nashua school district the road ahead: strategic plan...

Nashua School District

THE ROAD AHEAD: STRATEGIC PLAN

2009-2014

Nashua Board of Education

Mr. Thomas Vaughan, President Mr. Robert Hallowell, Clerk Mr. Richard Dowd Mr. Steven Haas Mr. Dennis Hogan Mr. Charles Katsohis Mr. John “Jack” Kelley Mr. William Mosher Ms. Sandra Ziehm Mr. Christopher Crawford Student Representative

Mr. Christopher Hottel

Superintendent of Schools

Developed in partnership with Future Management Systems, Inc. Lyle Kirtman, President

Mary Murray, Senior Consultant and Project Leader

May 11, 2009 Second Edition: June 9, 2009

05-11-09 Nashua School District The Road Ahead: Strategic Plan 2009-2014

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 2

The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan Diagram ...................................................................... 4

Letter from the Board of Education ........................................................................................................ 5

Overview of the Strategic Planning Process .......................................................................................... 6

Key Participants in the Planning Process .............................................................................................. 8

Guiding Tenets:

Vision Statement for the Year 2013-2014........................................................................................... 9

Core Values ...................................................................................................................................... 10

Mission Statement ............................................................................................................................ 10

Retrospective ....................................................................................................................................... 11

Internal Assessment Summary……………………… .............. ……………………………………………21

Focus Groups and Interviews .............................................................................................................. 30

Key Themes and Findings ................................................................................................................... 31

Priority Areas, Goals, and Measures of Success................................................................................. 39

Priority Areas and Goals ................................................................................................................... 39

Priority I: Student Learning And Achievement ..................................................................... 39 Goal: CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, and ASSESSMENT ................................. 39

Priority II: School Culture ............................................................................................... 39 Goal: STUDENT SUPPORT ................................................................................... 39 Goal: SCHOOL SYSTEM CULTURE AND CLIMATE ............................................ 39

Priority III: Leadership and Human Resources ...................................................................... 40 Goal: HUMAN RESOURCES AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ............... 40 Goal: ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND PLANNING .................................. 40

Priority IV: Community Involvement ......................................................................................... 40 Goal: COMMUNICATION AND PARTNERSHIPS ................................................. 40

Priority V: Operations ................................................................................................................ 40 Goal: TECHNOLOGY ............................................................................................. 40 Goal: FACILITIES ........................................................... …………………………….40 Goal: EDUCATIONAL FUNDING ........................................................................... 40

Measures of Success……… ............................ ……………………………………………………….......41 Goal: CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, and ASSESSMENT ................................. 41 Goal: STUDENT SUPPORT ................................................................................... 42 Goal: SCHOOL SYSTEM CULTURE AND CLIMATE ............................................ 42 Goal: HUMAN RESOURCES AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ............... 43 Goal: ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND PLANNING .................................. 44 Goal: COMMUNICATION AND PARTNERSHIPS ................................................. 44 Goal: TECHNOLOGY ............................................................................................. 45 Goal: FACILITIES ......................................................... …………………………..….46 Goal: EDUCATIONAL FUNDING ........................................................................... 46

Implementation and Accountability ...................................................................................................... 47

Action Planning Template for 2009-2010 with Strategies .................................................................... 48

Appendices .......................................................................................................................................... 60 Appendix A: Facilities Workgroup Report ......................................................................................... 61 Appendix B: Glossary ....................................................................................................................... 71


2

Executive Summary

The Nashua Board of Education, calling for a new, shared vision of education, initiated a community-led, strategic planning process that involved over 250 participants, and renewed fundamental connections among 18 stakeholder groups to define what education should be and would be in Nashua in 2014. Superintendent Christopher Hottel, in his remarks at the September 2008 Strategic Plan Kickoff held in the Rotunda at Nashua High School South, said Nashua is at a crossroads. Because of the challenges of changing student demographics, the new technology-rich pervasive learning that impacts teaching, and the complex role of education in our community today, Superintendent Hottel set Nashua on a year-long development of a five-year strategic plan. The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan, which embodies our idea of the future, its values and mission, and its commitment to accountability, articulates our pursuit of excellence in education by focusing on each student achieving academic success. The Strategic Plan is defined clearly by five priority areas and nine goals. The Strategic Plan Steering Committee served as the catalyst in reviewing the development of the plan and shaping the discussion. With added consultation from the District’s Leadership Team, led by Associate Superintendent Edward Hendry, and the Facilities Workgroup, the Strategic Plan, with its defining tenets, is a statement of who we are, what we are about, and where we intend to go next. To navigate the road ahead successfully, implementation of the Strategic Plan must adhere to the following five priority areas and nine goals: Priority Area I: Student Learning and Achievement – Ensuring Academic Success for Each Student Student learning and achievement is at the heart of what the Nashua schools are all about. Students who are better prepared in elementary, middle, and high school are better prepared to succeed in college and in the workplace. Goal: Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Promote increased student learning and achievement through all teaching and learning practices to maximize each student’s personal growth while meeting District, state, and federal standards of accountability. Priority Area II: School Culture – Creating a Learning Environment The goal of making the individual classroom a place that naturally motivates students to learn is much easier if students and teachers function in a school culture where parents and community members are welcomed and where academic success and the motivation to learn is expected, respected, and rewarded.

Goal: Student Support Ensure that the academic, emotional, physical, and social needs of each student are addressed and coordinated to nurture and support his/her growth and development.

Goal: School System Culture and Climate

Establish a safe, nurturing, and motivating culture in each school and across the District.


3

Priority Area III: Leadership and Human Resources – Leading the Learning Leadership in carrying out the District’s mission and effectively and efficiently managing human resources, professional development, educational issues, projects, and programs is critical to the academic success of students.

Goal: Human Resources and Professional Development Promote the quality, continuity, and effectiveness of staff through comprehensive and exemplary recruitment, staff development, and evaluation practices.

Goal: Organizational Leadership and Planning Establish strong and coordinated leadership at all levels of the District to ensure the provision of a quality personalized education for each student in Nashua. Priority Area IV: Community Involvement – Making a Difference with Many Voices and Hands In education many of the issues schools face are so complex that individuals acting independently cannot resolve them. When Nashua parents and community members are involved together in schools, education improves.

Goal: Communication and Partnerships Implement comprehensive communication systems and partnerships with parents and the community that support and provide for the needs of students and their families and enhance the educational program. Priority Area V: Operations - Making Learning Accessible Successfully managing and operating a school system of 17 schools, 12,300 students, and approximately 2,000 employees requires a comprehensive infrastructure of supporting services. These services are provided to ensure that teachers, students, and principals have the resources, materials, and facilities they need for successful instruction.

Goal: Technology Provide the technology and infrastructure necessary to support student learning expectations and District demands.

Goal: Facilities Ensure equitable educational facilities and necessary infrastructure to meet students’ needs, provide a quality 21st century education and foster community access are in place across the District.

Goal: Educational Funding Plan for the funding necessary to ensure an effective and stable educational environment in Nashua’s schools to support the implementation of the goals of the Strategic Plan. With The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan, the Steering Committee sets out a plan of accountability that defines success and accelerates teaching and learning so that each student succeeds. The Strategic Plan makes a clear statement and serves as a road map for moving forward. We invite you to travel with us over the next five years and follow implementation steps and annual review of the Plan’s goals on the District web site at www.nashua.edu. In the meantime, refer to page 4 for a diagram of guiding tenets, implementation and accountability, which serve as key elements of the Plan and a legend for The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan.

05-0 7-09 Nashua School District The Road Ahead: Strategic Plan 2009-2014

4

Guiding Tenets

• Core Values• Mission• Vision• Priority Areas• Goals

Implementation

Accountability

• GoalsThe objectives of our actions.

• Strategies How we achieve our goals.

• Action Plan What we specifically do to implement our strategies.

• Success MeasuresKnowing when we have achieved our Goals.

• Data PointsUsing the right tools to measure success.

• TargetsHitting the bullseye.

GOALS

The Road Ahead2009-2014 Strategic Plan


5

May 2009 Dear Staff, Parents, Students, and Community: Improving student achievement through community engagement is the key work of the Nashua School District. The Road Ahead: Strategic Plan 2009-2014 concretely expresses the fundamental understanding articulated by staff, parents, students, and community members about the future direction of Nashua’s schools. It rests on a methodically constructed, honest retrospective of the last five years, and builds on a vibrant web of community opinion created by focus groups and interviews incorporating more than two hundred participants. It moves forward with the Board’s existing set of goals. In addition, the plan threads together detailed investigations of facilities and programs with a profound re-examination of Nashua’s schools. More importantly, The Road Ahead provides a framework from which to place greater emphasis on identified action areas for the Board, the District, and the Superintendent of Schools. The ability of an organization to make continuous improvement rests in large measure on the commitment of individuals to work together to achieve specific goals. The sustained commitment by staff, members of the Facilities Workgroup, and the Steering Committee from the kickoff in September 2008 through presentation in May 2009 is a testament to how deeply Nashua cares about its schools. It is that common purpose of commitment to excellence and student achievement, which guides our future and ensures our success. The goals this plan envisions will—with continued commitment and clear focus—unfold over the next five years. Only through such an on-going review of accomplishments and challenges will the District be able to assure the highest quality of services for Nashua’s schoolchildren. Sincerely, Thomas Vaughan Christopher Hottel President, Board of Education Superintendent of Schools


6

Overview of the Strategic Planning Process

From June 2008 through May 2009 the Nashua School District carried out a strategic planning process for the purpose of providing the schools with a framework to guide priority-setting over the next five years. The Nashua School District, with its consultant Future Management Systems, Inc. (FMS), worked closely with the Nashua community in the formulation of the plan. Interviews, group meetings, and focus groups were conducted and data was reviewed both within and outside of the system, throughout the planning process to solicit information and viewpoints. The process was specifically designed to include stakeholders, and to encourage dialogue within the community about the future direction of the schools. A variety of activities took place during the planning process for this purpose. A fourteen member Steering Committee, representing the Nashua community, was formed. The Steering Committee met on six occasions between October 2008 and May 2009 to review draft planning documents including the Retrospective, Internal Assessment, and Success Measures, and to identify stakeholders to include in focus groups and interviews, review findings, and provide valuable input at every step of development. The District wrote a Retrospective, a report of activities of the District from 2003 to 2008. The Retrospective served as a launching point, for the strategic planning process. FMS conducted an internal assessment and analysis of several key topics. This internal assessment responded to the following questions:

• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Nashua School District’s internal structures, programs and practices that support the improvement of student achievement?

• What current or future opportunities and threats are likely to influence the internal structures, programs and practices of the Nashua School District and possibly affect efforts to improve student achievement?

The internal assessment focused on linking the results to the prevailing goals set by the Nashua Board of Education and the Nashua School District for 2007-2009 and literacy improvement goals established in 2005 in response to being identified by the State of New Hampshire as a school district in need of improvement (DINI). The assessment process surfaced improvement themes and critical issues on which to focus the strategic planning process and address future District improvement. FMS and the District conducted an external assessment fall 2008 and included 20 focus groups with 224 participants and interviews with ten key stakeholders. The Steering Committee reviewed focus group and interview key findings. All of these findings are reflected in the plan’s goals, strategies and success measures. A Facilities Workgroup was formed to review all information related to the condition and future planning for the District’s facilities. This involved a review of the 2007 Long Range Facilities Planning Report, other related district documents and data, interviews of District administrators and school staff, and identification of planning goals, success measures and action plan


7

strategies developed through a pinpoint planning process. The report of the Facilities Workgroup is included as Appendix A and was reviewed by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee revisited and reviewed the District’s Mission statement, and the Board of Education, Superintendent, Leadership Team, Facilities Workgroup and Steering Committee led the development of a vision statement and core values. From all of these activities and interactions with stakeholders, several common themes and priorities became evident. The five priority areas and nine goals serve as the basis for the development of the Strategic Plan. Measures of success were developed to define annual targets for improvement and benchmarks against which to measure progress, as well as monitor and adjust strategies to meet those targets. Annual action plans, using strategies identified in the planning process, will define each year’s actions to meet the plan’s priorities, including specific initiatives, timeframes and positions responsible for leading each effort. A template is included in the plan. The District’s Leadership Team will present to the Board of Education annual action plans, reflecting current strategic issues and problems. To the best extent possible, this strategic plan has been developed with both an awareness of past achievements and the goal of setting new standards for performance. The Strategic Plan will be reviewed on an on-going basis to ensure that goals, strategies and actions are addressed as appropriate. The plan, in time, may be modified to reflect achievements and address new priorities.


8

Key Participants in the Planning Process

Strategic Planning Steering Committee Ms. Carol Gorelick Teacher, Nashua School District Mr. Steve Haas Nashua Board of Education member Mr. Dan Hansberry Former member Nashua Board of Education Ms. Helen Honorow Parent representative Ms. Lucille Jordan President, Nashua Community College Mr. John “Jack” Kelley Nashua Board of Education member Ms. Kyle Langille Principal, Nashua School District The Honorable Donnalee Lozeau Mayor, City of Nashua Mr. Brian McCarthy Alderman, City of Nashua Ms. Awilda Muniz Community representative Ms. Sue Newman Community representative Mr. Wilson Powell Nashua High School North student representative Mr. Neil Rogers Parent representative Mr. Glenn Sweeney Nashua High School South student representative

Leadership Team

Mr. Christopher Hottel Superintendent Dr. Edward Hendry Associate Superintendent Mr. James Mealey Chief Operating Officer Dr. Althea Sheaff Executive Director, Curriculum

and Instruction Mr. John Burruto Director, Student Services Dr. Eric Schroeder Director, Special Education Dr. Brian Cochrane Director, Accountability and

Assessment Ms. Stacy Hynes Director, Grants and Community

Development Mr. Shawn Smith Director, Plant Operations Mr. Richard Farrenkopf Director, Technology Ms. Michelle Papanicolau Director, Community and Adult

Education

Mr. Marshall Derry Director, Career and Technical Education

Mr. David Rauseo Director, Transportation Ms. Jeanette Kimbell Director, Food Services Ms. Dana O’Gara Director, Human Resources Mr. Robert Cioppa Supervisor, English Language

Learners Mr. Paul Asbell Principal, Pennichuck Middle

School Ms. Alesa Cunningham Executive Secretary, Office of the

Associate Superintendent and District Strategic Planning Administrative Assistant

Ms. Janet Valeri Principal, Ledge Street Elementary School and District Strategic Planning Coordinator

Board of Education

Mr. Thomas Vaughan, President Mr. Dennis Hogan Mr. Steven Haas Mr. Charles Katsohis Mr. John “Jack” Kelley Mr. Christopher Crawford, Student Representative Mr. Robert Hallowell, Clerk Mr. William Mosher Ms. Sandra Ziehm Mr. Richard Dowd

Facilities Workgroup Mr. Richard Dowd Nashua Board of Education member Mr. Jeff Cox Nashua Alderman, Ward 9 Mr. David Deane Nashua Alderman at large Mr. Robert Hallowell Nashua Board of Education member Mr. Christopher Hottel Superintendent of Schools Ms. Lisa Law Parent, Mt. Pleasant Elementary School Mr. Rob Power Teacher, Amherst St. Elementary School Mr. Philip Schappler Principal, Sunset Heights Elementary School Ms. Sandra Ziehm Nashua Board of Education member


9

Vision Statement for the Nashua School District

For the Year 2014 The Vision Statement provided below describes the desired state of the Nashua School District in the next several years. The Vision is an expression of possibility, yet based enough in reality to be plausible. Its purpose is to inspire those involved and interested individuals to help the Vision become a reality. The Vision provides the basis from which the organization determines priorities and establishes targets for performance. In 2014, the Nashua School District will be focused on a quality, personalized education for each student, reflecting the diverse environment of the city of Nashua. The personalization of education will be based on the shared belief that education is an indisputable right and that it is the means to realize opportunity and fulfillment for each student. All stakeholders will demonstrate their understanding and commitment to the District’s fundamental belief that there is no predetermined limit to what each student can learn. All adults responsible for the growth and development of students will work to create opportunities to build knowledge, skills, and attitudes to enable each student’s success. Students will emerge empowered from the Nashua School District as lifelong learners, aware of their aspirations, able to access information, ask questions and make thoughtful decisions. All teaching staff will understand individual student aspirations in order to motivate and instill a sense of accomplishment in each student. Teaching staff will create safe and positive classroom environments that bridge disparity and reflect high expectations for all, yielding high levels of achievement for each student. A comprehensive program of instruction, with special emphasis on literacy and numeracy that includes the arts and sciences and is complemented by athletics, extracurricular activities, wellness and character and social development, will form the basis of each student’s education. Extended learning opportunities that support and provide alternative approaches to learning will be available to students. The school district and individual schools will exhibit cultures that sustain the activities and systems needed to accomplish this work. Teachers, administrators, staff members, and the Board of Education will work in partnership with parents, the community and city government to foster a sense of belonging for each student, to ensure that all students know that they are valued members of the community. Sustained partnerships with social service agencies, businesses, higher education, and alumni will be well established. The Board of Education will work collaboratively with the Mayor of Nashua, the Board of Aldermen, and other city groups, citizens, and stakeholders to maximize financial security for the schools. All school facilities will reflect high standards for safety, access, and energy efficiency. School facilities will be designed and maintained for student needs, with built-in flexibility to address multiple needs and uses and optimize student learning. Each school facility will provide current and appropriate technology to sustain effective learning and working environments for students and teachers. Leaders, including students, teachers, administrators, staff members, board members, parents, and community members, will use annual benchmarks and related data to monitor the progress toward reaching the goals of the strategic plan, and toward providing a quality, personalized education that will ensure academic success and well-being for each student in Nashua.


10

Core Values of the Nashua School District

Core values are the underlying support to our mission, vision, and goals and therefore provide a shared foundation for working and learning. We believe:

♦ The purpose of education is the growth and development of children. ♦ Education is an indisputable right of students that is accompanied by the

responsibility of each student to participate to the best of his/her ability.

♦ There is no predetermined limit to what each student can learn.

♦ Each student can become a lifelong learner.

♦ Each student is entitled to a personalized education in a physical environment that is safe and conducive to learning.

♦ Each student will learn best in a nurturing, motivating environment that

promotes a sense of belonging.

♦ Strong partnerships between educators and parents are critical to the successful education of children.

♦ Extensive collaboration of educators and community members promotes an

innovative and dynamic school system.

♦ Encouraging and supporting leadership at all levels of the organization and the community enhances the vitality and continuous improvement of our school district.

♦ Fair treatment, honesty, openness, integrity, and respect are required in an

ethical school system.

Nashua School District Mission Statement

The mission statement defines our shared sense of purpose, direction, and opportunity. The Nashua School District, in collaboration with parents and in partnership with the

community, is committed to providing a high quality education to all students in a safe,

nurturing, and motivating environment dedicated to helping each student become a

lifelong learner and a responsible, productive member of a rapidly changing society.


11

Retrospective of the Past Five Years: Achievements and Implications for Planning Introduction In spring 2008, the Nashua Board of Education and the Nashua School District embarked on the development of a five-year strategic plan for the school system. Our purpose is to ensure we are fully prepared to build on the District’s many successes as we move forward together with the education of Nashua’s schoolchildren. The primary purpose of our work on strategic planning is prospective, looking ahead, agreeing on what we need to accomplish together, and determining how best to get there through the cost-effective use of District resources. Indeed, when the strategic plan is finalized at the end of this school year, it will function as a roadmap to achieving agreed-upon goals and objectives for the District. Before looking ahead, however, it is essential that we first consider where we are now by revisiting the accomplishments that got us here. Therefore, this retrospective serves as a launching point, a stake in the ground so to speak, for the strategic planning process. Over the next six months, the 12-member Strategic Planning Steering Committee will use this retrospective as the context for reviewing the District’s mission statement, defined core values, and inaugural vision statement. In addition, with the District’s accomplishments of the last five years in mind, the Steering Committee will consider feedback from 10 stakeholder interviews and about 20 focus groups to identify key trends and issues that will help shape the strategic plan. This retrospective is also intended to involve the community at large in the planning process by presenting a chronological, five-year look back at the District’s work. The report starts with the 2003-2004 school year and then recaps the remarkable school year in the history of our schools that followed, in which we celebrated the grand opening in September 2004 of Nashua’s two new four-year comprehensive high schools. The report then recounts our ongoing work in the District since achieving that important milestone in Nashua’s commitment to education. Through dedication, hard work, and a willingness to come together as a community to educate Nashua’s schoolchildren, we have demonstrated our ability to set and achieve important goals. As we prepare to look ahead, this report helps remind all of us about the significance of those successes and our fundamental priorities as a school district. 2003-2004

• The Nashua School District fy2004 operating budget was $76.2 million, a 3.32% increase from fy2003.

• The District fy2004 average cost per pupil was 7,433.47, 12.51% lower that the New

Hampshire fy2004 average cost per pupil ($8,468.28).

• In the late 1980s, Superintendent Berard Masse initiated a long-range capital improvement plan that called for the renovation or expansion of all District schools. In the fall of 2003, Superintendent Joseph R. Giuliano oversaw the last piece of that plan, opening two new high schools, Nashua High School South and Nashua High School North, in September 2004. At the same time, Superintendent Giuliano oversaw


12

important changes for the earlier grades, shifting the ninth grade from the junior high schools to the high schools and moving the sixth grade from the elementary schools to create the new, grades 6-8 middle schools. Teachers took part in thousands of hours of specific and extensive workshops in anticipation of the grade re-configuration. During that year, for the second consecutive year, NHS South was operating as a school exclusively for sophomores city-wide, while NHS North housed all juniors and seniors city-wide. The preceding school year was an important turning point year for the District. Changing the landscape of the District involved extensive planning in anticipation of the re-assignment of more than 300 junior high school and high school teachers, and many other staff members. In support of the high school construction and renovation of the high schools, a major US Department of Education “Smaller Learning Opportunities” grant provided valuable staff training and professional development, relevant to the new academic scheduling (block scheduling) and re-organization (academies and team teaching).

• The Nashua Senior High School Girls’ Volleyball Team won the Class L State

Championship in November 2003.

• The Scott Foresman literacy curriculum was implemented in the elementary grades, K-5. The Scott Foresman curriculum provides a more consistent and explicit practice in reading. Phonics, spelling, grammar, comprehensive skills, and writing are organized around central themes that are consistent across the grades.

• For the first time under the federal law commonly referred to as No Child Left Behind

(NCLB), two of Nashua’s elementary schools were labeled as Schools In Need of Improvement (SINI). NCLB was signed into law in January 2002; the law is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), and focused on standardized testing to improve individual academic achievement. The labeling at both elementary schools was the result of students in one or more of the NCLB four-defined subpopulations (students of ethnicity; low socio-economic status; special needs; limited English proficiency) not performing to state standards.

• The Nashua Senior High School Girls’ Basketball Team won the Class L Championship

in March 2004.

• The Telegraph, several members of the Greater Nashua Chamber of Commerce and other local businesses and organizations collaborated with Superintendent Giuliano on a District-wide “Fair Compare Analysis & Audit of Educational Effectiveness.” SchoolMatch, a consulting firm from Ohio, facilitated the audit. After several months of conducting interviews and collecting data from each school in Nashua and comparing to other Districts from across the country with similar student and teacher demographics, SchoolMatch submitted its analysis. SchoolMatch commendations included the high school’s Advanced Placement program; planning for major high school construction and renovation; low teacher absence rates; competitive grading practices; staff development offerings; successful pursuit of federal Smaller Learning Communities grant; adoption of a new reading program; establishing alternative school for middle school at-risk students; sustained attention to special needs students; expansive high school curriculum offerings; parent volunteerism; school disciplinary procedures; database management; opportunities for non-college bound high school students; and use of norm-referenced tests. SchoolMatch recommendations were improving teacher


13

evaluation; peer coaching and peer review; clarifying and streamlining curriculum development process; improving reading performance; increasing state financial support; developing alternative academic opportunities for high school at-risk students; lowering dropout rates; initiating a communications audit; and reviewing school policy management.

• During 2003-2004, the District reported a reduction in the number of high school

dropouts. Both the credit recovery program and the implementation of block scheduling are identified as contributing factors to fewer students dropping out of school. The Credit Recovery Program offered alternative classes and programming to students looking to dropout, allowing them to keep on track for earning a high school diploma. The four-classes-a-day block scheduling offers three fewer classes each semester from the previous 7-class daily schedule, increasing more time each day with fewer teachers and less frequent transition between classes.

• The Nashua Senior High School Girls’ Tennis Team won the Class L Championship in

June 2004.

• Nashua Senior High School Class of 2004, the last city-wide unified class, numbered 810 graduates.

2004-2005

• The Nashua School District fy2005 operating budget was $81.5 million, a 7% increase from fy2004.

• The District fy2005 average cost per pupil was $7,936.46, 12.77% lower than the New

Hampshire fy2005 average cost per pupil ($9,098.56).

• The beginning of the 2004-2005 school year marked one of the most anticipated with both Nashua High School South (Panthers) and Nashua High School North (Titans) opening for the first time as four-year comprehensive schools. At the same time, a major shift in the new grade configuration was completed and a more student-centered teaching philosophy at the middle school level was adopted. The three junior high schools opened as middle schools, housing grades 6-8. Consequently the elementary schools opened to students up to grade 5, and for the first time in 10 years, each elementary school but one had its students under one roof. Twenty-five portable classrooms at the elementary level were eliminated because of the grade reconfiguration.

• In addition to renovated classrooms and expanded course offerings, Nashua High

School South offered an expanded weight room, a resurfaced 8-lane track, an upgraded football practice field with bleachers, six new tennis courts, and two upgraded softball-baseball fields to complement three rectangular practice fields.

• The Nashua Technology Center was also a major piece of the comprehensive high

school construction and renovation project that came to fruition in September 2004. The Center is housed within both Nashua High School North and Nashua High School South, and was an integral component of the District’s planning for the overall high school project. The Nashua Technology Center is a regional center for career and technical


14

programs, serving Nashua High School North, Nashua High School South, and students from eight surrounding communities: Milford, Hudson, Litchfield, Hollis, Brookline, Amherst, Mont Vernon, and Merrimack. Approximately 75-80 students from the surrounding high schools enroll each year, provided enrollment space is available. The Nashua Technology Center’s curriculum was reviewed and new courses developed, targeting emerging technologies and an evolving labor market. Because of the high cost of duplicating some of the programs, not all programs are housed at both high schools but are open to students from both high schools. Traveling between the high schools to take advantage of a specialized curriculum is not unusual, and administrators make every effort to accommodate a students’ preferred curriculum. The Nashua Technology Center offers programs in accounting, automobile technology, biomedical technology, CADD, cosmetology, computer networking, culinary arts, early childhood, engineering, finance, graphic design, health occupations, hospitality and tourism, HVAC, machining, marketing, and video production.

• With the opening of the two, four-year high schools, NHS North and NHS South students

were organized for the first time inclusively in academies, reflecting the need to develop smaller learning communities within the high schools. Freshmen and sophomores were organized in self-contained academies: the freshmen academy and the exploratory or sophomore academy. Juniors and seniors were organized in four career-based academies: arts and humanities; business and global communications; math, science, and technology; and health and human services.

• Nashua students took part for the first time in October 2005 in the new state-wide testing

program, the New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP). NECAP replaced the New Hampshire Educational Improvement and Assessment Program (NHEIAP). NECAP is a series of reading, writing, and mathematics achievement tests administered annually each October to students in grades 3 through 8 and in grade 11. The tests were developed in collaboration with the Vermont, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire Departments of Education.

• In January 2005, the NH Department of Education (DOE) labeled the District as a

District in Need of Improvement (DINI). The DOE labeled the District because students did not meet standards in reading in some of the four NCLB-defined subpopulations (students of ethnicity; low socio-economic status; special education; limited English proficiency) for the second consecutive year. The percentage of socioeconomically disadvantaged students is significantly higher than the state average, and growing faster than the state average; and the percentage of limited English proficiency students in Nashua is more than 2.5 times higher than the state average. As a result, Dr. Edward Hendry led the development of a District DINI plan, which focused on improving student achievement in reading and literacy across all grade-levels. The plan established four priority areas: improved data collection, management, and decision-making; improved communication and collaboration; enhanced reading and literacy professional development for our staff; and improved curriculum development process, with a focus on specific learning needs of our targeted students.

• In May 2005, Superintendent Giuliano led a planning committee to conduct an internal

communications audit, and retained a New Hampshire public relations firm. The purpose of the study, which follows through on one of the suggested SchoolMatch recommendations, was to interview a balance of participants, to summarize findings, and


15

to provide recommendations. The final report was presented in January 2006 to the Board of Education; recommendations included systemizing communications, initiating new communications outreach, establishing acknowledgement and recognition program; and operationalizing mission in the District and schools.

• NHS South was the first of Nashua’s two high schools to win a state championship; the

baseball team won the state title at Holman Stadium in June 2005 just days before the first NHS North and NHS South classes graduated from the Verizon Wireless Arena.

• Nashua High School North Class of 2005 numbered 366, and Nashua High School

South Class of 2005 numbered 410.

• Superintendent Giuliano retired in August 2005, after working as Assistant Superintendent or Superintendent of the Nashua schools since 1978.

2005-2006


• The District fy2006 average cost per pupil is $8,326.73, 14.25% lower than the New

Hampshire fy2006 average cost per pupil ($9710.10).

• Dr. Julia C. Earl of the Klein (TX) Independent School District was hired in August 2005 as Superintendent of Schools and, based on the DINI (District In Need of Improvement) Plan, launched a review and improvement of curriculum and instruction, and professional development process. The review was conducted with the goal of maximizing student achievement. Seven senior administrators and members of the curriculum team participated in the curriculum review trainings, facilitated by Curriculum Management Systems Inc. Three week-long sessions brought the team together with administrators from across the country, and the trainings helped foster the standards used to develop the District’s curriculum management plan. The initial session focused on curriculum design and delivery. The second session focused on Systems-based Factors of Policy, Organizational Structure, Budget, and Facilities. The third and final session focused on Auditor Preparation: Data Gathering and Report Writing Seminar. Since then curriculum design and deliver has become a District-wide focus, forming the basis for all decisions, including organizational structure, facilities use, and budgeting planning. The curriculum and professional development review eventually led to the re-organization of the District’s administrative structure, a study of facilities use, and the adoption of the Performance-Based Budgeting process for developing the operational budget.

• eNews, an electronic weekly District newsletter sent to approximately 6,500 staff,

parents, and members of the Nashua community, issued its first edition in November 2005.

• The Board of Education approved a new Wellness Policy in June 2006, replacing the

former Healthy Nutrition Policy. The broader scope of the policy reflects the District’s commitment to providing students with healthy choices and physical activities. In addition to establishing healthy food choices at school, the policy encourages all school-


16

related groups, such as PTOs, booster clubs, and student organizations, to uphold the District’s commitment to meet or exceed state and federal regulations regarding food and physical activity to promote good health and well-being.

• Superintendent Earl was placed on administrative leave and Christopher Hottel,

Assistant Superintendent, was named Acting Superintendent in June 2006. This was an unsettling period for the Office of the Superintendent of Schools, causing significant distraction for educators and the community.

• At the state-wide 13th Annual “ED”ies Recognition Ceremony in Manchester in June

2006, both the Academy of Learning and Technology and Nashua High School North were honored respectively as New Hampshire’s 2006 Middle School of Excellence and 2006 High School of Excellence. Pennichuck Middle School Technology Program was named 2006 Technology Program of the Year, and Pennichuck Middle School Teacher Thomas Prive was named 2006 Technology Teacher of the Year.


South Class of 2006 numbered 430. The Nashua Adult Education Program graduated 36.

2006-2007 • The Nashua School District fy2007 operating budget was $80.8 million, a 2.78%

decrease from fy2006.

• The District fy2007 average cost per pupil is $8,473.55, a 17.7% decrease from the New Hampshire fy2007 average cost per pupil ($10,304.88).

• The District’s English Language Learner (ELL) Program serves close to 900 students

who have been identified and classified with limited English proficiency. The student to teacher ratio in the Program has also significantly increased in the thirteen-year span from 27-to-1 in 1994-1995, to 47-to-1 in 2006-2007.

• Acting Superintendent Hottel unveiled in July 2006 an administrative re-organization

plan, designed to enhance communication as well as improve coordination of District administrative functions and duties. The re-organization was developed as a result of the trainings in curriculum audit process. The Board of Education approved the plan later that month. In terms of central leadership, an Associate Superintendent and a Chief Operating Officer oversee daily school operations. The Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction heads the Curriculum and Professional Development Council that focuses District planning and initiatives around the fundamental goal of student achievement. The Director of Accountability and Assessment monitors and manages state and federal regulatory standards and reporting, working closely with the three K-12 Supervisors of Math/Science, Humanities, and English Language Learners. In addition to the curriculum management framework, the Director of Student Services serves as hearing officer and head of guidance services. In the restructuring plan, four senior administrative positions were eliminated: Assistant Superintendent; Director of Guidance; Assistant Director of Human Resources, and one Interdisciplinary Curriculum Specialist.


17

• The Nashua Board of Education and Superintendent Earl reached a contract buy-out agreement in February 2007 and Acting Superintendent Hottel was hired as Superintendent in April 2007. Under Mr. Hottel’s new leadership, the District fulfilled the re-organizations plan and moved forward to define District goals and objectives.

• NHS South earned New England Association of Schools and College (NEASC)

accreditation in spring 2007. NEASC accreditation is repeated once every 10 years and serves as a validation of a school’s purpose, performance, and human and financial resources. NHS South administrators, teachers, parents, and students were engaged in this 18-month peer review process, culminating in an on-site visit. The NHS South accreditation builds on the previous accreditation of the former Nashua Senior High School.

• In response to earlier efforts to maximize student achievement, the District opted to

utilize a fundamentally different approach to preparing its fy2008 operational budget. In the fall of 2006, the District trained its administrators and community members in the Program (later Performance)-Based Budgeting (PBB) process. The District’s approximately $80 million budget was broken into 14 different program areas, such as elementary school education, middle school education, high school education, special services, plant operations, and District administration. Each program-area committee developed several multiple-level financial packages. The key to PBB lies in determining how each of those financial packages meets District priorities. A 41-member advisory committee listened to each program-area manager’s presentation and ranked the packages. Inclusivity is the hallmark of PBB; in all more than 250 staff members, parents, students, and community members took part in the budget preparation process.

• Also in the fall of 2006, the Nashua Board of Education and the District embarked on the

development of a K-12 long-range facilities study, conducted by the New England School Development Council. The scope of the study included an analysis of K-12 enrollment trends, present and planned school programming, and the facilities needed to provide these programs. The NESDEC executive statement included short-term and long-term needs. For the short term the District needs to fund schedules for maintenance/repair and capital improvement; to continue city-school communications regarding short-term repairs; and to develop a long-range plan for K-8 facilities and educational program planning. For the long term the District needs to address lack of equity in facilities/programs in elementary and middle schools; to replace/rehabilitate school spaces that do not support 21st Century educational programs; and to consider additional space for full-day kindergarten.

• The Nashua Board of Education and the Nashua School District, working with the NH

School Boards Association, embarked on a year-long, major policy review. The review examined 47 state-mandated policies and more than 45 District policies. The District is responsible for ensuring that NH education laws and administrative rules promulgated by the NH Board of Education are followed, providing a foundation where all students, kindergarten through high school, can learn and develop. The Nashua Board of Education is responsible for adopting and implementing written policies and procedures relative to how our schools are governed and operated.

• The Nashua School District Safety Committee was re-established during the 2006-2007 school year. The Committee consists of District administrators and representatives from


18

all of the unions. The items addressed included the annual safety audit for each school, the annual safety drills that need to be conducted, the access control measures that the Committee would recommend, and the development of an Emergency Preparedness Template to be used by each school in the District.

• NHS South Girls’ Lacrosse Team won the Class L Championship in June 2007.


South Class of 2007 numbered 406. The Nashua Adult Education Program graduated 76.

2007-2008


• The District and New Hampshire cost per pupil averages will not be calculated until

spring 2009.

• The percentage of District students qualifying for no fee or reduced fee lunch reached an all time high this year at 32.83%; the percentage of students qualifying for federal aid has increased each year since fy2002.

• The District subscribes to Follow the Child, which is a state-initiated response to NCLB and designed by NH Department of Education Commissioner Lyonel Tracy. Follow the Child school districts, like Nashua, place emphasis on developing a more personalized approach to education. Follow the Child encourages documenting each student’s progress in school using other success measures than standardized test results exclusively. In July 2007, District staff members joined teaching staffs from 21 other school districts at the Follow the Child Leadership Institute in Nashua. The Institute was an opportunity for participating school districts to learn about how to develop a more personalized approach to education so that students learn what they need to know, with the goal that all students stay on track to graduate from high school and those graduates are better prepared to pursue post-secondary education.

• NHS South Boys’ Cross Country Team won the Class L Championship in late October

2007.

• The use of new, automated telephone system, which was approved by the Board of Education in March 2007 and piloted at Birch Hill Elementary School, was implemented District-wide in fall 2007. ParentLink provides automated, recorded messages from teachers, principals, and other school administrators to parents informing them about school and their students. ParentLink has a capacity of generating about 15,000 phone calls within 15 minutes. ParentLink is most commonly used to announce school cancellation and delays because of inclement weather.

• Superintendent Hottel and Associate Superintendent Hendry, and Nashua Board of

Education members worked together to develop District goals and objectives. The full Board of Education approved and established those goals in November 2007, identifying five key focal areas to guide efforts to improve student achievement. Those five key


19

focal areas are: student achievement; accountability; alignment; assessment and evaluation; and climate.

• NHS South Girls’ Ski Jumping Team won the Class L Championship in February 2008.

• NHS North Girls’ Swim Team won the Class L Championship in March 2008, the first state championship for NHS North.

• The Nashua Board of Education and the Nashua Teachers’ Union (NTU) reached a five-

year agreement late in the evening Sunday, March 30, 2008, averting a teachers’ strike and ending a “work to rule” NTU action. The NTU contract had expired in August 2006. Negotiations began in earnest during the 2006-2007 school year and continued through the 2007-2008 school year until an agreement facilitated by a mediator was reached. The contract agreement ended another unsettling period in the District’s recent history.

• Fewer Nashua students are dropping out of school. The NH Department of Education announced 2006-2007 dropout data in April 2008 and Nashua’s four-year cumulative dropout rate (11.1%) is lower than the NH state average (12.2%) and the Hillsborough County average (13.8%). Nashua’s rate is also a significant drop from the previous year’s rate of 14.0%.

• In May 2008, the NH Department of Education announced the 2008 NCLB Adequate

Yearly Progress (AYP) status. Amherst Street Elementary School met all AYP requirements for the second consecutive year, shedding its School In Need of Improvement (SINI) status. Only two other schools in New Hampshire made such dramatic improvement, catapulting from being in corrective action to meeting AYP. Amherst Street joined three other District elementary schools in meeting AYP: Broad Street, Birch Hill, and Fairgrounds Elementary Schools.

• Janice Martin, 2008 NH School Psychologist of the Year, and Blanche Garant, 2008

Outstanding Community/Business/School Partner of the Year were honored at the 15th Annual “ED”ies Recognition Ceremony in June 2008 in Manchester. Jane Martin is the District head psychologist, and Blanche Garant is a longtime Charlotte Avenue Elementary School community volunteer and 2007 NH Partners in Education Volunteer of the Year.

• Following presentations in June 2008, the Board of Education approved in July 2008 the

reorganization of the high school administrative structure, creating a principal, four assistant principals, and an assistant principal of guidance at both Nashua High School South and Nashua High School North. As part of the restructuring, headmaster positions were eliminated.

• The District Technology Department installed X2 Aspen student information system

during the summer 2008 and facilitated training sessions with administrators, support staff, and teachers. The Board of Education approved the purchase of the software earlier in the school year. The new system is used District-wide to access all student data, including attendance and grades. The X2 Aspen architecture provides added depth and flexibility in managing student records, allowing for the production of valuable data.


20

• New Hampshire Partners in Education honored each school in the District with a Blue Ribbon School Achievement Award. For 20 consecutive years each school in the District has received a Blue Ribbon for the exceptional management of its volunteer program. Last year the District reported approximately 3,000 volunteers who contributed more than 120,000 hours of service.


South Class of 2008 numbered 440. The Nashua Adult Program graduated 93. The combined Classes of 2008 totaled 1,004 graduates, making this among the largest classes to graduate from Nashua’s high schools.

• The District hired seven principals, six elementary school principals and one middle

school principal, and hired or re-assigned six assistant principals at the elementary school level during the summer 2008. The Human Resources Department utilized a more inclusive interview and feedback process for these placements, a meet-and-greet that brought together Nashua administrators, staff, and parents. The meet-and-greet involved organizing interviewers in rotating groups to ask questions of the candidates. The District gained additional, valuable feedback from this more informal but inclusive interview technique.

• The Nashua Board of Education officially closed the Academy of Learning and Technology (ALT) in August 2008 and launched The Phoenix Program. The Phoenix Program is an off-site program for at-risk students in grades 6-10. The Program’s mission is to guide students toward achieving academically and assuming more responsibility toward their own learning and behavior; to redirect unproductive behavior toward constructive behavior; to develop and pursue personal goals, leading to a transition plan for attaining a high school diploma; and to create a safe, supportive, nurturing environment. The Phoenix Program moved during the summer into a new site at 440 Amherst Street. Plant Operations completed needed extensive renovations over the summer on time, allowing The Phoenix Program to open on the first day of school.


21

Internal Assessment Summary

In fall 2008 the Nashua School Board and the Nashua School District began the strategic planning process by engaging in an internal assessment in order to respond to the following questions:

• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Nashua School District’s internal structures, programs and practices that support the improvement of student achievement?

• What current or future opportunities and threats are likely to influence the internal structures, programs and practices of the Nashua School District and possibly affect efforts to improve student achievement?

The District’s strategic planning consultant, with assistance from the district’s administration, conducted this assessment process using a number of data sources and methods. These included a review of numerous related reports and documents such as the DINI (District In Need of Improvement) Plan and Progress Reports, the AYP Corrective Action Memorandum of Understanding with the New Hampshire Department of Education, the New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) Results and Comparison Reports on student achievement; SINI (School In Need of Improvement) Plans and Progress Reports; the NHS North & NHS South Mission Statements; and the NEASC Report (New England Association of Schools & Colleges), and the NESDEC Long range Facilities Planning Report. A departmental analysis that served to identify and substantiate internal issues related to policy and program impacts and qualities was conducted by the District Leadership Team under the direction of Associate Superintendent Edward Hendry and reviewed by the planning consultant. The following areas were included in the departmental analyses: Accountability and Assessment, Adult and Alternative Education, Career and Technical Education, Curriculum and Instruction, English Language Learner Program, Food Services, Human Resources, Plant Operations, Schools, Special Education, Student Services, Technology, and Transportation. Progress made towards achieving the goals set by the Nashua Board of Education and the Nashua School District for 2007-2009 and literacy improvement goals established in 2005 in response to being identified by the State of New Hampshire as a district in need of improvement (DINI) were also considered as part of the assessment. Nashua Board of Education and the Nashua School District goals

1. Achievement - To increase academic achievement for all students while recognizing the diverse needs of our students.

2. Accountability - To establish and communicate an accountability system to ensure that all District resources are efficiently and productively used to support student achievement.

3. Alignment - To align policies, procedures, and resources with District goals and with State and federal regulations in order to promote student achievement.

4. Assessment and Evaluation - To establish an assessment process that measures and reports at regular intervals on the status and the effectiveness of District programs.

5. Climate - To provide a positive climate and a safe educational environment that supports student achievement.

The internal assessment process surfaced improvement themes and critical issues on which to focus the strategic planning process and address future District improvement. This internal assessment summary is organized around the improvement themes and critical issues identified, which are linked to the focal areas of the Board of Education/District 2007-2009 goals.


22

Student Achievement This improvement theme is linked to all of the District’s focal areas; Achievement, Accountability, Alignment, Assessment and Evaluation, and Climate. The assessment ascertained that substantial progress has been seen in student achievement, as measured by the state’s NECAP assessment. Overall, the percentage of grades 3-8 students scoring in the proficient range in reading and math has annually increased, in some cases dramatically, since 2005. The Nashua School District achieved recognition for making Adequate Yearly Progress in the aggregate as a district in 2007 under the terms of No Child Left Behind. Nevertheless, the subscale scores in some elementary schools, middle schools and high schools have resulted in the majority of the district’s schools being identified as schools in need of improvement. This highlights the challenge faced in educating a school age population that exceeds a 33% poverty level, a 16% special education population and 8% English language learners. There is strong momentum within the District to continue the pattern of improving achievement for all students K-12 and narrowing achievement gaps for subgroups. Critical issues that surfaced through the internal assessment:

• Progress in writing achievement, although increasing, continues to lag behind that made in Reading and Mathematics.

• Progress in the achievement of subgroups continues to lag behind that of the general population in all areas of achievement.

• Subgroups are more highly represented in some schools, which typically are those identified as the schools in need of improvement.

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Accountability, Assessment, and Alignment. Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment are strongly and inextricably connected aspects of a school system’s functions. The District’s Curriculum and Professional Development Council, put in place in the 2005-2006 school year, administers and manages work related to curriculum, instruction, and assessment. A major task of the Council was the development and implementation of a Curriculum Management Plan that provides a comprehensive, systematic structure for designing, implementing, and evaluating curriculum. The district-wide professional development effort with TERC, a consulting service, built data analysis expertise, increased capacity for data-driven decision-making, and led to the creation of data teams at each school . Through data analysis and its status as a district in need of improvement, the district has focused on reading instruction at all levels. The District continues to look to improve instruction for all students in general education classrooms and to increase consistency of intervention strategies and resources through implementation of a response to instruction and intervention (RTI) model across the district. Follow the Child is the State umbrella for initiatives within the District to personalize education and track individual student success. With respect to accountability, benchmark and year-end assessments serve to monitor student progress and the effectiveness of instruction and programs.


23

Critical issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Curriculum design, effective horizontal and vertical alignment, and curriculum evaluation

all require further efforts in order to be fully effective and address student achievement related issues.

• Writing at all levels continues to lag in NECAP results. • The gap between the achievement of students in the general population and that of

students in subgroup populations of educational disabilities, low socioeconomic, ethnic, and English language learners, continues, based on recent NECAP results.

• Diversity of student instructional needs continues to be a concern for educators. The coordination and implementation of support efforts, such as Follow the Child and the appraisal of classroom practices need greater consistency across the district.

• The expertise and capacity of collection, analysis and use of data by data teams and individual teachers to inform instruction are not fully in place.

• A continued need exists to increase the use of benchmark and year-end assessments at all levels. Recently-mandated competency assessment in all high school courses are not fully linked to the use of data in improving curriculum, instruction and assessment at the high school level.

• Recommendations made by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges related to enhancement of curriculum and instruction planning, integration, assessment and analysis must be addressed.

• The adolescent literacy professional development initiative for teachers and administrators must continue especially at the middle and high school levels.

Student Support This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Climate, Student Achievement, and Alignment. Student support encompasses a number of systems that function across the school district to address the needs of students requiring support within and beyond that of the general classroom. The student support systems dealt with in this internal assessment are Special Education and English Language Learner programs and the services offered through Student Services and Nashua Community Adult School. Continued refinement, support for, and expansion of intensive programs have allowed a diverse population to be served in the district’s schools and have supported students with significant disabilities to remain in district. Implementation of models for inclusion has successfully supported intensive needs special education students. Instructional Collaboration and a collaborative approach among Special Education teams have promoted a willingness to consider multiple options for students. Substantial training for special education staff in the implementation of various specialized programs, techniques and technologies has also contributed to a number of noted successes in special education. The ELL Program has seen a number of advances through after school and summer school programming, professional development and the provision of additional ELL teachers. A wide range of alternative programming in alternative settings is accessible to students at risk of dropping out of school. An Alternative Education Task Force reviewed issues related to the need for alternative education program configurations.

Critical issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Inconsistent implementation and lack of understanding of some actions is evident

across the District and seems due to an apparent lack of universal familiarity with


24

Special Education legal and regulatory requirements and district policies and procedures.

• Attitudes regarding students in need of support are not always positive on the part of some school district and community members.

• Access to vocational/technical and employment readiness opportunities and transitional planning are limited for students in need of support.

• It is difficult to attract “critical shortage” staff, such as Speech Language Pathologists, Occupational Therapists and School Psychologists.

• Escalating transportation, specialized intervention and tuition costs. • Limited established protocol to support long term English language learners • A lack of ELL student participation in the school community (sports, drama, music),

especially at the high school level. • Many of the Office of Civil Rights compliance issues from their continued review of the

ELL programs continue to exist, such as, student-teacher ratios, screening and services for kindergarten ELLs, as well as professional development for mainstream teachers, the placement of ELLs in lower track classes, translation of documents, parental involvement, and communication with mainstream teachers regarding the importance of accommodations for ELL students.

• A high absence rate exists among ELL population at all levels. • Past reductions in staffing for attendance/court officer positions by 50% makes effective

investigation of related matters increasingly difficult. • A lack of district leadership in guidance services, resulting from reduced funding, has led

to reduced focus and consistency across the district, including less than adequate implementation of programs or plans to address increasing behavioral disruptiveness by particular students at the elementary level.

School and School System Culture and Climate This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Climate, Accountability, and Alignment. School culture and climate underlie the modes of operation and communication that provide a sense of what is important and how things work within the organization. The Nashua School district has made a concerted effort through its District and DINI goals to emphasize shifts in school culture and climate that better support student achievement, with strong emphasis on communication and collaboration across the district. This has resulted in a communication and collaborative focus for all district and school-based activities. This focus is particularly apparent in areas of curriculum, instruction and assessment and has been supported by initiatives in technology, budgeting, and communication and outreach.

Critical issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Inadequate consistency and continuity perceived across the district re: implementation of

programs, curriculum, expectations, and use of assessment and data, etc. • Administrative staffing is inadequate to provide necessary support for use of data,

program and curriculum implementation, monitoring and evaluation. • Communication throughout the district is not always adequate. District level

communication and planning through regular district level meetings needs to continue and be enhanced.


25

Human Resources and Professional Development This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Climate, Accountability, and Alignment. The purpose of the human resources function is to assist the school district in achieving its goals. To this end, the Nashua School District works to ensure that they employ a dedicated, experienced, and high quality teaching and support staff that is focused on teaching and learning and continuously advancing their understanding of the learning process and instructional practices. Recent contract settlements, although involving a contentious and disruptive process, have enabled the district to focus on addressing school improvement matters with greater focus. Administrators, both veteran and new to the district, are designated to lead the implementation of initiatives that support the district’s and DINI goals and monitor their progress to ensure continuing improvement. Some structural and policy changes that support improved patterns of communication and increased collaboration have assisted all personnel towards achieving these goals. An extensive and varied, district sponsored professional development program has been critical in enhancing the skills of all personnel, contributing to the positive change and increased academic achievement needed to achieve the district’s goals.

Critical issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Technological and Human Resources procedural knowledge base of support staff has to

keep pace with the district’s needs. • Payroll and Human Resources technology does not adequately meet the demands of

the district • Restrictions (e.g. Master Contract) for professional development and teacher

collaboration during the school day not always supportive of school improvement approaches.

• A significant difficulty exists in attracting highly qualified staff in “critical shortage” areas.

• The numbers of teachers with Alternative 4 and 5 Certification Plans leaving the district within three years has increased.

• Staff diversity does not mirror the diversity of the student population. • Practices to recruitment and retain highly qualified staff must keep pace with the needs

of the district and the demands of the employment market. • Supervision and evaluation processes do not align with many of the instructional and

curriculum changes now in place. • New administrators require ongoing support and mentoring. • All professional development within the district to sustain and enhance recent initiatives,

emphasize collaboration and the creation of professional learning communities requires a maintained focus and ongoing support.

• Building principals require ongoing professional development and support to maintain understanding of classroom practices related to new initiatives.

Organizational Leadership and Planning This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Accountability, Alignment and Climate. After a few disappointing years in 2007 the Nashua School District demonstrated the results of much hard work by making Adequate Yearly progress (AYP) as a district under the terms of the federal No Child Left Behind legislation. This milestone and the efforts supporting this


26

achievement have begun to restore confidence in the district’s leadership following what had been a very difficult time in the district’s history. However in 2008 the district failed to meet AYP and as a result has been designated by the State as a district in Corrective Action. As a result, the district has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the NH Department of Education that requires the district to develop a corrective action plan to improve the districts NECAP test scores in reading. A more cohesive approach to management of the district, as well as greater transparency in operations and enhanced communication, has contributed to the current level of support for the district’s leadership. A number of matters involving leadership and management continue to be addressed. These include identifying four operational cornerstones for the school district which include building leadership, shaping belief, creating achievement, and celebrating success and the formulation of a series of “building leadership capacity” professional development activities for principals and district leaders. . The strategic planning process will further ascertain and clarify such issues and map the strategies necessary to deal with them. Issues that surfaced through the internal assessment:

• There is a need for thorough long range planning at all levels • Staff evaluation processes need to be updated and revised to reflect the goals of district

improvement. • Coordination between the city and the school district needs to be sustained. • Early childhood program development needs to be addressed in order to provide

intervention where it is most effective. • Improvement of relationships with the city and school board should continue to be

addressed. Communications and Partnerships This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Accountability, Alignment and Climate. Nashua schools have a long history of advocating for parent effort and involvement, and partnering with community organizations and programs. They have continued and expanded these efforts, increasing outreach to parents and a more diverse representation of the community. Communication has increased substantially across schools and the community at large, following a Communications Audit completed in 2005. A broader and more in depth approach has been taken to systematize communications and provide information that is timely, targeted to various stakeholders and to the community at large. Parents have been able to gain more a personal and accurate understanding of what is occurring in the school district through the implementation of ParentLink, an automated phone communication system; eNews, an electronic weekly District newsletter; a more dynamic District web site, which was launched in November 2008; and a soon to be initiated parent portal for direct access to student records. In addition, the District is managing the local cable television station, channel 99, devoted to educational programming about Nashua’s public and private schools and colleges. This District also takes part in Running Start, an articulated academic program between the District and the Nashua Community College. (Running Start allows high school students to earn credit for both a high school diploma and a college degree, diploma, or certificate program.) Community outreach efforts include a longstanding volunteer program involving between 3,000 to 4,000 volunteers who contribute about 120,000 hours annually. Parent outreach efforts have increased in Title I schools designated in need of improvement. Some of these schools have


27

made space for parent centers. The school district’s planning has become more inclusive and expansive as a result of being designated a district in need of improvement. Issues that surfaced through the internal assessment:

• Collaboration both within the school, across city agencies and in the community still limited in its scope.

• A plan for delivery of mental health services in the schools in collaboration with local agencies has been started, with four pilot schools collaborating with Community Council

• Negative perceptions of Special Education exist on the part of some community members and parents.

• A high number of ELL students’ parents refuse services because they want their children to remain in the neighborhood school where ELL services are not available.

• There is a low involvement of ELL parents and inadequate outreach staffing in the non-Title I schools and all middle schools.

Technology This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Accountability and Alignment. Technology has a considerable and multifaceted role within the Nashua School District. A cooperative relationship exists with the City of Nashua in the development of a fiber network. The school district has benefited from the use of federally provided ERATE, Title V and other grant monies in funding some of its technology needs. Enrollment in the 19 state approved Career and Technical Ed (CTE) programs at the secondary level is the largest in the state, with many carrying post-secondary articulations and\or college credits for high school work. A good infrastructure for technology is provided in the two new high school buildings. The use of technology supported data analysis to support instructional and programmatic decisions is being used more frequently within schools and across the district. Opportunities are available to use technology to improve effectiveness and efficiency in every aspect of the school district’s functions. Once fully implemented, the new student information system, X2, will provide streamlined processes, better scheduling, online IEPs, and better reporting and access of information. Similarly the implementation of the Follett Destiny Library system has provided quicker and simpler access, integrated reporting, and easier sharing of materials among staff and between schools.

Critical issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Local technology funding has decreased almost annually. The FY2008 budget is

$34,000 less than it was in FY2004. • Limited technology operating budget at the local level prevents computer replacement

and greatly impacts the technology infrastructure, related professional development and training.

• Limited equitable access to technology for students at elementary and middle school levels, including provision of appropriate supports to support student learning in inclusive settings due to inadequate technology infrastructure.

• The use of technological instructional tools is not adequate in most classrooms. • Key staff (computer and A/V support, training and technology integration) are inadequate

across the district. • Difficulty in attracting highly skilled CTE instructors. • Internet and some schools’ computer networks are stretched to capacity; affecting

student learning and professional development that is technologically based.


28

• Phone systems in school buildings are failing and generate expenses that would diminish with IP telephony.

Facilities This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Accountability, Alignment and Climate. The district maintains strong facilities’ staffing and a history of significant effort in maintaining its older buildings. They employ technology well in work order and supply systems and in monitoring half of the district buildings’ operating systems. The construction of Nashua North High School and the renovation of Nashua South High School completed a series of projects that brought a sense of renewal about Nashua School District’s high school facilities. The bulk of the district’s remaining building stock, although added to or renovated over ten years ago, is aging and was constructed for educational requirements differing substantially from those of the twenty- first century. In 2007 the district completed a thorough and substantial review and analysis of its facilities to assist in short and long term facilities planning. The resulting report was reviewed and considered in this assessment and in the work of the Facilities Workgroup as part of the development of this Strategic Plan.

Issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Overcrowding exists in numerous buildings, requiring use of portable classrooms, in

some cases. • There is a lack of equity in the quality and characteristics of facilities at elementary

and middle school levels. • No opportunity is available to expand early childhood programming due to lack of

space at elementary level. • There are multiple examples of space and facilities that are inadequate to support

demands of twenty-first century classrooms and programming at elementary and middle school levels.

• Growing deferred maintenance backlog indicative of inadequate funding for capital projects. A comprehensive preventive maintenance program plan is needed.

• Staffing shortages in some maintenance areas. • Identification of alternative energy sources and ways to conserve energy are needed in

order to reduce dependency/cost of utilizing fossil fuels and reduce total energy costs. • School building safety & security audit and planning requires further attention.

Educational Funding This improvement theme is linked to the District’s focal areas of Accountability and Alignment. As a district in need of improvement, Nashua has benefited from a number of funding sources made available as a result of that designation, with certain funds targeted towards specific schools identified as schools in need of improvement. This influx of funds has been effective in facilitating the district’s implementation of initiatives driving change in schools and classrooms, such as development of data collection and analysis systems and curriculum and instruction related professional development. The School District continues the Performance-Based Budgeting process, which was developed in 2006, and met with much acclaim in the community. The goal is to make the budget development as transparent as possible, to involve citizens in committees that develop and prioritize budgetary items, and to make recommendations to the Board of Education in its preparation of the school budget for the city.


29

Issues that surfaced through the internal assessment: • Fiscal impacts of changing demographics of the city and the resulting challenges

presented to the city’s schools continue to evolve. • Transportation costs are escalating; rising cost of fuel is expected to have a major

impact on out of district transportation, as well as upcoming transportation contracts. • No Child Left Behind and SPED mandates have increased, while their funding has not

kept pace. • Efforts should be made to increase the diversity of the District’s funding sources. • New England Association of Schools and Colleges accreditation evaluation indicates

Nashua South High School’s budget inadequate to address needs identified in staffing levels, textbooks, instructional materials and supplies, and technological support.

• Nashua School District’s annual operating budget increases have not, on average, kept pace with inflation.

• Despite a greater challenge of more diverse pupil needs, Nashua School District’s average per pupil funding continues to be more than ten per cent below the state average.


30

Focus Groups and Interviews

Reaching out to stakeholders was a critical element in the development of the District’s Strategic Plan. Focus groups served as the means for gathering data and feedback from the community about our schools. Future Management Systems (FMS), our consultant, facilitated three of the 20 focus groups: retirees, union leadership, and members of the Nashua Board of Aldermen. Volunteers trained by FMS, facilitated the remaining 17 focus groups. In addition, FMS conducted phone interviews with ten local stakeholders who are heavily invested in our schools.

The following table summarizes pertinent information about these activities.

Information About Stakeholder Groups

Focus Group No. of Participants City Employees 8 Administration (Directors, AD, Supervisors) 13

Principals 16 Teachers Elementary 14 Non-Public Parents (Home School, Private School, Preschool) 7

Parents Elementary 8 Parents Special Education 3 Students (High School) 20 Youth Task Force 10 Clergy 5 Business Community 11 Teachers Middle School 17 Support Staff (Secretaries, Custodians) 17 Ethnic Community Hispanic/Other 12 Senior Citizens 10 Union Leadership 4

Board of Aldermen 5 Teachers High School 7 Parents High School 14 Parents Middle School 6 Parents Elementary** 10 Parents Special Education** 7 Interviews Conducted with Town Officials and Community Partners 10

TOTAL PARTICIPANTS 234


31

Focus Group and Interview questions were organized around the central planning question: What does the Nashua School District need to do over the next five years to effectively ensure that Nashua’s children are prepared for their roles as adults during the twenty –first century? In order to respond to that question as we developed the plan, the following questions were asked of all focus groups and interview participants:

1. What is the role of the schools in the community and the role of the community in schools?

2. What is the school district doing well now in preparing students for their roles as

adults that should continue? 3. What could the school district improve, do differently or stop doing to better

prepare students for their roles as adults? 4. What are the biggest obstacles the school district faces in preparing students for

their roles as adults?

Summary of Findings The information provided below summarizes the key themes and overall findings of the focus groups and interviews. All groups responded to the same questions. A complete set of notes is available on the District web site.

1. What is the role of the schools in the community and the role of the community in schools?

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Schools ♦ To provide every child with a challenging individualized education, that prepares

them to be productive, self-disciplined life-long learners and well-rounded adults. ♦ To develop well-informed, strong citizens and future leaders, contributors to the

larger society, able to perpetuate democracy and be citizens of the world. ♦ To challenge and stretch students to be problem solvers and creative thinkers who

will use new tools for a new evolving world of the future. ♦ Provide career and life management programs that have real life applications,

promote workforce sustainability, meet the needs of industry and the community and provide guidance in career choices and options for career diversity.

♦ Ensure literacy and numeracy proficiency for all students. Community ♦ Challenge the school system to achieve excellence, ensure that the needs of the

system are addressed, and hold the system accountable. Student Support

Schools ♦ Promote self-discipline in all students and flexible and creative habits of mind. ♦ Provide structure, consequences and accountability for students at risk, supporting

them with advocacy and mentoring. ♦ Provide early intervention for students and parental support before students are of

school age (pre-school) as well as throughout the school experience.


32

School System Culture and Climate Schools ♦ Provide a safe, consistent environment for all students to learn, to socialize and to

experience opportunities, other than academics, that provide for diverse interests. ♦ Educate the whole child, balancing the academic focus with teaching of common

universal values. ♦ Assist students in knowing they can make a difference, in their school community

and in the community at large. Human Resources and Professional Development

Schools ♦ Maintain a teaching staff that has the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively

fill their roles and meet community needs. ♦ Provide professional development and technical training for teachers and staff to

stay current with advancements in education and technology. Organizational Leadership and Planning

♦ Schools should have parity of services, resources and facilities. ♦ There should be consistency in maintaining district standards of curriculum,

instruction, and measuring accountability. Communications and Partnerships

Schools and Community ♦ Schools and Community need to share a common vision and act in mutual support of

and be accountable to each other. • Schools need to evaluate, understand, support, and facilitate the needs and

values of the community and partner with the community, in order to better prepare students.

• Community, including businesses, government and community agencies, need to understand and support the needs and mission of schools and partner with the schools in order to make schools the best they can be.

♦ Schools and community should proactively support parents and families in sending students to school who are healthy and ready to learn while assisting them in understanding the curriculum and school expectations and how they can help their children at home.

♦ Schools should partner with community agencies, organizations and businesses to assist in impacting students beyond the school day, helping to bridge the relationship between parents and schools and bring wrap-around services to schools.

♦ Schools should communicate in ways that will help parents and the community understand the changing face of school and the district’s needs; the community should consistently keep schools informed about community resources and what is going on within the community.

♦ Parents and the community should actively participate in the schools and in the education process, providing interactive support and specialized knowledge.

♦ Schools need to be a centerpiece and resource of the community, open to parents and community members, where resources of time and talent are shared and assistance is provided in accessing lifelong learning opportunities.

♦ Schools should connect with higher education and post high school training expectations.

♦ Schools should view the community as a learning environment; strengthen connections to community resources and opportunities for students to contribute as citizens of Nashua.


33

Technology

Schools ♦ Keep technology current, with equitable access for all schools.

Facilities

Schools and Community ♦ Build and maintain the educational facilities and infrastructure necessary for a quality

education. Educational Funding Schools and Community

♦ Creatively provide financial resources for the infrastructure and educational process needed for 21st century schools.

♦ Provide alternate funding and fundraising capabilities. ♦ Provide advocacy at the local, state, and federal levels for resources needed to meet

standards of accountability.

2. What is the school district doing well now in preparing students for their roles as adults that should continue?

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment ♦ Continue and strengthen the focus on literacy and math using the research based

programs that work. ♦ Continue the broad range of quality vocational technical courses at high school and

maintain and expand connections to local businesses and internships. ♦ Continue the Career and Technology program at the high school level, integrating

workplace and employability skills and experiences with classroom learning and connections to local businesses, including internships.

♦ Elementary education program should continue the effective engagement of students and dealing with students as individuals.

♦ Maintain the variety of successful AP courses, the variety of courses available to earn college credit, and the broad range and high interest of electives offered at high school, continuing to prepare students well who are going to college.

♦ Continue and expand the community service and “ Service Learning” program ♦ Continue the commitment to improving instruction, coordinating strategies and skills

across curriculum, promoting active learning and providing a greater diversity of learning opportunities at all levels.

Student Support

♦ Continue the good efforts of the Title I schools in taking good care of kids through expanded services.

♦ Continue to offer strong high school athletics programs and a variety of extracurricular activities and clubs.

♦ Continue offering and operating alternative programs for at risk students. ♦ Continue and strengthen the ELL program. ♦ Continue to focus on and make progress on improving the dropout rate. ♦ Continue to move towards educating the whole child, focusing on the individual,

using the Follow the Child model. ♦ Continue K-12 interpersonal development with students- Relationships that provide

student to student support and social skills education, including conflict resolution. ♦ The Special Education program should continue doing the impressive job they do,

advocating for and being attentive to student needs.


34

School System Culture and Climate

♦ Continue collaboration models within district - teachers, staff, administrators ♦ Continue preparing students to be good citizens of the world - being inclusive,

teaching respect/dignity for all children and awareness and tolerance of differences. ♦ Continue the work of building smaller learning communities. ♦ Continue to build in accountability for students regarding their learning, actions and

decisions. ♦ Continue to demonstrate that adults in schools care about kids and their success and

see students as individuals. Human Resources and Professional Development

♦ Continue to provide assistance for new teachers. ♦ Continue to offer strong professional development for teachers. ♦ Continue to maintain a dedicated teaching and support staff with the skills,

knowledge and talent to fulfill their roles. Organizational Leadership and Planning

♦ Continue the positive efforts of strategic planning and actively and pragmatically seek solutions to the problems the district faces.

Communications and Partnerships

♦ Maintain assistance for adult education. ♦ Continue efforts to communicate with parents and the community using multiple

forms of media. ParentLink, E-news, Broadcast Board meetings ♦ Continue reaching out to disenfranchised parents, getting parents and students

engaged through parent classes and parent resource rooms. ♦ Continue efforts to reach out to the community and forge partnerships across the

community that enhance school programs. Technology

♦ Maintain the investment made in high school technology. ♦ Continue to support computer labs in elementary schools. ♦ Continue integrating technology into curriculum and learning and introducing

students to use of technology as learning and research tools. Facilities

♦ Maintain the high school facilities, infrastructure and environment. Educational Funding

♦ Continue seeking and effectively using Federal and other grants.

3. What could the school district improve, do differently or stop doing to better prepare students for their roles as adults?

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment ♦ Provide financial, economic, consumer literacy for all students. ♦ Keep World Language offerings current and begin at elementary level. ♦ Focus on education and development of individual students as opposed to groups of

students; one size does not fit all. ♦ Provide greater consistency of curriculum from one grade to another and from one

level to another, with more contact between levels to clarify expectations. ♦ Ensure smaller class sizes across the board ♦ Do a better job teaching core subjects and basic skills.


35

♦ Reassess and modify block scheduling. ♦ Provide a greater emphasis on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math,

emphasizing process and problem solving but balancing with basic skills. ♦ Ensure high quality teaching and learning with teachers as facilitators/coaches,

emphasizing interactive, individualized teaching, focusing not on what was taught, but on what students have learned.

♦ Minimize the impact of group standardized testing (NECAP) on teaching and learning and shift to an emphasis on individual progress over time.

♦ Ensure that all students achieve proficiency in literacy in first three grades and continue a literacy emphasis in upper grades for all students.

♦ Provide full-time Kindergarten in all schools with transportation provided. ♦ Make preschool education part of the education continuum for all students. ♦ Add a community service requirement. ♦ Expand the internship program. ♦ Adhere to high expectations - raise grade expectations, not lower them for

graduation and for athletic participation ♦ Provide more interdisciplinary curriculum, e.g. language and cultural studies, literacy

with arts and humanities, integrate science/social studies with reading. ♦ Offer more civics courses, with greater emphasis on learning how our government

operates. ♦ Provide more communication with post secondary level to discuss what preparation

is needed and how to meet requirements, bring faculties together. ♦ Move learning outside the four walls of the classroom and provide more opportunities

for community collaboration related to curriculum. ♦ Track students post graduation to determine preparedness for post-secondary

experience or work place and completion rate of college or post secondary training.

Student Support ♦ Put an attendance policy in place that addresses the truancy problem and enforce

and deal with it proactively. ♦ Do better job transitioning kids from one building to another, one level to another,

and one grade to another, following-up with those needing individual attention or special plans in transition.

♦ Need to address needs of students who don’t qualify for any support; “silent group” slipping through cracks.

♦ Need to better address the differences of our diverse population and strengthen our connections

♦ Better address needs of at risk students and those who don’t fit traditional classes. ♦ Do more to discipline students and hold them personally responsible for behavior,

and their work, find ways to address needs of students lacking home support. ♦ Enforce district policies about school suspensions and communication to parents, but

do not suspend kids out of school, find other methods. ♦ Ensure that all teachers and paraprofessionals are knowledgeable about students’

IEPs and adhere to them. ♦ Provide more guidance counselors, social workers, healthcare professionals,

behavioral specialists, SPED teachers, ELL teachers to address changing demographics and provide consistency of services.

♦ Provide more support services for middle school kids, SPED and ELL not enough. ♦ Put more focus into the guidance program at high school, separating socially related

issues from that of academic advising role for ALL students.


36

School System Culture and Climate ♦ Deepen the level of diversity training, cultural awareness, tolerance and valuing of

diversity for students and staff. ♦ Place greater emphasis on expectations of respect and responsibility among

students, parents and all district employees. ♦ Develop a culture of greater collaboration and support within schools. ♦ Build a better sense of community within schools, teach kids what community is, how

to contribute and become a positive member of society. Human Resources and Professional Development

♦ Ensure that the district hires and retains enthusiastic and skillful teachers, who keep students connected with subject matter.

♦ Value, respect and recognize successful teachers. ♦ Maintain paraprofessional staffing levels and provide more training for

paraprofessionals and support staff. ♦ Enhance and expand the support program for new teachers. ♦ Provide a comprehensive professional development system for all personnel that

addresses the district’s goals, while providing individual options for teachers, using multiple means such as on-line learning.

♦ Provide stronger more comprehensive faculty oversight and evaluation. ♦ Ensure full-time art, music, physical education and computer teachers in every

school. Organizational Leadership and Planning

♦ Reduce institutional inertia in terms of implementing change. ♦ Explore lengthening school day and school year ♦ Define how input into decision making processes will be used. ♦ Need consistent approach to school management, site-based or top-down. ♦ Gain a better understanding of ongoing change in the community, regularly assess

needs and re-evaluate priorities to be proactive in planning. ♦ Harness energy and interest being generated through strategic planning. ♦ Continue building and improving relationships between BOE and rest of city

government. Communications and Partnerships

♦ Expand communication and outreach with parents, especially new parents, provide information about school and community resources, training and opportunities in schools, and help them become as involved as possible.

♦ Provide support to parents in navigating the special ed. system. ♦ Increase regular direct communication between teacher and parent. ♦ Stress responsibility and accountability equally for parents, teachers and

administrators. ♦ Communicate more proactively with the community, parents, BOE and state

legislators about successes, as well as needs. ♦ Use a wider array of media, utilize channel 99 and update district web site. ♦ Expand all collaborative efforts with the community; a work in progress.

Technology

♦ Ensure that the district’s technology and technology infrastructure are up to date and able to keep up with the demands of the district.

♦ Provide adequate tools to integrate technology into curriculum and instruction across the district.


37

♦ Provide technology training for teachers so they can be knowledgeable and current using technology in the classroom.

♦ Provide more computer lab time at the elementary level for basic computer skills. Facilities

♦ Address physical conditions so that facilities are equitable. Educational Funding

♦ Improve the budgeting process – school (equity), city, and state levels.

4. What are the biggest obstacles the school district faces in preparing students for their roles as adults?

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment ♦ Standardized tests -they take away from critical skills development and

individualization, and narrow the focus of curriculum. ♦ Large class sizes ♦ Preparing students for future careers in an unstable world. ♦ Lack of consistency and continuity of curriculum and programs across the schools. ♦ Maintaining high expectations and accountability for all students and teachers. ♦ Not enough emphasis on learning vs. teaching, balance of understanding vs.

application of content and relating curriculum to real world. ♦ Developing a high school program that addresses recently mandated competency

assessment. Student Support

♦ Students who are unmotivated to learn and not engaged in school. ♦ Attendance policy and it’s enforcement ♦ ELL program is not adequate to meet the increasing number of ELL students. ♦ Increasing mental health issues - guidance staffing does not match increases. ♦ Increasing numbers of students identified for special education and 504

accommodations. ♦ Educating students about those things that can pose personal safety issues, e. g.

drugs, sexual practices, etc. ♦ Students with medical problems and adequate support of school nurses to address.

problems and provide necessary medical supervision. ♦ Weak early intervention programs.


♦ Developing inclusive school communities where the attitudes of all are inclusive. ♦ Addressing the needs of the increasingly diverse school-age population. ♦ Ensuring that all students feel safe within the school environment and have a sense

of belonging. Human Resources and Professional Development

♦ Teachers who are not prepared to teach required skills, or using outdated and/or ineffective methods

♦ Attracting and keeping the best staff possible. ♦ Shortage of teachers in specialty areas, teacher licensure issues. ♦ Providing good quality professional development opportunities that advance the

goals of the district and reflect opportunities for choices by teachers. ♦ Relationships with Union and teacher contract - political implications, affect on public

and students.


38

♦ Succession of leadership. Organizational Leadership and Planning

♦ Not enough time in the school day and/or the school year, need change. ♦ Political philosophies and mandates such as NCLB that limit and direct. ♦ Lack of a clear vision, planning, and direction, need to develop and share with the

community and fully implement this plan. ♦ Rate and pace of change, competing priorities, different approaches; often driven by

those who have no connection to education. Communications and Partnerships

♦ Disconnect between home and school and lack of parental involvement and support, parents who don’t have advocacy skills or lack knowledge.

♦ Negative attitudes about teachers and the diminished value of education, disconnect with taxpayers.

♦ Societal influences, conflicting values and priorities in home, and entitlement culture. ♦ Changing demographics of the community, ethnic/language, socio-economic. ♦ Need for School Board, Aldermen, city government and community to work together

more collaboratively on all issues related to education. Technology

♦ Maintaining and keeping up with technology. ♦ Access to technology for students, both in and out of school buildings, and

technology training of professionals. Facilities

♦ Physical infrastructure issues Educational Funding

♦ Unfunded mandates (e.g. special education, NCLB, NECAP assistance, kindergarten).

♦ Fiscal and funding restraints, state and local community . ♦ Lack of resources, supplies and materials, to meet the needs of all students.


39

Priority Areas, Goals and Success Measures The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan is defined clearly by five Priority Areas and nine Goals. FMS used the data generated from the focus groups, stakeholder interviews, and the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analyses as the basis for the identification of goals and the subsequent success measures. The District developed the five priority areas to assist in messaging and provide a clearer focus and organization of the goals. The five Priority Areas focus on:

1. Ensuring Academic Success for Each Student 2. Creating a Learning Environment 3. Leading the Learning 4. Many Voices and Hands Making a Difference 5. Making Learning Accessible

Success Measures contain data points that measure progress toward the targets that enhance teaching and learning, and move the District forward toward meeting its goals.

Priority Areas and Goals As stated in the Executive Summary, presented below are the five priority areas and nine goals of The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan. Strategic goals are broad statements of what the District hopes to achieve in the next five years. Goals focus on outcomes or results and are qualitative in nature. They are consistent with the Mission, Core Values, and fulfill Vision. Priority I: Student Learning and Achievement - Ensuring Academic Success for Each Student Student learning and achievement is at the heart of what the Nashua schools are all about. Students who are better prepared in elementary, middle, and high school are better prepared to succeed in college and in the workplace.

Goal: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Promote increased student learning and achievement through all teaching and learning practices to maximize each student’s personal growth and meet district, state, and federal standards of accountability.

Priority II: School Culture - Creating a Learning Environment The goal of making the individual classroom a place that naturally motivates students to learn is much easier if students and teachers function in a school culture where parents and community members are welcomed and where academic success and the motivation to learn is expected, respected, and rewarded.

Goal: Student Support Ensure that the academic, emotional, physical, and social needs of each student are addressed and coordinated to nurture and support students in their growth and development.

Goal: School System Culture and Climate Establish a safe, nurturing, and motivating culture in each school and across the district.


40

Priority III: Leadership and Human Resources - Leading the Learning Leadership in carrying out the Nashua School District's mission and effectively and efficiently managing human resources, professional development, educational issues, projects, and programs is critical to the academic success of students.

Goal: Human Resources and Professional Development

Promote the quality, continuity and effectiveness of staff through comprehensive and exemplary recruitment, staff development, and evaluation practices.

Goal: Organizational Leadership and Planning

Establish strong and coordinated leadership at all levels of the district to ensure the provision of a quality personalized education for each student in Nashua.

Priority IV: Community Involvement - Many Voices and Hands Making a Difference In education many of the issues schools face are so complex that individuals acting independently cannot resolve them. When Nashua parents and community members are involved together in schools, education improves.

Goal: Communications and Partnerships

Implement comprehensive communication systems and partnerships with parents and the community that support and provide for the needs of students and their families and enhance the educational program.

Priority V: Operations - Making Learning Accessible Successfully managing and operating a school system of 17 schools, 12,300 students, and approximately 2,000 employees requires a comprehensive infrastructure of supporting services. These services are provided to ensure that teachers, students, and principals have the resources, materials, and facilities they need for successful instruction.

Goal: Technology

Provide the technology and infrastructure necessary to support student learning expectations and district demands.

Goal: Facilities

Ensure equitable educational facilities and necessary infrastructure to meet students’ needs, provide a quality 21st century education and foster community access are in place across the District.

Goal: Educational Funding

Plan for the funding necessary to ensure an effective and stable educational environment in Nashua’s schools in support of the implementation of the goals of the strategic plan.


41

SUCCESS MEASURES And Improvement Targets

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

Goal: Promote increased student learning and achievement through all teaching and learning practices to maximize each student’s personal growth and meet district, state, and federal standards of accountability.

Success Measures Targets

Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 Students entering Grade 1 demonstrate readiness for learning.

Determine Quantitative measure and cut point for readiness

Pilot readiness instrument and establish readiness baseline

Year 1 of full implementation of instrument

Baseline + 3% demonstrate readiness

Baseline + 5% demonstrate readiness

2 Students entering Grade 6 demonstrate readiness for middle school academics

2008 Baseline + 2% for 5th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; 5th grade Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment Unit 6; and 5th grade Mathematics year end assessment

+2% for 5th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; 5th grade Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment Unit 6; and 5th grade Mathematics year end assessment

+2% for 5th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; 5th grade Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment Unit 6; and 5th grade Mathematics year end assessment assessment across all AYP subgroups

+2% for 5th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; 5th grade Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment Unit 6; and 5th grade Mathematics year end assessment assessment across all AYP subgroups

+2% for 5th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; 5th grade Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment Unit 6; and 5th grade Mathematics year end assessment assessment

3 Students entering Grade 9 demonstrate readiness for high school academics

2008 Baseline + 2% for 8th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; and 8th grade year end mathematics assessment

+2% for 8th grade NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; and 8th grade year end mathematics assessment




4 Extended and alternative learning opportunities for high school students are in place and in use by high school students.

State and District Policies implemented and baseline established

↑ student participation by 40% of 09/10 level




5 Students leaving Grade 12 demonstrate readiness for college or some other form of post-secondary education or training

2008 Baseline + 2% for High School NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; SAT scores; Course competencies success rate

+ 2% for High School NECAP proficiency levels in reading, mathematics, and writing across all AYP subgroups; SAT scores; Course competencies success rate





42

Student Support

Goal: Ensure that the academic, emotional, physical, and social needs of each student are addressed and coordinated to support students in their growth and development.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 Develop academic and non-academic index scales (Kid Grid) to monitor academic and non-academic status and progress of students at each grade span (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9-12) and link to personalized education plans

Develop & pilot scale for 1st grade span

Implement 1st GS; develop & pilot scale for 2nd grade span

Implement 2nd GS; develop & pilot scale for 3rd grade span

Implement 3rd GS; develop & pilot scale for 4th grade span

100% implementation

2 My Voice Student and Staff results are at or above national averages with significant improvement in identified key indicators.

Identification of key indicators and establish baseline data

3% gains on key indicators, 2% gains on aggregate




3 Improvement in statistics related to climate and culture such as attendance, tardiness, discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, etc.

Establish baseline data and index scale/weighting

Monitor and revise scale and weighting

Year 1 of full implementation

Year 2 Year 3


Goal: Establish a safe, nurturing, and motivating culture in each school and across the district.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 School climate and culture is monitored annually through student, teacher and parent surveys to determine improvement initiatives and monitor results.

Surveys identified& implementation planned

Implementation in all schools

ongoing review

ongoing review

ongoing review

2 A comprehensive safety and security plan is developed and implemented, and is being monitored in the district. (Suicide prevention and threat assessment protocols included at the Action Plan level)

Plan development Implementation & monitoring begun

ongoing review

ongoing review

ongoing review


43

Human Resources and Professional Development

Goal: Promote the quality, continuity and effectiveness of staff through comprehensive and exemplary recruitment, staff development, and evaluation practices.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 The quality and continuity of staff is increased as measured by a) turnover rate of staff; voluntary and involuntary terminations, b) exit interview data to determine reasons for departure of voluntary terminations, c) percentage of teachers at highly qualified status d) percentage of staff on alternative plans compared to certified staff, measured for new hires and overall staff.

Baselines for a, c, d, e & criteria for b established

Incremental, progressive decreases for (a) until 5-10% turnover is achieved for voluntary terms in each employee job class Progressive decrease for (d) until acceptable target ratio is met & (b) achievement of 90% positive response (c ) Meet 100% HQT- state standard upon hire

Incremental, progressive decreases for (a) until 5-10% turnover is achieved for voluntary terms in each employee job class Progressive decrease for (d) resulting in meeting target ratios & (b) achievement of 95% positive response (c ) Maintain/ meet 100% HQT- state standard upon hire

Maintaining acceptable levels of all success measures Achievement of 98% positive response should be reached at this point, if not already

Maintaining acceptable levels of all success measures

2 All staff evaluation processes are reviewed, refined and revised to reflect the district’s commitment to high expectations and are linked to training outcomes and the goals of the district’s strategic plan.

Identify priority basis for review of evaluation systems 25% of evaluation systems reviewed, refined and revised

+25% of evaluation systems reviewed, refined and revised



100% of evaluation systems reviewed, refined and revised

3 100% of staff consistently evaluated on established cycles, using structured protocols, with identified follow-up for performance not meeting job expectations.

Evaluation systems defined & all recommended practices implemented

100% 100% 100% 100%

4 The district’s professional development program reflects the priorities of the district’s strategic plan and is annually rated as highly effective, as measured by staff members completing professional development evaluation forms.

PD program aligned with priorities of district’s strategic plan

95-98% Rating as highly effective




5 All newly hired teachers (a) participate in district and school-based induction programs (orientation & mentoring) (b) annually rate the district’s staff induction programs highly effective.

(a)100% participation (b)95-98% rating as highly effective






44

Organizational Leadership and Planning

Goal: Establish strong and coordinated leadership at all levels of the district to ensure the provision of a quality personalized education for each student in Nashua.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 Strategic Planning benchmarks are reported to Board of Education and community annually and made readily accessible to all.

Establish benchmarks

Full report Full report Full report Full report

2 Performance appraisals and individualized professional development plans demonstrate increased leadership roles on the part of professional staff

Appraisal system and individual plans reflect assessment of leadership qualities

ongoing ongoing ongoing ongoing

3 School Teams (including parent representatives), the district Leadership Team, and BOE have implemented collaborative efforts that support distributed and shared leadership at school sites and across the community to support the goals of the strategic plan.

Establish plans for teams’ collaborative efforts to support strategic plan

All school teams, the district Leadership Team and the BOE have implemented collaborative efforts

ongoing ongoing ongoing

Communications and Partnerships

Goal: Implement comprehensive communication systems and partnerships with parents and the community that support and provide for the needs of students and their families and enhance the educational program.

Success Measures Targets Y1

SY 09-10 Y2

SY 10-11 Y3

SY 11-12 Y4

SY 12-13 Y5

SY 13-14 1 Parent participation in

parent/teacher conferences, parent informational activities and programs is increased.

Establish baseline, procedures, and groups for whom increases will be measured.

Increase 2% for all groups

Increase 2% For all groups



2 The number, quality and impact of Community partnerships in support of District goals are increased.

Establish criteria, protocols for partnerships and implement with current partners

Establish baseline and prioritize partnership goals

Expand partnerships around priority goals

Maintain & expand effective partnerships

Maintain & expand effective partnerships

3 A district-wide Communication Plan is effectively implemented as measured by stakeholder surveys

Define scope and sequence of Plan

Develop and pilot surveys and establish baseline data

+5% satisfaction re: communication



4 Parent portal on X2 is implemented and accessed consistently by parents

X2 Grade book infrastructure, programming & training completed

Access implemented, baseline data collected

5% increase in parent usage




45

Technology

Goal: Provide the technology and infrastructure necessary to support student learning expectations and district demands.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 Technology skill goals and benchmarks for staff at all levels are developed, implemented, and consistently referenced to measure technological proficiency around Office Productivity tools, use of Student Information System, Library System, and other related management tools.

Technology benchmarks developed, training needs assessed, training plan defined. 25% of benchmark met

Training Plan reviewed & updated, 50% of benchmark met



Training Plan reviewed & updated, ongoing training

2 Technology is used proficiently by teachers to enhance student learning. Technology is integrated as a tool to support (a) student learning as measured by student assignments and creation of electronic portfolios and (b) teaching as measured by classroom observations, yearly surveys and curriculum development.

Measurement criteria identified, electronic portfolio deployment plan defined

Criteria in place and used by administrators, Electronic portfolios exist for 25% of students

Electronic portfolios exist for 50% of students



3 Support by instructional technology staff for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools is indicated to be satisfactory, based upon user surveys.

Needs assessed at High School Level, plan to meet needs in place

Needs are being met at High School Level Needs assessed at Middle School Level, plan to meet needs in place

Needs are being met at Middle School Level Needs assessed at Elementary School Level, plan to meet needs in place

Needs are being met at Elementary School Level

Needs are being met at all levels

4 Technology Replacement Plan to support District needs around computer infrastructure is developed, approved by the BOE, and Implemented.

Computer infrastructure is replaced with a 20 year life cycle





5 Technology Replacement Plan to support District needs around implementation of fiber, implementation of IP telephony, and audio-visual infrastructure is developed, approved by the BOE and implemented.

Plan developed and approved

Plan implemented

Plan implemented

Plan implemented

Plan implemented


46

Facilities Goal: Ensure equitable educational facilities and necessary infrastructure to

meet students’ needs, provide a quality 21st century education and foster community access are in place across the District.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 Three percent of each facility’s assessed value will be spent annually on its maintenance cost in order to keep all maintenance systems within acceptable engineering limits

All facilities assessed for total value by developing data base systems with life span and replacement costs.

Implementation of facility value to maintenance spending ratio by developing a maintenance systems and replacement plan

Implementation ongoing ongoing

2 Safety and emergency management plans are annually reviewed and updated with City officials, organizations, and groups.

ongoing ongoing ongoing ongoing ongoing

3 All schools have facility and classroom profiles that demonstrate how they meet industry, state and federal education standards.

Profiles developed &measured against standards

50% of facility profiles aligned to standards




4 A facilities’ use plan will be in place for each school building that identifies how the community uses the building and how access is fostered.

Board of Education Ad Hoc Study Committee established to review current district policies and practices and make recommendations

Develop facilities use plan. Publish and promote access

ongoing ongoing ongoing

Educational Funding

Goal: Plan for the funding necessary to ensure an effective and stable educational environment in Nashua’s schools in support of the implementation of the goals of the strategic plan.


Y1 SY 09-10

Y2 SY 10-11

Y3 SY 11-12

Y4 SY 12-13

Y5 SY 13-14

1 Favorable ratings increase annually in regards to general understanding of the school district’s budget needs measured against progress on strategic plan goals, based on the results of parent, teacher, and community partner surveys

Survey developed and baseline established

5% increase 5% increase

5% increase

5% increase

2 Budget planning & related decisions are informed by & based on the availability of the most appropriate budget models and multi-year projections

Budget models and multi-year projection process established

Process in use ongoing ongoing ongoing

3 An Educational Foundation is established to support alternative funding options for the District, with collaborative support from the District & BOE

Education Foundation planning initiated by interested community members with collaborative support of district

Education Foundation established with guidance & support of District, including development of criteria for allocation of funds raised

Education foundation activities initiated and progress monitored

ongoing ongoing


47

Implementation and Accountability The implementation of The Road Ahead: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan is the next critical step in successfully navigating the District’s future. This requires the development of an annual action plan that links the goals and strategies to what the District specifically will do each year toward achieving our defined goals. The strategies serve as the departure point for the action plan template, see pages 48 to 59. The template also includes accountability data, including due date, person(s) responsible, success measures, and data points. The strategies were developed using data generated from focus groups, stakeholder interviews, as well as the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analyses of District programs and offices. District staff will identify actions needed to be taken each year that utilize the strategies that fulfill goals. The actions of numerous initiatives already underway in the Nashua School District will need to be identified and integrated into the annual action plan. The developers of the actions must be as forward-thinking as possible in considering current issues, new ideas, innovative methods, and possible resources in fulfilling goals. The Nashua Board of Education will establish a system of reporting and of reviewing the results of the annual action plan. A timeframe for such reporting will involve interim reports during the school year, as well as a final annual report. Reports will contain clear outcomes of the actions taken and will be shared and communicated with stakeholder audiences through public venues, keeping accountability at the forefront. Acknowledging that possible detours will arise but will not impede progress is important, and means that the implementation of the Strategic Plan, and ultimately the fulfillment of goals, remains our destination. Toward that end, the Nashua Board of Education will remain true to the collegial energy and effort of all Strategic Planning participants and to the strength and well-being of the Nashua community.

05-11-09 Nashua School District The Road Ahead: Strategic Plan 2009-2014 48

ACTION PLANNING TEMPLATES

For 2009-2010


Priority Area I: Student Learning and Achievement – Ensuring Academic Success for Each Student

Goal: Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Promote increased student learning and achievement through all teaching and learning practices to maximize each student’s personal growth and meet district, state, and federal standards of accountability.

Actions Due Date Person(s) Responsible (Lead, Implement, Support)

Strategy 1. Implement curriculum at every grade level and in every subject area that is consistent and aligned with district and state standards, provides clear expectations and continuity across grade levels and course sequences, and ensures literacy and numeracy proficiency for all students.

Strategy 2. Provide a variety of learning opportunities that address individual student needs and promote collaboration beyond the immediate school environment, providing opportunities for real life applications and service to the community.

Strategy 3. Provide highly effective instruction in every classroom that challenges and supports students at all achievement levels to be active learners, problem solvers and critical and creative thinkers, able to use a range of learning tools and maximize their personal growth.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Students entering Grade 1 demonstrate readiness for learning.

2 Students entering Grade 6 demonstrate readiness for middle school academics.

3 Students entering Grade 9 demonstrate readiness for high school academics.


5 Students leaving Grade 12 demonstrate readiness for college or some other form of post-secondary education or training.

• Learning Readiness measurement • DIBELS • NECAP proficiency levels • Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment

Unit 6 • 5th Grade Math End-of-Year Assessment • SAT scores • Number of Students Passing Course

Competencies


Priority Area I: Student Learning and Achievement – Ensuring Academic Success for Each Student

Goal: Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment (cont.) Promote increased student learning and achievement through all teaching and learning practices to maximize each student’s personal growth and meet district, state, and federal standards of accountability.


Strategy 4. Extended and alternative learning opportunities for high school students are in place and in use by high school students.

Strategy 5. Students leaving Grade 12 demonstrate readiness for college or some other form of post-secondary education or training.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Students entering Grade 1 demonstrate readiness for learning.

2 Students entering Grade 6 demonstrate readiness for middle school academics.

3 Students entering Grade 9 demonstrate readiness for high school academics.


5 Students leaving Grade 12 demonstrate readiness for college or some other form of post-secondary education or training.

• Learning Readiness measurement • DIBELS • NECAP proficiency levels • Scott Foresman Benchmark Assessment

Unit 6 • 5th Grade Math End-of-Year Assessment • SAT scores • Number of Students Passing Course

Competencies


Priority Area II: School Culture – Creating a Learning Environment Goal: Student Support Ensure that the academic, emotional, physical, and social needs of each student are addressed and coordinated to

nurture and support students in their growth and development.


Strategy 1. Anticipate, plan and provide for the needs of students, across the spectrum of abilities and backgrounds, to nurture and support each student in their growth and development.

Strategy 2. Strengthen transition planning and practices from grade to grade and from level to level across the school district, in order to meet the needs of students and parents.

Strategy 3. Involve parents, families and community organizations in the support of students.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Develop academic and non-academic index scales (Kid Grid) to monitor academic and non-academic status

and progress of students at each grade span (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9-12) and link to personalized education plans.

2 My Voice Student and Staff results are at or above national averages with significant improvement in identified key indicators.

3 Improvement in statistics related to climate and culture such as attendance, tardiness, discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, etc.

• Kid Grid – academic and non-academic index scales

• My Voice Student Survey scores • My Voice Staff Survey scores • Excessive Absences • Excessive Tardiness • Student Discipline Occurrences


Priority Area II: School Culture – Creating a Learning Environment Goal: School System Culture and Climate: Establish a safe, nurturing, and motivating culture in each school and across the district.


Strategy 1. Ensure a safe, caring and welcoming environment for each student, where the learning and diversity of each student is recognized and respected.

Strategy 2. Build a sense of community within all schools, where the attitudes of all are inclusive and each student and parent experiences a sense of belonging within the school environment.

Strategy 3. Develop a welcoming culture within all schools where collaboration and support among teachers, staff, administrators, parents and community members are the norm.

Strategy 4. Build in student accountability for their learning and actions.

Success Measures Data Points 1 School climate and culture is monitored annually through student, teacher and parent surveys to determine

improvement initiatives and monitor results.

2 A comprehensive safety and security plan is developed and implemented, and is being monitored in the district. (Suicide prevention and threat assessment protocols included at the Action Plan level)

• School Climate and Culture Survey scores • Suicide Incidents • Threatening Behavior Incidents


Priority Area III: Leadership and Human Resources – Leading the Learning Goal: Human Resources and Professional Development Promote the quality, continuity and effectiveness of staff through comprehensive and

exemplary recruitment, staff development, and evaluation practices.


Strategy 1. Recruit and retain an enthusiastic, dedicated teaching and support staff that reflects the diversity of the community and has the skills, knowledge, talent and disposition necessary to effectively fulfill their roles, keep students connected with subject matter and meet community needs.

Strategy 2. Provide a comprehensive professional development and technical training system for all personnel that addresses the district’s goals, while providing individual options to stay current with advancements in education and technology.

Strategy 3. Develop stronger, more comprehensive faculty and staff supervision and evaluation that reflect programmatic changes and the district’s goals.

Success Measures Data Points 1 The quality and continuity of staff is increased

2 All staff evaluation processes are reviewed, refined and revised to reflect the district’s commitment to high expectations and are linked to training outcomes and the goals of the district’s strategic plan.

3 100% of staff consistently evaluated on established cycles, using structured protocols, with identified follow-up for performance not meeting job expectations

4 The district’s professional development program reflects the priorities of the district’s strategic plan and is annually rated as highly effective, as measured by staff members completing professional development evaluation forms.

5 All newly hired teachers (a) participate in district and school-based induction programs (orientation & mentoring) (b) annually rate the district’s staff induction programs highly effective.

• Staff Turnover Rate • Voluntary Terminations • Involuntary Terminations • Non-lifestyle Voluntary Terminations • Percentage of Highly Qualified Teachers • Percentage of Teachers on Alternative

Plans • Percentage of Staff Evaluated per Cycle • Professional Development Ratings • Participation of Teacher New-Hires

completing Induction Programs • Staff Induction Program Ratings


Priority Area III: Leadership and Human Resources – Leading the Learning Goal: Organizational Leadership and Planning Establish strong and coordinated leadership at all levels of the district to ensure the provision of a

quality personalized education for each student in Nashua.


Strategy 1. Collaboratively work with teachers, parents, students, community, and Board of Education members to build the capacity for leadership in support of the vision and goals of this plan.

Strategy 2. Ensure that annual benchmarks are used to regularly report on the progress of the plan’s implementation and that the results are disseminated to the community.

Strategy 3. Continue to build and improve relationships between BOE and rest of city government.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Strategic Planning benchmarks are reported to Board of Education and community annually and made readily

accessible to all.

2 Performance appraisals and individualized professional development plans demonstrate increased leadership roles on the part of professional staff.

3 School Teams (including parent representatives), the district Leadership Team, and BOE have implemented collaborative efforts that support distributed and shared leadership at school sites and across the community to support the goals of the strategic plan.

• Strategic Planning benchmarks • Performance appraisals • Leadership qualities assessment


Priority Area IV: Community Involvement – Many Voices and Hands Making a Difference Goal: Communication and Partnerships Implement comprehensive communication systems and partnerships with parents and the community that

support and provide for the needs of students and their families and enhance the educational program.


Strategy 1. Strengthen support for parents and families that will facilitate sending students to school who are healthy and ready to learn and assist parents in understanding the curriculum, school expectations and policies and how parents can help their children at home..

Strategy 2. Partner with community organizations and institutional resources to assist in supporting students, their families and the educational program..

Strategy 3. Communicate in ways that will help parents and the community understand changes in school curriculum, practices and policies, create awareness of the district’s and community’s needs, and build shared expectations.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Parent participation in parent/teacher conferences, parent informational activities and programs is increased.

2 The number, quality and impact of Community partnerships in support of District goals are increased.

3 A district-wide Communication Plan is effectively implemented as measured by stakeholder surveys.

4 Parent portal on X2 is implemented and accessed consistently by parents

• Parent participation rates by school level • Community Partnerships: number, quality

& impact • Communication survey results • X2 Parent Portal usage rates


Priority Area V: Operations – Making Learning Accessible Goal: Technology Provide the technology and infrastructure necessary to support student learning expectations and district demands.


Strategy 1. Ensure that the district’s technology and technology infrastructure are up to date and able to keep up with the demands of the district, with equitable access for all schools.

Strategy 2. Provide adequate tools and training for teachers across the district to be knowledgeable and current in integrating technology into curriculum and instruction and introducing students to use of technology as learning and research tools.

Strategy 3. Establish a technology replacement plan

Strategy 4. Identify alternative funding and resources to supplement and advance the use of technology in the district.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Technology skill goals and benchmarks for staff at all levels are developed, implemented, and consistently

referenced to measure technological proficiency around Office Productivity tools, use of Student Information System, Library System, and other related management tools.

2 Technology is used proficiently by teachers to enhance student learning. Technology is integrated as a tool to support (a) student learning as measured by student assignments and creation of electronic portfolios and (b) teaching as measured by classroom observations, yearly surveys and curriculum development.

3 Support by instructional technology staff for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools is indicated to be satisfactory, based upon user surveys.

4 Technology Replacement Plan to support District needs around computer infrastructure is developed, approved by the BOE, and Implemented.

5 Technology Replacement Plan to support District needs around implementation of fiber, implementation of IP telephony, and audio-visual infrastructure is developed, approved by the BOE and implemented.

• Staff technological proficiency ratings • Percentage of Student Electronic

Portfolios • Technology survey ratings • Technology replacement lifecycle • Percentage of technology infrastructure

implemented


Priority Area V: Operations – Making Learning Accessible Goal: Facilities Ensure equitable educational facilities and necessary infrastructure to meet students’ needs, provide a quality 21st century

education and foster community access are in place across the District.


Strategy 1. Develop a three year plan for the elimination or reduction of the leased portable classrooms at Fairgrounds, Elm and Pennichuck schools.

Strategy 2. Define and differentiate necessary types of services based on demographics/performance, integrate them into the facilities profile for each elementary school and annually evaluate the availability of local, state and federal funding.

Strategy 3. Develop a system for tracking early childhood students to enable projections of services needed for students entering district’s elementary schools.

Strategy 4. Investigate and identify ways in which specialized schools, such as central registration, early childhood, or special education, might be advantageous to the district and the implications of such schools on facilities.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Three percent of each facility’s assessed value will be spent annually on its maintenance cost in order to

keep all maintenance systems within acceptable engineering limits. 2 Safety and emergency management plans are annually reviewed and updated with City officials,

organizations, and groups. 3 All schools have facility and classroom profiles that demonstrate how they meet industry, state and federal

education standards. 4 A facilities’ use plan will be in place for each school building that identifies how the community uses the

building and how access is fostered.

• Facility maintenance budget (3% of facility’s assessed value)

• Percentage of classroom profiles aligned to standard

• Percentage of facility profiles aligned to standard


Priority Area V: Operations – Making Learning Accessible Goal: Facilities (cont.) Ensure that equitable educational facilities and the infrastructure necessary to meet student needs, provide a quality 21st

century education and foster community access are in place across the district.


Strategy 5. Perform an analysis of the level of annual maintenance investment necessary to appropriately maintain the district’s facilities and infrastructure.

Strategy 6. Develop elementary school facilities’ profiles that allow for dedicated core subject rooms and 8-10% of rooms to be flexible from year to year.

Strategy 7. Identify a facilities use plan/policy that promotes community use of facilities and fosters access.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Three percent of each facility’s assessed value will be spent annually on its maintenance cost in order to

keep all maintenance systems within acceptable engineering limits. 2 Safety and emergency management plans are annually reviewed and updated with City officials,

organizations, and groups. 3 All schools have facility and classroom profiles that demonstrate how they meet industry, state and federal

education standards. 4 A facilities’ use plan will be in place for each school building that identifies how the community uses the

building and how access is fostered.

• Facility maintenance budget (3% of facility’s assessed value)

• Percentage of classroom profiles aligned to standard

• Percentage of facility profiles aligned to standard


Priority Area V: Operations – Making Learning Accessible Goal: Educational Funding Plan for the funding necessary to ensure an effective and stable educational environment in Nashua’s schools in

support of the implementation of the goals of the strategic plan.


Strategy 1. Advocate at the local, state, and federal levels for resources needed to meet standards of accountability and equitably provide the resources, supplies and materials to meet the needs of Nashua’s diverse student population.

Strategy 2. Creatively secure financial resources through alternate funding and fundraising capabilities for the infrastructure and educational process needed for 21st century schools.

Strategy 3. Develop district budget modeling and multi-year financial planning to further support the goals of this strategic plan.

Success Measures Data Points 1 Favorable ratings increase annually in regards to general understanding of the school district’s budget needs

measured against progress against strategic plan goals, based on the results of parent, teacher, and community partner surveys.

2 Budget planning and related decisions are informed by and based on the availability of the most appropriate budget models and multi-year projections.

3 An Educational Foundation is established to support alternative funding options for the school district, with collaborative support from the District and BOE.

• Budget needs survey ratings • Budget models • Budget multi-year projections • Educational Foundation funding


60

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Facilities Workgroup Report Appendix B: Glossary of Terms


61

FACILITES WORK GROUP FINAL REPORT 1.0 Mission

The Facilities Work Group's mission was to evaluate the current state and efficiency of school facilities, the role of those facilities in promoting improvements in academic achievement and the potential future needs of the district in terms of facilities and infrastructure.

2.0 Goals Based on this mission statement, the committee sought to answer the following broad questions: What is the current state and future need of infrastructure within school district facilities? Looking at the recent improvements to school district facilities and near term capital improvements, the work group cataloged the future long-term needs for improvements and maintenance of district facilities. Is the district utilizing classroom space efficiently and effectively? By looking at current and projected student enrollments and input from staff, the work group analyzed the questions of classroom utilization, school closures, and school redistricting. Are there potential changes to the physical structure and/or management of facilities that may benefit the district? Several ideas on the use of facilities came up during discussions that may benefit the district in the long run. 3.0 Definitions Facilities: building structures and major components (roof, HVAC, etc) and the exterior infrastructure (parking lots & playgrounds). Portables: Trailer based classrooms, separated from main building with self contained heating/air conditioning but no water facilities. Each structure holds two classrooms. Five of the structures are leased and two are owned by the district. 4.0 Results/Recommendations

4.1 What is the current state of the facilities at each school? (gathered from detailed assessments done for previous studies and analyses [NESDEC, capital improvements plan and the security study]) In addition, staff was queried to (a) identify deficiencies in the school (poorly designed rooms, inadequate ventilation, sub-par grounds, etc). and (b) define any flexible rooms (rooms that often change uses from year to year).


62

See attached elementary school summary which attempts to capture a snapshot in terms of population, funding, and infrastructure of each school. Items listed here often form the basis for conclusions reached by the work group.

Ethnicity: Distribution of ethnic groups by school Language: Number and % of student population that do not have English as a

primary language Socio-Economic: The % of students on a free or reduced lunch program.

Often used as a surrogate for measuring families that have financial hardships. Special Ed: The number and % of students that have special education

disabilities. Totals can be deceiving her as some schools have concentrations of similar special education students (Broad St for example).

Capacity: Total enrollments, Kindergarten, pre-K and the % of planned operating capacity as laid out in the NESDEC facility study.

Turnover: The % of students that are transient (move out of the school) from grades K thru 5. Measurements were estimated by examining the current and previous school code as captured on the Grade 3-5 NECAP reports. The average annual attrition rates were then assumed for each of the elementary years. For example, Mt Pleasant has an annual attrition rate of about 14% so over the 6 years from K thru 5 they lose 54% of their original students. This isn’t an exact estimate, some students leave and come back and it is only a snapshot, but it does show the differences between school populations.

Facility Usage: Standard classrooms are used for math, English, etc. while ”Flexible” classrooms are not required classes and, if desired, can be modified from year to year (parent rooms, reading rooms, etc).

Infrastructure: Illustrates the last date that various components of the facility have been updated (Overall refers to the internal classrooms, then HVAC, Roofing, Playgrounds, and Parking). Color coding in orange shows items that are currently on the Capital Improvements list. Pink shows items that have been updated in the last 5 years.

Funding: Per pupil funding costs per school based on the Operating budget, Title funds and targeted special education funds.

NECAP: 2007-08 Math, Reading and Writing NECAP scores for each school

4.2 Given the current population of the schools, is there any efficiency to be gained by closing a school?

Work group conclusion: No. The NESDEC report recommended that an elementary school might be considered for closure, although it stopped short of making that recommendation. Several factors were investigated by the committee to determine if a school reduction would be possible, ranging from current and projected school enrollments to the overall performance of various schools. The committee unanimously agreed that closing an elementary school did not make sense for the following reasons:


63

1) Since the NESDEC study we have eliminated the vast majority of portable classrooms that had been added over the years (essentially we have removed a school by removing portables).

2) Elementary school populations have stabilized and new program requirements (such as pre-school and increased special education regulations) have filled space that might have otherwise been unused.

3) State requirements for special education, including requirements for pre-school education, have absorbed much of the under-utilized spaces within the elementary schools. And the state requirements are about to get stricter, requiring more space.

4) Most schools have some flexibility (~10% of their rooms) to reconfigure room usage to allow for unexpected fluctuations in student populations and needs. For example, many of the Title I schools have implemented “Parent Resource” rooms that allow parents to feel more connected to the school. Other schools were able to absorb an increase in grade level classes to add an additional grade level class. This flexibility was strongly cited as a key reason for schools, such as Amherst Street, which have improved their NCLB status.

All of the middle schools have sufficient space to run a full complement of programs and class sizes are often well below target ranges. With only 3 middle schools, the under-utilization at the middle schools is still nowhere near levels that would justify closing one of these schools. However, the middle schools have portable classrooms that were added over the past decade and, as will be discussed in 4.4, the work group felt adjustments could be made at this level. The two high schools are at (NHSS) or near capacity (NHSN), but projected enrollments should ease this burden.

4.3 Given projections of school enrollment, is there a reduced level of school enrollment where closing a school may be warranted? Work group conclusion: No. Projections at the elementary school level remain relatively flat (with a 1-5% reduction) over the next 10 years. The work group feels the analysis done above will hold true for the foreseeable future.

4.4 What are the long term prospects of eliminating the remaining portable classrooms?

There are a total of seven portable classrooms within the district – all of them are at

the middle schools. The table below shows the breakdown between the three middle schools.

School Pennichuck Fairgrounds Elm # of Portables 2 1 4 # of Classrooms 4 2 8 Enrollment (2008-09) 681 763 1152 POC* 575 850 1150 Avg Class Size (08-09) 23 20 21


64

The planned operating capacity of the school (based on the NESDEC facilities report)

measures the number of students a school can handle based on expected classroom sizes and usage. POC does not factor in portable space, only the main building. Both Pennichuck and Fairgrounds have POC values that are significantly higher than their current or projected enrollments. Elm, however, is at or slightly exceeds POC.

At current and projected levels, the portable at all three schools could be removed

over time. Impacts to class size are slight (approximately 1 student/class) and there are benefits in terms of teacher utilization.

Work group recommendation: Work towards reducing and/or eliminating the

five leased portables at Fairgrounds, Elm and Pennichuck over the next 1-3 years. 4.5 Does redistricting make sense in terms of either balancing facility usage or student

demographics? The work group had several long discussions amongst themselves and with staff on

the merits and pitfalls of redistricting. We identified two main reasons why re-districting has been performed by various school districts in the past: (1) balance school population sizes (for overcrowding) and (2) balance school demographics (socio-economic, ethnicity, ELL, etc). In terms of balancing school sizes, the analysis done illustrates that none of the elementary or middle schools are severely over or under capacity. There is a slight imbalance in the size of the high school populations; however, projected decreasing enrollments at the high school level will alleviate the larger school population at NHSS.

In terms of demographics, middle school and high school comparisons show that the

populations are quite similar. At the elementary school level, there are clear distinctions between school populations. The figure below shows four categories that are often indicators of challenging school environments: ethnic diversity, NECAP scores, percent of ELL students, percent of low SES. Ethnic diversity is shown on the left with each sub-bar representing an ethnic subgroup. The remaining three categories use the elementary facilities summary chart at the end of this document. Red boxes indicate schools that have very high percentages of ELL and low-SES students and/or low NECAP scores (more than one standard deviation from the average). Conversely, blue boxes indicate schools that have relatively low ELL, SES and/or high NECAP scores. Grey boxes indicate that the school metrics are within range of the average for all schools. The Ledge Street school, for example, has the most ethnically diverse, poorest and highest percentage of non-English speakers in the district. Conversely, Main Dunstable is almost the exact opposite, relatively low ELL and SES statistics and NECAP scores are in-range. But, you’ll also notice that there is a wide range of combinations in between.


65

Figure 1 Elementary School Demographics

In addition, as shown in the Elementary School comparison table (attached), some

schools have a higher transient population. In these schools families more often move away resulting in schools that lose more than 45% of their original school population from grades K thru 5 (Mt Pleasant for example). Conversely, schools like Main Dunstable have a more stable population with less than 20% change from K-5. Changing populations not only make it difficult in terms of teaching students who are coming in from districts with different skill sets, but there are always challenges for new students (new home, new friends, etc) that make it harder for them to learn.

An analysis was performed on NECAP scores for the elementary school population to compare results for low-SES students from the inner-city schools (Ledge, Amherst, Dr Crisp, Fairgrounds and Mt Pleasant) versus the other seven schools with lower percentages of low-SES students. Figure 2 shows the average Math and Reading NECAP scores for grades 3-5 broken down by inner-city and other schools. While there is a slight difference in the overall distribution, the average NECAP Math and Reading grades differ by just 3-4 score points. This at least demonstrates that low-SES students appear to have roughly equivalent experiences in high poverty vs. low poverty environments with the added resources that are provided to those schools.


66

Figure 2 Grade 3-5 NECAP Scores Inner-city Vs All Other Schools

In addition, redistricting might very well hurt schools by reducing the targeted Title

funding available to schools with high percentages of low socio-economic and ELL students. Amherst Street, for example, made great strides to extract itself from the SINI


67

list but with that came an elimination of NCLB funding and associated staff. This reduction reduces the ability of the school to maintain improvements. A similar situation could arise if schools are redistricted to rebalance school populations.

The work group and staff that discussed this topic felt strongly that, provided the appropriate services, students are better served in the neighborhood school district in which they were living. Therefore, the work group felt the time and expense of redistricting was not necessary and potentially counter-productive.

Work group conclusion: Redistricting is not necessary at this time; however, a

concerted effort should be made to define the type of services that should be concentrated at each elementary school based on demographics/performance. Individual school funding (including state & federal grants) should be evaluated each year to ensure that tailored services are available for at-risk schools.

4.6 What are the potential impacts on facilities of expanding to full day Kindergarten

throughout the district?

Between public and private Kindergarten services available in Nashua, the vast majority of Kindergarten grade students are being served. All Title I schools now have full day Kindergarten, therefore the highest-risk population has the opportunity for full coverage. Increasing to full day Kindergarten at the remaining schools could be managed by most schools (Bicentennial would be one exception), but it would reduce the classroom flexibility that the work group felt was important for school success. Work group recommendation(s): The district should track within X2 the pre-first grade schooling of students (Kindergarten and pre-school both public and private). This data would help the district understand the remaining need for services.

4.7 What are the potential impacts on facilities of recent changes in state requirements for

special education pre-school classrooms?

Late in the process, it came to the work group’s attention that there were pending changes to tighten state standards for pre-school education classroom’s (reducing class size). In discussing ways to compensate for this change, the possibility of repurposing a school (or an outside facility) for specialized use as a pre-school might be advantageous by concentrating special education transportation and services in one location. Repurposing a school would necessitate redistricting to absorb the K-5 students from the repurposed school. Further meetings with pre-school educators made it clear that the First Parish Church program is best served at its current location, but that combining the myriad of pre-school programs at the other schools was plausible. While the work group felt the idea of concentrating services had some merit, we did not feel we had sufficient information or analysis on which to make a recommendation to pursue such an idea. But, we did feel it warranted further study.


68

Work Group recommendation: A committee should be formed to investigate in what ways specialized schools (such as concentrated Kindergarten, pre-school, or Special Education) might be advantageous to the district. 4.8 What is the status of maintenance funding for all schools? Should changes be made

to support routine maintenance?

The work group gathered data to show the current state of school facilities and projected dates where capital investments would be needed. However, we did not address the issue of recurring maintenance expense and the appropriate level of investment. It was generally felt by plant operations that the current investment level was well below what was necessary. Even at the new High Schools replacement costs for furniture and bathroom fixtures were far outpacing original estimates. Work Group recommendation: The Board of Education should perform an analysis for the appropriate level of maintenance investment.

4.9 Other issues raised but not fully addressed by the work group:

How do we best utilize facilities to enhance student performance? At first, we discussed specific room usage that might be beneficial to students (e.g. more important to have a dedicated reading room than a parent room?). In the end, however, we never really addressed specific rooms. Instead, we simply addressed the desire to have dedicated core subject rooms combined with about 10% of the rooms being flexible from year to year. PTO involvement: In the course of our work, the committee touched on the disparity between PTOs within our elementary schools. Suggestions were made to the PTO presidents that funding disparities between PTOs should be discussed and that perhaps ‘project fundraisers’ could be broadened to allow a city-wide elementary fundraiser for schools that are challenged. Since PTOs are independent, it is unclear what role the Board or School district should play in these discussions. How might we allow our facilities to be used more readily by the community? We gathered information on how often school facilities were used by other agencies/organizations. We did not, however, have time to analyze this data or speculate on ways to increase usage. What community resources/facilities might augment school facilities? The thought here was, how might students engage into the community – assisting in city run events/projects, charitable organizations, and businesses. Other than raising the topic, other topics took priority.


69

Facilities Work Group Membership: Robert Hallowell (co-chair), BOE Member Administration: Rick Dowd (co-chair), BOE Member Christopher Hottel, Superintendent Sandra Ziehm, BOE Member James Mealey, CFO Phillip Schappler, Principal, Sunset Heights Janet Valeri, Strategic Planning Coordinator Lisa Law, Parent, Mt. Pleasant Kimberly Carrozza, Facilities Workgroup Intern Robert Power, Teacher, Amherst Street Jeffrey Cox, Ward 9 Alderman David Deane, At-large Alderman* *Alderman Deane stepped down from the committee on November 18th, 2008


70

Sunset Heights

New Searles

Mt Pleasant

Main Dunstable Ledge St Fairgrounds Dr Crisp

Charlotte Ave

Broad Street Birch Hill Bicentennial

Amherst Street

White 73% 87% 64% 81% 54% 64% 63% 82% 76% 74% 64% 59% 70% 10%

Hispanic 11% 3% 25% 2% 34% 26% 29% 5% 6% 10% 4% 29% 15% 11%

Asian 12% 6% 1% 15% 1% 2% 2% 8% 12% 10% 27% 2% 9% 8%

Black/Other 4% 4% 10% 2% 11% 8% 6% 5% 6% 6% 5% 10% 6% 3%

# of ELL 45 7 67 11 123 90 58 30 8 67 35 53 49.5 594

% of School Population

10% 2% 21% 2% 25% 15% 15% 6% 2% 15% 6% 17% 11% 8%

Socio-Economic

Free & Reduced Lunch %

24% 22% 63% 12% 74% 56% 68% 15% 18% 24% 12% 71% 45% 23%

# of Special Ed Students

74 72 50 67 60 62 52 77 87 47 64 62 65 774

% of School Population

16% 20% 16% 12% 12% 10% 13% 14% 23% 11% 10% 20% 14% 4%

Current Enrollment

459 366 322 554 487 597 391 544 373 445 623 307 456 5468

K 69 56 49 61 92 93 64 62 36 56 65 50 63 753

Pre-K* 24 26 66 58 15 174

POC^ 468 356 376 560 560 560 468 540 352 492 632 352 476 5716

% of POC' 98% 103% 86% 99% 87% 107% 84% 101% 106% 90% 99% 87% 105% 105%

Turnover% of Student Turnover (K thru 5th)

30% 34% 54% 20% 46% 40% 46% 21% 34% 31% 22% 47% 34% 11%

Total # Rooms 34 29 25 35 34 36 28 36 30 35 38 28 32.3 388

Flexible 3 2 2 4 4 5 1 2 2 6 2 2 2.9 35

% Flexible 9% 7% 8% 11% 12% 14% 4% 6% 7% 17% 5% 7% 9% 9%

Overall 1991 1995 1987 1993 1990 1990 1997 1990 1991 1993 1997 1999 1992.8 3.6

HVAC 1990 2003 1987 1993 1990 1990 1997 1990 1990 1990 1997 1999 1993.0 4.8

Roofing 1991 1995 2007 1993 2002 1999 1997 2002 1991 1993 1997 1999 1997.2 4.9

Playgrounds 2006* 2001* 1999* 2000* 2008 2005 2000 N/A N/A

Parking 2005 1995 1987 2008 2001 2004 1997 2006 2004 2007 1997 2006 2001.4 6.3

Operating Budget ($K)

2,406$ 2,021$ 1,869$ 2,455$ 3,064$ 2,662$ 2,217$ 2,369$ 2,307$ 2,398$ 2,740$ 1,970$ 28,478$ 28,478$

Title I eligible? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Title I-V ($K) 101$ 126$ 521$ 59$ 584$ 721$ 542$ 20$ 138$ 23$ 15$ 497$ 3,347$

spec ed 75$ 277$ -$ -$ 180$ 59$ 181$ 3$ 373$ -$ 17$ 211$ 1,376$

Funding per pupil ($K)

5.46$ 5.87$ 7.42$ 4.54$ 7.49$ 5.67$ 7.06$ 4.39$ 6.55$ 5.44$ 4.42$ 8.04$ 5.82$ 1.27$

Math 65 72 52 77 42 64 53 75 77 83 83 71 68.6 13.0

Reading 70 82 56 80 46 76 61 79 80 83 88 76 73.9 12.5

Writing 39 53 49 53 39 58 32 53 61 53 71 49 51.8 10.5

*2 sessions, this it total students, only half are considered in "Current Enrollment" ̂POC: Planned Operating Capacity capture the total number of students who can be housed at a facility based on standards for room usage and pupil space considerations.

The current enrollment divided by POC~ Flexible rooms are those that can be repurposed from year-to-year (e.g. ELL,SPED,reading,parent resource room, empty, science lab, etc)

Indicates full day Kindergarten programIndicates infrastructure needs that are currently in the Capital Improvements PlanIndicates infrastructure that was significantly updateed in the last 5 years

Funding

Average Elementary

School

Capacity

NECAP

Indicates metric is more than one standard deviation below averageIndicates metric is more than one standard deviation higher than averageIndicates Title I school

Total or StdDev (as applicable)

Infra-structure

Special Ed

Ethnicity

Language

Facility Usage


71

Glossary of Terms The following abbreviations are used in the Action Plan located in Appendix A, in the Success Measures and in other parts of the plan.

Actions: The steps that will be needed to enact the strategy and reach each goal. (These are the specific steps we will take …)

Action Plans: Specific, detailed strategies, actions, improvement targets and timelines based upon data analysis which addresses a critical issue within a goal statement.

AYP: Under the federal No Child Left Behind law, required annual improvement in reading, mathematics, and science for students in grades 3 through 8 and grades 9-10 to reach proficiency by the 2013-2014 school year.

Best Practices: Lessons and activities that have been “student tested” to work in the classroom and are aligned with current research and curriculum standards, and may serve as models for other efforts to improve and expand student achievement.

Bliss Report: A security assessment of Nashua School District facilities performed by Bliss Associates during the 2007-2008 school year.

Core Values: The underlying beliefs that shape decisions and choices of the Nashua School district

Curriculum Curriculum mapping is a procedure for collecting data about the actual Mapping: curriculum in a school district using the school calendar as an organizer.

Data are gathered in a format that allows each teacher to present an overview of his or her students’ actual learning experiences. The fundamental purpose of mapping is communication. The composite of each teacher’s and/or discipline’s map in a building or district provides access to a PK-12 curriculum perspective both vertically and horizontally.

Data Point: A measurable piece of factual information that shows progress toward the targets that meet District goals and enhance teaching and learning.

DIBELS: The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) are a set of procedures and measures for assessing the acquisition of early literacy skills from kindergarten through sixth grade. They are designed to be short (one minute) fluency measures used to regularly monitor the development of early literacy and early reading skills.

Differentiated Varied teaching methods that meet different needs of students such Instruction: as learning styles, learning levels and interests as opposed to using a

textbook with all students being on the same page at the same time.

English Language Students enrolled in U.S. schools who speak a language other than Learners (ELL): English and have not yet mastered English. They are known as limited-

English-proficient (LEP) students. They are either immigrants or children born in the United States. Each LEP student receives English-as-a-second-language services.


72

Everyday Math: The Nashua School District’s mathematics program for Grades K–6. Underlying the curriculum are six strands of knowledge: Algebra; Data and Chance; Geometry; Measurement; Numeration and Order; Patterns, Functions, and Sequences; Operations; and Reference Frames. At each grade level, learning targets are identified for each of the six strands.

Focus Group: Members of the schools and community working together to review and respond to specific questions about the school district; generally meeting only once

Follow the Child: The State’s Follow The Child Initiative encourages the Nashua School District to document the progress of each child personally, physically, socially, and academically. This initiative promotes a personalized education for each child that documents evidence of student performance and is consistent with the spirit in which No Child Left Behind was written.

Goal: A statement of a desired situation or state. (What we want to do or be…); outline in broad terms how the mission will be fulfilled purpose and intentions; it defines why an organization exists and provides the rationale for goal setting; it serves as a standard by which all plan components are judged.

GPA: Grade Point Average, a method of determining a student’s academic standing. A grade point average is a weighted average based on the grades received and the number of credit hours taken.

Inclusion: The practice if education children with disabilities alongside their non-disabled peers, often in a general education classroom in their neighborhood school. The Individuals with Disabilities Act requires that disabled children be educated in the “least restrictive environment” possible.

K – 12: Kindergarten through Grade 12

Kid Grid: A single page chart that tracks each child’s learning progress for parents and school staff.

Learning A school and/or education system that recognizes that its members Community: must engage in the ongoing study and constant practice that characterize an

organization committed to continuous improvement

Measures of The factors that will tell us that we have succeeded in implementing Success: the actions. (We will know if we are successful if …)

Mission: A clear concise statement of the Nashua School District’s purpose and intentions; it defines why an organization exists and provides the rationale for goal setting; it serves as a standard by which all plan components are judged

My Voice Survey: The My Voice Survey helps educators and parents discover how students and staff perceive the school environment, what motivates and inspires students to achieve, and how well students and staff believe the school is meeting those objectives.

NCLB: No Child Left Behind Act of 2002; federal legislation regulating public education


73

NEASC: New England Association of Schools and Colleges, which is responsible for school accreditation in the New England region.

NECAP: The New England Common Assessment Program is the state of New Hampshire’s assessment program that monitors student performance in reading, mathematics, writing, and science.

Parent Portal: A tool designed to enhance the communication and involvement of parents in their child's education. The Parent Portal will allow parents to monitor their child's progress in school by providing Internet access to grades, attendance, discipline, and academic history in a secure password protected environment.

Person(s) The key personnel who will lead, implement, and support the Strategies Responsible: and actions of the Action Plan. The “lead” person is the one to be contacted

for further information about this action.

PK – 12: Pre-Kindergarten through Grade 12

Professional In-service education; education and training to provide teachers and Development: other school professionals with additional knowledge and skills to support

improved student learning

Scott Foresman: The Nashua School District’s reading program for Grades K–6 which is designed to help teachers build readers through motivating and engaging literature, scientifically research-based instruction, and a wealth of reliable teaching tools

Stakeholder: Those individuals or groups who have a stake or interest in the education of the children in the community

Strategic Initiative: A sequence of actions designed to help an organization fulfill its mission.

Strategic Plan: A long range guide detailing specific steps that an organization will take to achieve its vision and mission

Strategic A complex and ongoing learning process of organizational change Planning: oriented towards the anticipated future; it is based upon the analysis of

internal and external data and it intends to focus effort and resources to reach its purposes

Strategies: The manner in which the Nashua School District goals will be approached. (What we will do to achieve this goal…)

Timeframe: The fiscal year in which an action will be initiated and completed, or initiated with ongoing action and progress in subsequent years

Vision: Describes the future attributes expected to be seen and demonstrated in the Nashua School District

X2: The Nashua School District’s data management system

nashua school district the road ahead: strategic plan...

Documents