to School, National Research Council, 2007) is to develop student proficiency in:
Knowing, using, and interpreting scientific explanations of the natural world (disciplinary core
ideas and cross-cutting concepts);
Generating and evaluating scientific evidence and explanations (practices);
Participating productively in scientific practices and discourse (practices); and
Understanding the nature and development of scientific knowledge (practices and cross-
cutting concepts).
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 116
Overall Accomplishments
In FCPS’ effort to align to the MSSS, a new ninth grade course, Physics of Earth and Space,
was created. The course incorporates earth and space standards with physical science
standards, which will be a prerequisite for Biology. Biology’s curriculum is aligned to the MSSS
for the 2017-18 school year.
The 2016-17 school year was the last year of the Maryland High School Assessment (HSA) for
Biology. Students took the exam for graduation credit. Based on performance results for Biology
HSA, all student groups, except Hispanic/Latino, showed some level of increase in performance
in Biology HSA from 2015 to 2017 (see Table 50 on page 124). This is also true for male
student test-takers in Biology HSA.
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in secondary science are consistent with
the overall goals and objectives for all FCPS students with disabilities.
Accomplishments
The Biology HSA pass rate of students with disabilities increased from 2015 (29.3%) to 2017
(32.9%) despite a small decline in 2015 (see Table 50). Since 2016, students with disabilities
showed a 4% increase in pass rate on the 2017 Biology HSA. The achievement gap between all
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 117
FCPS students and students with disabilities decreased by approximately 2% from 2015 to
2017.
Challenges
Challenges for students with disabilities accessing instruction in Biology remain. When
analyzing 2017 Biology HSA results for students with disabilities, a 32.9% pass rate gap
remains (compared to all FCPS students).
Strategies and Changes
FCPS’ Biology curriculum is aligned to the MSSS for 2017-18. The secondary science course sequence is now fully aligned to the MSSS.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among students receiving
special education services in secondary science; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the
Special Education section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure
progress among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for EL students in secondary science are consistent with the overall
goals and objectives for all FCPS EL students.
Accomplishments
FCPS has few accomplishments for EL students taking Biology HSA. The EL student group size
increased by 18%. EL students showed a decline of 8.6% proficiency on the 2017 Biology HSA
compared to the 2016 data but showed a .2% increase from the 2015 data (see Table 50). Male
EL students also showed an increase in the Biology HSA pass rate over the last three years
(9.7% to 18.5%, respectively).
Challenges*EL students remain the lowest performing FCPS student group in HSA Biology (15.2%
proficiency in 2017) with the largest achievement gap of 58.2% in 2017 (when compared to all
FCPS students) (see Table 50).
Strategies and Changes
FCPS’ Biology curriculum is aligned to the MSSS for 2017-18. The secondary science course
sequence is now fully aligned to the MSSS. FCPS schools with a high EL population have been
trained on SIOP and teachers are incorporating this training into their daily instruction.
Systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all EL students in
secondary science; refer to Global Strategies or Changes in the Limited English Proficiency
section. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all
students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
*For additional information on challenges with EL students in Biology,see Appendix B: Response to MSDE Clarifying Questions.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 118
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards State Performance Standards
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives of all FCPS students, including those failing to meet or make progress
towards performance standards, in secondary science is to reduce the achievement gap.
Accomplishments
Pass rates on the Biology HSA have continued to increase over the last three administration
years in all student groups except Hispanic/Latino students (see Table 50). In fact, black/African
students showed an increase of 6.2% for 2017 and students receiving FARM showed an
increase of 2.8% for 2017.
Challenges*Despite these incremental accomplishments, challenges are still evident among certain student
groups—black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and students receiving special services
(students with disabilities, EL, and FARM). These students are performing at a lower
achievement level than the FCPS student population as a whole. In fact, Hispanic/Latino
students showed a 6.4% decrease in proficiency in 2017 (see Table 50).
Strategies and Changes
As previously stated, FCPS’ Biology curriculum is aligned to the MSSS for the 2017-18 school
year. The secondary science course sequence is now fully aligned to the standards. The new
curriculum incorporates the science and engineering practices, cross-cutting concepts, and
disciplinary core ideas around real-world phenomena. The Biology curriculum also integrates a
few physical, earth, space science standards. Biology is the second of a three-course
sequence, which integrates all of the MSSS that will be assessed by the MISA. MISA will be
field tested in high school in 2017-18. Year-long professional learning communities on the
new science curriculum are being established to support teachers as they transition to the
new standards for which $10,500 in unrestricted funding has been allocated.
In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students,
including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
HSA GOVERNMENT
FCPS’ social studies program promotes the preparation of global
citizens for a dynamic and diverse world. FCPS’ social studies
offerings provide an opportunity for students to experience history,
economics, government and geography from multiple perspectives.
Students engage in authentic disciplinary activities to gain a greater
understanding of themselves and the world in which they live. All
social studies coursework from grades 6 through 12 is supported
with skills and processes in reading and writing aligned with the
college and career ready standards.
* For additional information on challenges with students failing to meet performance standards in Biology,see Appendix B: Response to MSDE Clarifying Questions.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 119
Overall Goals and Objectives
FCPS’ secondary social studies program will focus on the following three goals during the 2017-
18 school year.
Goal 1. Implement disciplinary literacy standards across all courses. Develop and revise
activities that emphasize these standards including formative document based question
(DBQ) assessments.
Goal 2. Prepare for sequence change in high school that is expected to improve
Government HSA scores by moving American Studies II to grade 9 and Government to
grade 10.
Goal 3. Continue development of web-based resources to support social studies
instruction for all learners in grades 6-12.
Overall Accomplishments
From 2015 to 2017, there was a 6.5% increase in the number of Government HSA test-takers
(see Table 51 on page 125). Despite decreases in the pass rates from 2015 to 2017, increases
in pass rates occurred from 2016 to 2017 for five student groups. Additional accomplishments in
the 2016-17 school year are noted below.
The pass rate for all students increased from 68.6% to 70.8% (+2.2%) for all
Government HSA test takers, with male test-taker pass rate increasing 3.8% and
females increasing .6%.
An overall increase of 4.6% in the pass rate for black/African American students with
black/African American males increasing 6.5% and females increasing 2.1%
White males showed a significant increase in pass rate, i.e., increase of 6.3% from 2016
to 2017 while white female pass rates increased 1.8%.
Gains were made for both males and females students with disabilities with an overall
increase of 5.5%; males increasing by 6.1% and females by 5.2% (from 2016 to 2017).
Students receiving FARM increased in Government HSA pass rates with an overall
increase of 2.2%; 3.2% for males, and 1.3% for females.
Special Education Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for students with disabilities in secondary social studies are consistent
with the overall goals and objectives for students with disabilities in FCPS.
Accomplishments
Despite a decrease from 2015 to 2017, an increase in the Government HSA pass rate for
students with disabilities increased in the last year. In fact, from 2016 to 2017, the pass rate
increase by 5.5% overall for students with disabilities, with male test takers increasing by 6.1%
and female test takers by 5.2%.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 120
Challenges
Although a significant increase in pass rate occurred, students with disabilities still
underperformed their general education peers by approximately 48% in 2017. Female students
with disabilities underperformed their male counterparts by 12.5%.
Strategies and Changes
The intensive reading, writing, and vocabulary skills required for the Government course and
HSA present a challenge for all students and especially those with disabilities. Table 49 on
page 123 summarizes the strategies that will be implemented in the 2017-18 school year to
support all students in Government, including students with disabilities.
In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students,
including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Limited English Proficient Students
Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for EL students in secondary social studies are consistent with the
overall goals and objectives for all FCPS EL students in secondary social studies.
Accomplishments
Data continues to support the large achievement gaps that exist between EL students and their
student peers. Thus, very few accomplishments can be noted in Government HSA for this
student group. The pass rate for female EL students increased by 3.2% from the previous year.
However, EL students remain the lowest performing group in Government HSA across the past
three administrations.
Challenges*ELL students underperformed on the Government HSA when compared to their peers.
According to Table 51, this disparity for all test administrations (i.e., EL compared to all student
group) increased from 2015 to 2017. The declining overall pass rates (-1.3% from 2016 to 2017)
from all test takers are reflected in this data. Disparities between male and female EL student
pass rates are observed in all administration years with males outperforming females. In 2017,
the pass rate for male LEP students dropped by 5.6% from the previous year.
Strategies
Similar strategies that will be implemented with students receiving special education services
will also be implemented for EL students in the 2017-18 school year (see Table 49). In addition,
systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all students, including
special populations; see the Executive Summary.
Students Failing to Meet or Make Progress Towards State Performance Standards
The social studies program supports the success of all learners. For students to meet the goal
of global citizenship, all students must show proficiency on these standard measures of
achievement.
* For additional information on challenges with EL students in Government,see Appendix B: Response to MSDE Clarifying Questions.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 121
Goals and Objectives
The restructuring of the high school schedule, development and implementation of disciplinary
literacy standards, and the identification and implementation of research-based instructional
strategies are the main goals for eliminating the achievement gap. The continued evaluation of
student needs and move towards personalized learning, use of project-based/inquiry-based
instruction, UDL, and the mapping of the curriculum using Understanding by Design will work
in concert to reduce gaps in student achievement.
Additional goals related to Government intervention include:
Encouraging administrators to place highly qualified social studies teachers in classroom
and intervention positions, specifically seasoned Government teachers in extended learning
opportunity positions;
Developing and deploying instructional materials that target Government content and
reinforce the skills and processes disciplinary literacy standards;
Continuing to map curricular standards using the Understanding by Design framework that
requires depth of understanding with continued professional development for all
Government teachers; and
Developing personalized learning materials and utilization of strategies.
Accomplishments
As mentioned previously, despite decreases in Government pass rates since 2015, increases in
pass rates occurred among several student groups—all students, white, black/African, students
with disabilities, and students receiving FARM—from 2016 to 2017.
Challenges*Although black/African American, students with disabilities, and students receiving FARM
experienced gains in the 2016-17 school year, achievement gaps still exist when compared to
their peers. In addition, there was a decline in Government HSA pass rates among
Latino/Hispanic and EL students in 2017.
Strategies or Changes
Table 49 summarizes the strategies that will be implemented in the 2017-18 school year to
support all students in Government, including those students not meeting expectations or
making progress. In addition, systemic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress
among all students, including special populations; see the Executive Summary.
* For additional information on challenges with students failing to meet performance standards in Government,see Appendix B: Response to MSDE Clarifying Questions.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 122
Table 49. High School Government Strategies to be Implemented in 2017-2018
Strategy Rationale Timeline/Measurement Resource Allocation
Implementation of Disciplinary Literacy Standards and Activities
The Government HSA is reading intensive and requires critical analysis as well as writing skills. These standards emphasize the skills and processes needed for success on the assessment.
Training on new standards occurred in August 2017 and will continue during the 2017-18 school year. Standards-based activities will be developed and implemented during 2017-18.
Baseline data will be available in 2017-18; however, increases between benchmarks will be used to measure efficacy of the standards.
Development of the new standards and resources began during summer 2017 curriculum writing workshops. Funds were unrestricted curriculum writing funds totaling $5,100.
Preparation for Resequencing the High School Schedule
It is expected that Government HSA pass rates will increase by providing students with more time to grow their reading, writing, and analysis skills and providing additional content of American Studies II.
To align courses for implementation in 2017-18, new standards were written for American Studies I and II. Development of inquiry-based instructional materials aligned to standards has also begun and will continue during 2017-18.
Measurement of progress will begin in 2018-2019.
Development of standards and instructional activities began during summer 2017 curriculum writing workshops. Unrestricted funds totaling approximately $15,000 were used. Additional funding for curriculum writing will continue throughout the 2017-18 totaling approximately $5,000.
Increased Formative Assessment activities
Creation of materials based on new disciplinary literacy standards that help teachers in the instruction of the standards and implementation of formative assessment DBQs in all core classes.
DBQ formative assessments have been retooled with a standards-based rubric.
Measurement of progress will be based on student performance on the benchmark DBQ assessments.
This work was completed during summer 2017 curriculum writing on the DBQ assessments as well as ancillary instructional support materials. Funds to cover this work are subsumed within the literacy standards development and resequencing preparation activities.
Personalization of Learning
In concert with the course sequence change construction of personalized courses in American Studies II and Government that allow students to work at their own pace, and frees the teacher to provided individual assistance are being developed.
During the 2017-18 school year, social studies high school Vanguard teachers will be developing these courses.
Measurement of success will include comparison of benchmark data.
Unrestricted funds allocated for the development of these courses include $2,000 for support in instructional design.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 123
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 124
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 125
2017 BRIDGE TO EXCELLENCE MASTER PLAN ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS
FCPS uses a variety of tools and instructional strategies to observe and analyze how students are performing on their enrolled grade-level
curriculum. Curricular expectations are monitored formally and informally through assessments (state and local), quizzes, assignments, and
conferencing with students about their progress. Based on these measures, instruction is modified to support student needs toward mastery of
Maryland College and Career-Ready Standards.
In accordance with the reporting requirements under House Bill 412 and Section 7.203.3, FCPS’ assessments mandated by the state and local are
specified in Table 52 below. These assessments are used by teachers to “measure a student’s academic readiness, learning progress, and skill
acquisition.” These assessments assist in identifying and closing achievement gaps, ensuring equity in instruction, and informing strategies to
increase performance across all student groups.
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
Maryland Integrated Science Assessment
Accountability program that measures the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)
State Grade 5 Grade 8 Once in high school
Science March 2018 January 2018
(high school) May – June 2018
(high school)
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
The Alternate Maryland Integrated Science Assessment
Alternative assessment for accountability of 1% of the population with alternative learning outcomes
State Grade 5 Grade 8 Grade 11
Science March – May 2018 Yes To Be Determined
Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)
Accountability program that measures the Maryland College and Career-Ready Standards (MCCRS)
State Grades 3-8 Algebra 1 English 10
English Language Arts (ELA)
Math
Fall Block: December 2017 - January 2018
Spring Block: April - June 2018
Yes Included in Section 3 of the PARCC Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual, pages 27-44
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 126
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
The Multi-State Alternate Assessment (MSAA)
Alternative assessment for accountability of 1% of the population with alternative learning outcomes
State Grades 3-8 Grade 11
ELA Math
March - May 2018 Yes Included in the MSAA Test Administration Manual, page 22
High School Assessments
Maryland graduation requirements
State High school Government January 2018 May 2018 July 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA)
The KRA identifies children's individual needs, enabling teachers to make informed instructional decisions.
State Random sample of kindergarten students
Measures: - social
foundations - physical well-
being and motor development
- language and literacy
- mathematics
September – October 2017
Yes Included in Guidelines on Allowable Supports for the KRA, page 7
ACCESS for ELLs English Language Proficiency Assessment
State Kindergarten, Grades 1-12, non-English speaking students
Measures English language proficiency in the areas of:
- listening - speaking - reading - writing - comprehension
and literacy
Entry into the school system, then again in 2nd semester (January - February 2018)
No Not Applicable
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 127
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
Elementary School Math Interviews
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Prekindergarten Kindergarten
Math Quarterly Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary School Math Benchmarks
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 1-5 Math Grade 1-2: Quarterly
Grades 3-5: three times per year
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Math Performance Series
Computer Adaptive Universal Screener
Local Grade 2 Grade 5
Math January – February 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary School ELA Oral Language Acquisition Inventory
Computer Adaptive Universal Screener
Local Prekindergarten ELA Quarterly Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary School ELA Benchmark Assessment System
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Prekindergarten Kindergarten-Grades
1-2 Grades 3-4 Grade 5
ELA Prekindergarten: Quarter 4
Kindergarten, Grades 1-2: Quarters 1, 2, and 4
Grades 3-4: Quarters 1 and 3
Grade 5: Quarter 1
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary School ELA Fluency Assessment
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 3-5 ELA Quarter 1 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary School ELA Writing and Foundational Assessments
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Prekindergarten ELA Quarterly Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 128
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
Elementary School ELA On-Demand Writing Types
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Kindergarten Grades 1-5
ELA Kindergarten: Quarters 2, 3, and 4
Grades 1-5: Quarters 1, 2, and 3
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Reading Performance Series
Computer Adaptive Universal Screener
Local Grade 2 Grade 5
ELA January – February 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary Visual Art Common Formative Assessments
Term benchmarks of artistic progress
Local Grades 3-5 Visual Art Quarters 1-4 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary Visual Art Common Summative Assessments
Semester summary of student achievement
Local Grades 1-5 Visual Art January 2018 May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary General Music Common Formative Assessments
Term benchmarks of artistic progress
Local Grades 3-5 General Music Quarters 1-4 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary General Music Common Summative Assessments
Semester summary of student achievement
Local Grades 1-5 General Music January 2018 May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Elementary School Physical Education Benchmarks
Measure progress on FCPS PE standards
Local Grades K-5 Physical Education
Year-long (3-5 times per term)
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School Math Benchmarks
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 6-8 Math Quarters 2 and 3 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 129
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
Math Performance Series
Computer Adaptive Universal Screener
Local Grade 8 Math January - February 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School English/Language Arts Narrative Writing Task Benchmark
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 6-8 ELA November 2017 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School English/Language Arts Literary Writing Task Benchmark
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 6-8 ELA February 2018 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School English/Language Arts Research Simulation Task Benchmark
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 6-8 ELA April 2018 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Reading Performance Series
Computer Adaptive Universal Screener
Local Grade 8 Math January – February 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School Social Studies Performance Task 1
Measure progress on Maryland State Social Studies Standards (MSSSS)
Local Grades 6-8 Social Studies Quarter 1 or 2 (Grades 6-7: January 2018; Grade 8: December 2017 – January 2018)
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School Social Studies Performance Task 2
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local Grades 6-8 Social Studies Quarter 3 or 4 (All grades: March/April 2018)
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 130
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
Science Performance Task 1 and 2
Measure progress on Maryland State Science Standards (MSSS)
Local Grades 6-8 Science Quarters 1 and 2 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Science Performance Task 3 and 4
Measure progress on MSSS
Local Grades 6-8 Science Quarters 3 and 4 Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School Physical Education Benchmarks
Measures progress on essential curriculum
Local Grades 6-8 Physical Education
2 assessments per term
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Middle School Health Education
Measures progress on essential curriculum
Local Grades 6-8 Health Education 2 assessments per term
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
High School ELA Narrative Writing Task Benchmark
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 9-11 ELA October 2017 March 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
High School ELA Literary Writing Task Benchmark
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 9-11 ELA November 2017 April 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
High School ELA Research Simulation Task Benchmark
Measure progress on MCCRS
Local Grades 9-11 ELA January 2018 May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Algebra 1 Benchmark 1 Measure progress on MCCRS
Local High School Algebra 1
Math (Algebra 1) October 2017 March 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 131
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
Algebra 1 Benchmark 2 Measure progress on MCCRS
Local High School Algebra 1
Math (Algebra 1) December 2017 May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Geometry Benchmark 1 Measure progress on MCCRS
Local High School Geometry
Math (Geometry) October 2017 March 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Geometry Benchmark 2 Measure progress on MCCRS
Local High School Geometry
Math (Geometry) December 2017 May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Algebra 2 Benchmark 1 Measure progress on MCCRS
Local High School Algebra 2
Math (Algebra 2) October 2017 March 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Algebra 2 Benchmark 2 Measure progress on MCCRS
Local High School Algebra 2
Math (Algebra 2) December 2017 May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Government Benchmark 1
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local High School Government
Social Studies (Government)
October 2017 March 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Government Benchmark 2
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local High School Government
Social Studies (Government)
November - December 2017
April - May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
American Studies II Benchmark 1
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local High School Government
Social Studies (American Studies II)
October 2017 February - March
2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 132
Table 52. Frederick County Public Schools Assessment Requirements
Title of Assessment Purpose of
Assessment
Mandatory by a Local, State, or Federal Entity
As Appropriate, to Which Assessment is Administered
(Grade Level / Subject Area)
Testing Window of the Assessment
Accommodations Available for
Students with Special Needs
Type of Accommodations Available
American Studies II Benchmark 2
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local High School Government
Social Studies (American Studies II)
November – December 2017
April – May 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Modern World History Benchmark 1
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local High School Government
Social Studies (Modern World History)
October 2017 February – March
2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Modern World History Benchmark 2
Measure progress on MSSSS
Local High School Government
Social Studies (Modern World History)
December – January 2018
May – June 2018
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
Biology Benchmarks Measure progress on MSSS
Local High School Biology Science (Biology)
Throughout Semester
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
High School Physical Education Benchmarks
Measures progress on essential curriculum
Local High School Physical Education
Fitness For Life
1 assessment per term
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
High School Health Education
Measures progress on essential curriculum
Local High School Health Education 2 assessments per term
Yes Included in Section 5 of the Maryland Accommodations Manual, pages 5-1 to 5-32
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 133
APPENDIX A: HOUSE BILLS 999 AND 412
HOUSE BI LL 999
According to HB 999, Section 3, the following are reporting requirements for the master plan
annual updates for 2016 and 2017. Section 3 and be it further enacted, that:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for calendar years 2016 and 2017, a county
board of education’s annual update of the comprehensive master plan required by § 5–
401(b)(3) of the Education Article shall include only:
(1) the budget requirements required by § 5–401(b)(5) of the Education Article;
(2) the goals, objectives, and strategies regarding the performance of:
(i) students requiring special education, as defined in § 5–209 of the 9 Education Article;
(ii) students with limited English proficiency, as defined in § 5–208 of the Education
Article; and
(iii) students failing to meet, or failing to make progress toward meeting, State
performance standards, including any segment of the student population that is, on
average, performing at a lower achievement level than the student population as a
whole;
(3) the strategies to address any disparities in achievement for students in item (2) (iii) of this
subsection; and
(4) the requirements of § 7–203.3 of the Education Article, as enacted H.B. 412/ S.B. 533 of
the Acts of the General Assembly of 2016.
(b) (1) The State Department of Education shall convene a group of stakeholders to review the
current statutory and regulatory requirements of the master plan and the new requirements
of the federal Every Student Succeeds Act.
(2) On or before October 1, 2017, the Department shall report to the State Board of
Education, the Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education, as enacted by
Section 1 of this Act, and, in accordance with § 2–1246 of the State Government Article, the
General Assembly on recommendations regarding:
(i) what information future comprehensive master plans should contain; and
(ii) whether future comprehensive master plans should be completed in a digital form
that can be updated periodically.
Section 3.4. And it further enacted, that this Act shall take effect June 1, 2016. It shall remain
effective for a period of 2 years and, at the end of May 31, 2018, with no further action required
by the General Assembly, this Act shall be abrogated and of no further force and effect.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 134
HOUSE BI LL 412 and SE CTI ON 7 -203.3
The 2016 General Assembly House Bill 412, Assessment Administration and Provision of
Information, Chapter 264 includes the new §7-203.3, Education Article of the Annotated Code of
Maryland. As enacted by House Bill 412/Senate Bill 533, §7-203.3 reporting requirements are
specified below:
(A) (1) In this section, “ASSESSMENT” means a locally, state, or federally mandated test that is
intended to measure a student’s academic readiness, learning progress, and skill
acquisition.
(2) “ASSESSMENT” does not include a teacher-developed quiz or test.
(B) This section does not apply to an assessment or test given to a student relating to:
(1) A student’s 504 Plan;
(2) The federal individuals with disabilities education Act, 20 U.S.C.1400; or
(3) Federal law relating to English Language Learners
(C) For each assessment administered in a local school system, each county board shall
provide the following information:
(1) The title of the assessment;
(2) The purpose of the assessment;
(3) Whether the assessment is mandated by a local, state or federal entity;
(4) The grade level or subject area, as appropriate, to which the test is administered;
(5) The testing window of the assessment; and
(6) Whether accommodations are available for students with special needs and what the
accommodations are.
(D) On or before October 15th of each year, the information required under subsection (A) of this
shall be:
(1) updated;
(2) posted on the website of the county board; and
(3) included in the annual update of the county board’s master plan required under § 5–401
of this article section.
Section 2. And be it further enacted, that this shall take effect July 1, 2016.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 135
APPENDIX B: RESPONSE TO MSDE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
E L A A N D MA T HS T U D E N T S W I T H D I S A B I L T I E S
MSDE Review Panel Clarifying Question: What are the challenges for special education students in
ELA? What are the challenges for special education students in mathematics? Additional Clarification
from MSDE: Please describe why these students are not performing and what they are considering doing
to improve their performance. For example, What is the delivery of instruction for special education
students? Co-taught, self-contained? How many students are in co-taught classes? How many of the
special education students are attendance issues? Discipline issues? Do the special educators have
certification in the content they are instructing? Do they attend planning meetings?
A consistent area of weakness in ELA for FCPS students with disabilities is in written expression. Depending on grade, students most struggle with literary text, informational text, or vocabulary. For math, these challenges for students with disabilities (scoring at level three; approaching expectations) is in the PARCC sub-claims of additional and supporting content, along with mathematical reasoning, and modeling. All staff members, including general education teachers are strengthening their understanding of the rigorous expectations of the content, using tools such as Pearson’s Data Management and Reporting System (DMRS), performance level descriptors, and evidence tables. Strengthening the quality of Tier 1 instruction is a significant portion of FCPS’ plan to support students with disabilities, while also supporting a strong approach to Tiers 2 and 3 using EBIPs that are aligned and custom designed to meet the needs of individual students.
Attendance and Suspensions
Some students with disabilities struggle with attendance when compared to their grade level peers. While the 2017 FCPS attendance rate for “all students” was 95%, the attendance rate for students with disabilities was 93.5%. Attendance for students with disabilities wanes (ranging from 90.9% to 92.4%, depending on grade) as students move into high school.
Students with disabilities also face out-of-school suspension at a disproportionate rate. While 10.3% of students in FCPS receive special education services, the student group makes up 32% of FCPS suspensions.
Standards-Based IEPs
As FCPS leaders have evaluated the quality of current IEPs in its county audit, staff have identified an area of weakness in well-aligned, rigorous, standards-based IEPs. While FCPS IEPs certainly meet the expectations of the state department, local leaders recognize that students with disabilities must have IEP goals and objectives that align to the new core standards. Because special education teachers are often not content trained, a significant focus of AAE staff is to train their special education teachers on the content.
Additional Information Regarding FCPS Strategies
Students with disabilities in FCPS receive services in the least restrictive environment. Self-contained classes no longer exist aside from students who may be enrolled in one of FCPS’ special programs (i.e., Challenges, Learning for Life, Pyramid, etc.). A primary service delivery model in FCPS is co-teaching. Staff have engaged in ongoing professional learning using resources from Marilyn Friend to ensure quality implementation of the various models that
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 136
should be promoted (i.e., station rotation, parallel teaching, etc.). A focus on creating positive partnerships between colleagues is a continual area of focus.
FCPS has embarked on a multi-year journey in promoting cultural proficiency to assist with this challenge and has system targets for each school in the way of reducing disproportionality. In addition, many school CSI teams are engaging in restorative practices. Staff training is occurring and school teams are finding these interventions effective in re-engaging students who may be struggling through issues with their peers.
In addition, and per previous discussion in the regarding CPL for intervention, FCPS is establishing the concept of “core literacy teams” and “core math teams.” These teams consist of an administrator, EL teacher, special education teacher, interventionist, and content specialist from each school. Together, these staff are participating in ongoing professional learning throughout this school year with the following objectives:
● Improve understanding of curriculum resources available to support targeted interventions
that address standards (i.e., curriculum maps, evidence tables, performance level
descriptors, learning progressions, etc.).
● Improve understanding of intervention offerings available to support varied student
populations and/or enhance awareness of characteristics of students with disabilities and/or
EL.
● Review EBIP components that facilitate high-quality implementation. Provide opportunities
for school teams to learn how to develop curricular programs to meet the varied needs of
students.
● Review relevant assessment and progress monitoring tools available to school teams.
● Create opportunities to discuss and reflect upon school Response to Intervention (RtI)
processes and learn from innovative school teams.
B I O L OG Y A ND G O V E R NME N T E L S T U D E N T S & S T U D E N T S F A I L I N G T O M E E T P E R F O R M A N C E S T A N D A R D S
MSDE Review Panel Clarifying Question: What challenges exist for ELs and students failing to meet
performance standards? What challenges exist for ELs and students failing to meet performance
standards?
Additional challenges that can affect student performance, including biology and government, include attendance and suspension rates. Attendance rates among the students groups—black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, two or more races, EL students, and students receiving FARM—tend to be slightly lower than “all students” (95%). In fact, attendance rates were 94.9%, 94.3%, 94.6%, 94.2%, and 93.4%, respectively, in 2017. For the most part, attendance rates begin to decline as students enter high school; however, for students receiving EL and FARM services, this occurs as early as middle school. In addition, out-of-school suspension is disproportionate for black/African American (30.4%), two or more races (6.5%), students receiving FARM (54.9%).
As discussed in prior sections, systematic strategies are being implemented to ensure progress among all student groups, including EL students and students failing to meet performance standards.
FCPS; Final 11.17.17 2017 BTE Master Plan Annual Update Page 137