shawnee hs diagnostic review report shawnee hs final.pdfthe diagnostic review team used the advanced...

February19-22,2018

Resultsfor:TheAcademy@Shawnee4001HermanStreetLouisville,KY40212

©AdvanceEducation,Inc. www.advanc-ed.org

2

DiagnosticReviewReport

Table of Contents

Introduction...........................................................................................................................3

AdvancEDStandardsDiagnosticResults.................................................................................4LeadershipCapacityDomain.............................................................................................................4LearningCapacityDomain.................................................................................................................5ResourceCapacityDomain................................................................................................................6

EffectiveLearningEnvironmentsObservationTool®(eleot®)Results......................................7eleotNarrative................................................................................................................................11

Findings.................................................................................................................................13ImprovementPriorities...................................................................................................................13

ConclusionNarrative.............................................................................................................19

TeamRoster..........................................................................................................................23

StudentPerformanceData....................................................................................................25

Schedule...............................................................................................................................28


3


IntroductionTheAdvancEDDiagnosticReviewiscarriedoutbyateamofhighlyqualifiedevaluatorswhoexaminetheinstitution’sadherenceandcommitmenttotheresearchalignedAdvancEDStandards.TheDiagnosticReviewProcessisdesignedtoenergizeandequiptheleadershipandstakeholdersofaninstitutiontoachievehigherlevelsofperformanceandaddressthoseareasthatmaybehinderingeffortstoreachdesiredperformancelevels.TheDiagnosticReviewisarigorousprocessthatincludesthein-depthexaminationofevidenceandrelevantperformancedata,interviewswithstakeholders,andobservationsofinstruction,learning,andoperations.Standardshelpdelineatewhatmatters.Theyprovideacommonlanguagethroughwhichaneducationcommunitycanengageinconversationsabouteducationalimprovement,institutioneffectiveness,andachievement.Theyserveasafoundationforplanningandimplementingimprovementstrategiesandactivitiesandformeasuringsuccess.AdvancEDStandardsweredevelopedbyacommitteecomprisedofeducatorsfromthefieldsofpractice,researchandpolicy.Thesetalentedleadersappliedprofessionalwisdom,deepknowledgeofeffectivepractice,andthebestavailable research to craft a set of robust standards that define institutional quality and guide continuousimprovement.TheDiagnosticReviewTeamusedtheAdvancEDStandardsandrelatedcriteriatoguideitsevaluation,lookingnotonlyforadherencetostandards,butalsoforhowtheinstitutionfunctionedasawholeandembodiedthepracticesandcharacteristicsofquality.Using theevidence theygathered, theDiagnosticReviewTeamarrivedata setoffindingscontainedinthisreport.AsapartoftheDiagnosticReview,stakeholderswereinterviewedbymembersoftheDiagnosticReviewTeamabouttheirperspectivesontopicsrelevanttotheinstitution'slearningenvironmentandorganizationaleffectiveness.ThefeedbackgainedthroughthestakeholderinterviewswasconsideredwithotherevidenceanddatatosupportthefindingsoftheDiagnosticReview.Thefollowingtableliststhenumbersofinterviewedrepresentativesofvariousstakeholdergroups.

StakeholderGroups Number

District-levelAdministrators 2Building-levelAdministrators 7ProfessionalSupportStaff(e.g.,Counselor,MediaSpecialist,TechnologyCoordinator)

15

CertifiedStaff 14Non-certifiedStaff 2Students 46Parents 4Total 90


4


AdvancEDStandardsDiagnosticResultsThe AdvancED Performance Standards Diagnostic was used by the Diagnostic Review Team to evaluate theinstitution’s effectiveness based on AdvancED’s Performance Standards. The diagnostic consists of threecomponents built around each of the three Domains: Leadership Capacity, Learning Capacity and ResourceCapacity.Pointvaluesareestablishedwithinthediagnostic,andapercentageofthepointsearnedbytheinstitutionforeachStandardiscalculatedfromthepointvaluesforeachStandard.Resultsarereportedwithinfourcategories:NeedsImprovement,Emerging,MeetsExpectationsandExceedsExpectations.TheresultsforthethreeDomainsarepresentedinthetablesthatfollow.

LeadershipCapacityDomainThecapacityofleadershiptoensureaninstitution’sprogresstowarditsstatedobjectivesisanessentialelementoforganizationaleffectiveness.Aninstitution’sleadershipcapacityincludesthefidelityandcommitmenttoitspurposeanddirection,theeffectivenessofgovernanceandleadershiptoenabletheinstitutiontorealizeitsstatedobjectives,theabilitytoengageandinvolvestakeholdersinmeaningfulandproductiveways,andthecapacitytoimplementstrategiesthatimprovelearnerandeducatorperformance.

LeadershipCapacityStandards Rating

1.1 Theinstitutioncommitstoapurposestatementthatdefinesbeliefsaboutteachingandlearning,includingtheexpectationsforlearners.

NeedsImprovement

1.2 Stakeholderscollectivelydemonstrateactionstoensuretheachievementoftheinstitution'spurposeanddesiredoutcomesforlearners. Emerging

1.3 Theinstitutionengagesinacontinuousimprovementprocessthatproducesevidence,includingmeasurableresultsofimprovingstudentlearningandprofessionalpractice.

NeedsImprovement

1.4 Thegoverningauthorityestablishesandensuresadherencetopoliciesthataredesignedtosupportinstitutionaleffectiveness.

NeedsImprovement

1.5 Thegoverningauthorityadherestoacodeofethicsandfunctionswithindefinedrolesandresponsibilities.

NeedsImprovement

1.6 Leadersimplementstaffsupervisionandevaluationprocessestoimproveprofessionalpracticeandorganizationaleffectiveness. Emerging

1.7 Leadersimplementoperationalprocessandprocedurestoensureorganizationaleffectivenessinsupportofteachingandlearning. Emerging

1.8 Leadersengagestakeholderstosupporttheachievementoftheinstitution’spurposeanddirection.

NeedsImprovement

1.9 Theinstitutionprovidesexperiencesthatcultivateandimproveleadershipeffectiveness.

NeedsImprovement

1.10 Leaderscollectandanalyzearangeoffeedbackdatafrommultiplestakeholdergroupstoinformdecision-makingthatresultsinimprovement.

NeedsImprovement


5


LearningCapacityDomainThe impact of teaching and learning on student achievement and success is the primary expectation of everyinstitution.Aneffectivelearningcultureischaracterizedbypositiveandproductiveteacher/learnerrelationships;high expectations and standards; a challenging and engaging curriculum; quality instruction and comprehensivesupportthatenablealllearnerstobesuccessful;andassessmentpractices(formativeandsummative)thatmonitorandmeasurelearnerprogressandachievement.Moreover,aqualityinstitutionevaluatestheimpactofitslearningculture,includingallprogramsandsupportservices,andadjustsaccordingly.

LearningCapacityStandards Rating

2.1 Learnershaveequitableopportunitiestodevelopskillsandachievethecontentandlearningprioritiesestablishedbytheinstitution.

NeedsImprovement

2.2 Thelearningculturepromotescreativity,innovationandcollaborativeproblem-solving.

NeedsImprovement

2.3 Thelearningculturedevelopslearners’attitudes,beliefsandskillsneededforsuccess.

NeedsImprovement

2.4 Theinstitutionhasaformalstructuretoensurelearnersdeveloppositiverelationshipswithandhaveadults/peerswhosupporttheireducationalexperiences.

NeedsImprovement

2.5 Educatorsimplementacurriculumthatisbasedonhighexpectationsandprepareslearnersfortheirnextlevels. Emerging

2.6 Theinstitutionimplementsaprocesstoensurethecurriculumisalignedtostandardsandbestpractices.

NeedsImprovement

2.7 Instructionismonitoredandadjustedtomeetindividuallearners’needsandtheinstitution’slearningexpectations.

NeedsImprovement

2.8 Theinstitutionprovidesprogramsandservicesforlearners’educationalfuturesandcareerplanning.

NeedsImprovement

2.9 Theinstitutionimplements,evaluates,andmonitorsprocessestoidentifyandaddressthespecializedsocial,emotional,developmental,andacademicneedsofstudents.

NeedsImprovement

2.10 Learningprogressisreliablyassessedandconsistentlyandclearlycommunicated. Emerging

2.11 Educatorsgather,analyze,anduseformativeandsummativedatathatleadtodemonstrableimprovementofstudentlearning.

NeedsImprovement

2.12 Theinstitutionimplementsaprocesstocontinuouslyassessitsprogramsandorganizationalconditionstoimprovestudentlearning.

NeedsImprovement


6


ResourceCapacityDomainTheuseanddistributionofresourcessupportthestatedmissionoftheinstitution.Institutionsensurethatresourcesaredistributedandutilizedequitablysothattheneedsofalllearnersareadequatelyandeffectivelyaddressed.Theutilizationofresourcesincludessupportforprofessionallearningforallstaff.Theinstitutionexaminestheallocationand use of resources to ensure appropriate levels of funding, sustainability, organizational effectiveness andincreasedstudentlearning.

ResourceCapacityStandards Rating3.1 Theinstitutionplansanddeliversprofessionallearningtoimprovethelearning

environment,learnerachievement,andtheinstitution’seffectiveness. Emerging

3.2 Theinstitution’sprofessionallearningstructureandexpectationspromotecollaborationandcollegialitytoimprovelearnerperformanceandorganizationaleffectiveness.

Emerging

3.3 Theinstitutionprovidesinduction,mentoring,andcoachingprogramsthatensureallstaffmembershavetheknowledgeandskillstoimprovestudentperformanceandorganizationaleffectiveness.

NeedsImprovement

3.4 Theinstitutionattractsandretainsqualifiedpersonnelwhosupporttheinstitution’spurposeanddirection

NeedsImprovement

3.5 Theinstitutionintegratesdigitalresourcesintoteaching,learning,andoperationstoimproveprofessionalpractice,studentperformance,andorganizationaleffectiveness.

Emerging

3.6 Theinstitutionprovidesaccesstoinformationresourcesandmaterialstosupportthecurriculum,programs,andneedsofstudents,staff,andtheinstitution.

NeedsImprovement

3.7 Theinstitutiondemonstratesstrategicresourcemanagementthatincludeslong-rangeplanninganduseofresourcesinsupportoftheinstitution’spurposeanddirection.

NeedsImprovement

3.8 Theinstitutionallocateshuman,material,andfiscalresourcesinalignmentwiththeinstitution’sidentifiedneedsandprioritiestoimprovestudentperformanceandorganizationaleffectiveness.

NeedsImprovement

ThechartbelowprovidesanoverviewoftheinstitutionratingsacrossthethreeDomains.

NeedsImprovementEmerging

MeetsExpectationsExceedsExpectations

Rating NumberofStandards

NeedsImprovement 22

Emerging 8

MeetsExpectations 0

ExceedsExpectations 0


7


EffectiveLearningEnvironmentsObservationTool®(eleot®)ResultsTheeProve™EffectiveLearningEnvironmentsObservationTool(eleot)isalearner-centricclassroomobservationtool that comprises 28 items organized in seven environments alignedwith the AdvancED Standards. The toolprovidesuseful,relevant,structured,andquantifiabledataontheextenttowhichstudentsareengagedinactivitiesand demonstrate knowledge, attitudes, and dispositions that are conducive to effective learning. Classroomobservationsareconductedforaminimumof20minutes.EverymemberoftheDiagnosticReviewTeamisrequiredtobeeleot-certifiedandpassacertificationexamthatestablishesinter-raterreliability.Teammembersconducted21observationswitheleotduringtheDiagnosticReviewprocess,includingalllearningenvironmentscoveringcorecontentareas.Thefollowingprovidestheaggregatedataacrossmultipleobservationsforeachofthesevenlearningenvironmentsincludedineleot.

2.01.6

2.01.6 1.5 1.7

1.2

EnvironmentAverages

DiagnosticRevieweleotRatingsA.EquitableLearning B. HighExpectations C.SupportiveLearning

D. ActiveLearning E.ProgressMonitoring F.Well-ManagedLearning

G.DigitalLearning


8


Indicators Average Description

Not

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

A1 1.3Learnersengageindifferentiatedlearningopportunitiesand/oractivitiesthatmeettheirneeds.

71% 29% 0% 0%

A2 2.5Learnershaveequalaccesstoclassroomdiscussions,activities,resources,technology,andsupport.

14% 24% 57% 5%

A3 2.8 Learnersaretreatedinafair,clear,andconsistentmanner. 5% 24% 62% 10%

A4 1.3

Learnersdemonstrateand/orhaveopportunitiestodevelopempathy/respect/appreciationfordifferencesinabilities,aptitudes,backgrounds,cultures,and/orotherhumancharacteristics,conditionsanddispositions.

76% 19% 5% 0%

2.0

A.EquitableLearningEnvironment

Overallratingona4pointscale:


Not

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

B1 1.8Learnersstrivetomeetorareabletoarticulatethehighexpectationsestablishedbythemselvesand/ortheteacher.

38% 48% 14% 0%

B2 1.6Learnersengageinactivitiesandlearningthatarechallengingbutattainable.

43% 52% 5% 0%

B3 1.3Learnersdemonstrateand/orareabletodescribehighqualitywork.

67% 33% 0% 0%

B4 1.5Learnersengageinrigorouscoursework,discussions,and/ortasksthatrequiretheuseofhigherorderthinking(e.g.,analyzing,applying,evaluating,synthesizing).

52% 43% 5% 0%

B5 1.6Learnerstakeresponsibilityforandareself-directedintheirlearning.

52% 38% 10% 0%

1.6Overallratingona4pointscale:

B.HighExpectationsLearningEnvironment


9



Not

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

C1 1.7Learnersdemonstrateasenseofcommunitythatispositive,cohesive,engaged,andpurposeful.

52% 24% 24% 0%

C2 1.9Learnerstakerisksinlearning(withoutfearofnegativefeedback).

43% 29% 29% 0%

C3 2.3Learnersaresupportedbytheteacher,theirpeers,and/orotherresourcestounderstandcontentandaccomplishtasks.

14% 38% 48% 0%

C4 2.2Learnersdemonstrateacongenialandsupportiverelationshipwiththeirteacher.

29% 33% 29% 10%


C.SupportiveLearningEnvironment

Indicators Average DescriptionNot

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

D1 1.9Learners'discussions/dialogues/exchangeswitheachotherandteacherpredominate.

38% 38% 19% 5%

D2 1.4Learnersmakeconnectionsfromcontenttoreal-lifeexperiences.

71% 14% 14% 0%

D3 1.7 Learnersareactivelyengagedinthelearningactivities. 48% 38% 14% 0%

D4 1.5Learnerscollaboratewiththeirpeerstoaccomplish/completeprojects,activities,tasksand/orassignments.

62% 29% 10% 0%


D.ActiveLearningEnvironment


10



Not

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

E1 1.2Learnersmonitortheirownprogressorhavemechanismswherebytheirlearningprogressismonitored.

81% 19% 0% 0%

E2 1.9Learnersreceive/respondtofeedback(fromteachers/peers/otherresources)toimproveunderstandingand/orrevisework.

29% 52% 19% 0%

E3 2.0Learnersdemonstrateand/orverbalizeunderstandingofthelesson/content.

29% 48% 24% 0%

E4 1.1Learnersunderstandand/orareabletoexplainhowtheirworkisassessed.

90% 10% 0% 0%


E.ProgressMonitoringLearningEnvironment

Indicators Average DescriptionNot

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

F1 2.0Learnersspeakandinteractrespectfullywithteacher(s)andeachother.

33% 33% 29% 5%

F2 1.7Learnersdemonstrateknowledgeofand/orfollowclassroomrulesandbehavioralexpectationsandworkwellwithothers.

43% 43% 14% 0%

F3 1.4Learnerstransitionsmoothlyandefficientlyfromoneactivitytoanother.

67% 29% 5% 0%

F4 1.5Learnersuseclasstimepurposefullywithminimalwastedtimeordisruptions.

62% 24% 14% 0%


F.Well-ManagedLearningEnvironment


11


eleotNarrativeTheDiagnosticReviewTeamconducted21classroomobservations,which includedall corecontentclasses.Theoverall ratingsrangedfrom1.2to2.0onafour-pointscale.TheSupportiveLearningEnvironmentandEquitableLearning Environments were the highest rated, and the lowest rated was the Digital Learning Environment.Classroomobservationdatasuggestedtheschoolhadnotestablishedasystematiccontinuousimprovementprocessthat engaged teachers in planning rigorous, challenging lessons and instructional strategies to improve studentlearningandteacherprofessionalpractices.TheoverallratingfortheHighExpectationsLearningEnvironmentwas1.6onafour-pointscale,suggestinganeedforteacherstoimplementrigorousinstructionalstrategiesandmodelhigh expectations for student learning. It was evident/very evident in five percent of classrooms that studentsengaged in “rigorous coursework, discussions, and/or tasks that require the use of higher order thinking (e.g.,analyzing,applying,evaluating,synthesizing)”(B4).Instancesofstudentsengagedin“activitiesandlearning”thatwere“challengingbutattainable”(B2)wereevident/veryevidentinfivepercentofclassrooms,highlightinganeedforschoolleaderstomorecarefullycreateacontinuousimprovementprocessthatprovidesteacherswithfeedbackonhowtoengagestudentsinrigorousclassroomactivities.Studentswhostrivedtomeetorwereableto“articulatethehighexpectationsestablishedbythemselvesand/ortheteacher”(B1)wereevident/veryevidentin14percentofclassrooms.Areviewoftheschool’sperformancedatafor2016-2017revealedthattheschoolhadnotmetanyofitsproficiencyorgapdeliverytargets,whichalsoalignedwithclassroomobservationdata that showedstudentsengaged in“differentiated learningopportunitiesand/oractivities” that met their needs (A1) were evident/very evident in zero percent of classrooms. These resultssupportedacommentmadebyoneteacher,“Thebarhasbeensettoolowforstudents.”TheDiagnosticReviewTeam identified these as leverage points and encourages the school to differentiate teaching approaches andestablishexpectationstoensureallstudentsarechallengedtolearnathighlevels.Oneconcern thatemergedwas that inamajorityof classrooms, students textedand listened tomusicon theircellphones,whichdistractedthemfrombeingactivelyengagedinclassroomactivities.Theextenttowhichlearnershad“equalaccesstoclassroomdiscussions,activities,resources,technology,andsupport”(A2)wasevident/veryevidentin62percentofclassrooms.TheseresultsparalleledstudentClimate&CultureSurveydatathatrevealed


Not

Observed

Somew

hat

Eviden

t

Eviden

t

VeryEvide

nt

G1 1.3Learnersusedigitaltools/technologytogather,evaluate,and/oruseinformationforlearning.

81% 10% 10% 0%

G2 1.2Learnersusedigitaltools/technologytoconductresearch,solveproblems,and/orcreateoriginalworksforlearning.

86% 10% 5% 0%

G3 1.1Learnersusedigitaltools/technologytocommunicateandworkcollaborativelyforlearning.

95% 0% 5% 0%


G.DigitalLearningEnvironment


12


thatwhenasked,“Whichfourofthefollowingwordsorphrasesbestdescribe,ingeneral,thethingsyoumostoftenDOwhileinclassatschool?”(C5),79outof225studentschose,“Completeworksheets”and70outof225studentschose, “Work alone,” illuminatingmissed opportunities for students to develop appreciation for differences incultures, backgrounds and other engaging hands-on activities. Furthermore, it was evident/very evident in fivepercentof classrooms that studentsused “digital tools/technology to conduct research, solveproblems, and/orcreateoriginalworksforlearning”(G2).Itisworthwhiletohighlighttheimportanceofstudentsusingdigitaltoolsandtechnologytoworkcollaborativelyforlearning.The Supportive Learning Environment received a rating of 2.0 on a four-point scale. Instances of studentswhodemonstratedasenseofcommunitythatwas“positive,cohesive,engaged,andpurposeful”(C1)wereevident/veryevidentin24percentofclassrooms.TheDiagnosticReviewTeamcouldnotconfirmtheexistenceofstrongpositiverelationshipsbetweenstudentsandteachers,underscoringaneedforschoolleaderstomoreintentionallyprovidementoring and coaching programs for teachers about the importance of student-teacher relationships. Positiverelationships can improve student outcomes and encourage students to take risks in learning without fear ofnegativefeedback.Itwasevident/veryevidentin39percentofclassroomsthatstudentsdemonstrated“acongenialandsupportiverelationshipwiththeirteacher”(C4).Comparably,theextenttowhichlearnerswere“supportedbytheteacher,theirpeers,and/orotherresourcestounderstandcontentandaccomplishtasks”(C3)wasevident/veryevidentin48percentofclassrooms.InterviewdatashowedthatclassroomwalkthroughswereusedtoensureteachersadheredtotheschoolwideSelf-Discipline,Ownership,positiveAttitudeandhealthyRelationships(SOAR)ClassroomExpectation,yetobservationdata showed instructional effectiveness was not routinely monitored. The lack of focus on instructionalimprovementswasevidentinclassroomobservations.In14percentofclassrooms,forexample,itwasevident/veryevidentthatstudentswere“activelyengagedinthelearningactivities”(D3).Alsoitwasevident/veryevidentin19percentof classrooms that students received/responded “to feedback (from teachers/peers/other resources) toimprove understanding and/or revise work” (E2). These results underscored the need for school leaders toconsistently observe classroom practices and provide teachers with tailored feedback to promote meaningfulimprovementsinteachingandlearning.Moreover,theDiagnosticReviewTeamfoundlittleevidencethatindicatedformativeassessmentdatawereusedtoensurestudentsunderstoodthecontentandteachersreinforcedstrategiestoelicitandstrengthenstudentthinking.It was evident/very evident in 24 percent of classrooms that students demonstrated and/or verbalized“understandingofthelesson/content”(E3).Instancesinwhichstudentsused“classtimepurposefullywithminimalwastedtimeordisruptions”(F4)wereevident/veryevidentinonly14percentofclassrooms.Interviewdata revealed thatstudents,generally,wereconcernedthatclassroomdisruptions interferedwith theteachingand learningprocess. Several studentsmade theseassertions,whichwas summedup inone student’scomment,“Thesekidsaredisrespectfultoteachers,andteachersdonotenforcetheschoolrules,becausetheyareafraidofthestudents,”whichaffirmedwhyitwasevident/veryevidentthatinonly34percentofclassroomsthatstudentsspokeandinteracted“respectfullywithteacher(s)andeachother”(F1).Finally,theDiagnosticReviewTeaminfrequentlyobservedrigorousandhighqualityworkinclassrooms.Studentperformancedatadidnotrevealanestablishedcontinuousimprovementprocessthatencouragedstudentstotakeresponsibilityfortheirlearning(B5),whichwasevident/veryevidentinonly10percentofclassrooms.Collectively,thesefindingsshowedaneedforschool leaderstocarefullyexaminetheimpactofclassroomwalkthroughsand


13


provideteacherswithmeaningfulandtimelyfeedbackthatwillresultinimprovedstudentperformanceandschooleffectiveness.FindingsImprovementPrioritiesImprovement priorities are developed to enhance the capacity of the institution to reach a higher level ofperformance and reflect the areas identified by the Diagnostic Review Team to have the greatest impact onimprovingstudentperformanceandorganizationaleffectiveness.ImprovementPriorityEstablish,implementandmonitoraprocesstocontinuouslyimprovestudentperformanceandteacherpractices.Ensure theprocess identifiesmeasurableobjectives, strategies, activities, timelinesand required resources.Usestudent performance and ongoing classroom observation data to evaluate the effectiveness of the process.Communicateimprovementprogresstostakeholders.(Standard1.3)Evidence:StudentPerformanceDataStudentperformancedata,asdetailedinanattachmenttothisreport,decreasedinoverallacademicachievementinallcontentareasfrom2015-2016to2016-2017.Similarly,theschooldidnotmeetanyofitsproficiencyorgaptargetsinthe2016-2017schoolyear.Thepercentageofstudentswhoscoredproficient/distinguishedinwritingwas5.2percent in2016-2017.Thepercentageof studentswhometbenchmark inEnglish,mathand reading laggedsignificantlybehindstateaverages.Thesedatasuggestedtheschoolcouldbenefitbyestablishingacomprehensivecontinuousimprovementprocessdesignedtoyieldimprovementsinstudentperformance.StakeholderInterviewDataInterviewdatarevealedstaffmembersconsistentlycouldnotarticulateaprocess forschool-wide improvement.Interview data showed that the 30-60-90-day continuous planning process used by previous leaders had beendiscontinuedwhentheprincipalwasremoved.Althoughinterviewdatarevealedthatteachersandschoolleadersdeveloped,postedandelevatedthe“3BigRocks”asafocusforcontinuousimprovementandtopropelstudentachievement,manycommunitymembersandstudentscouldnotarticulatewhetherimprovementshadoccurredsinceimplementingthe“3BigRocks.”Teacherinterviewdata,forexample,revealedthatwhileteacherswereawareofthe"3BigRocks,"theycouldnotarticulateacorrespondingimplementationplan.Moreover,interviewdatarevealedseveralstaffmembersnotedtheschoolhadnotestablishedaprocesstoaddressachievementgapsasexemplifiedbythecommentofoneteacher,“Therewasnotasystemic,focusedorintentionalplantosupportstudentswithspecificacademicneeds.”Anotherteacherstated,“Wespendagreatdealoftimeteachingvocabulary,becauseourstudentscometousreadingtwotothreegradelevelsbelowgradeexpectancy,anditisdifficulttoteachrigorouscontentwhentheycanhardlyreadthecontentmaterial.”Further,interviewdatashowedmanystaffmembersexpressedconcernaboutstudenttruancyanditsimpactonstudentlearning.Although school leaders conducted classroom walkthroughs, interview data revealed teachers inconsistentlyreceived feedback to improve instructional practices. In addition, though teachers participated in embeddedprofessional development, new learning had not significantly changed classroom practices. It was evident/veryevident in five percent of classrooms, for instance, that students engaged “in rigorous coursework, discussions,and/ortasks”thatrequiredthe“useofhigherorderthinking(e.g.,analyzing,applying,evaluating,synthesizing)”


14


(B4). Further, teacher interview data revealed a lack of professional learning specifically focused on improvinginstructionalpractices;rather,recentprofessionallearningaddressedRestorativePracticeduetomanyincidentsofdisruptivebehavior.Somestudentsreportedclasswasdisruptedoften.Onestudent,forexample,stated,“Teachersspenda lotof class timecorrectingbehavior.”Whenasked todescribewhat“good instruction” looked like inaclassroom,oneteacherresponded,“Thereisnoconsistentimplementationofwhatgoodteachinglookslike,andtheteachingisallovertheplace.”DocumentsandArtifactsA review of documents and artifacts (e.g., Kentucky Department of Education Title I Annual Review ofComprehensive School Improvement Plan) provided by the school revealed that the Comprehensive SchoolImprovementPlan(CSIP)wasonlypartiallyimplemented.Further,theschoolidentifiedmultiplereasonswhythecontinuous improvement process had not improved student achievement, which included lack of teacherexperience, student attendance, teacher turnover and reorganization of resources. Classroom observation dataconfirmed the lack of teacher experience. Observation data, for instance, revealed that instances of studentsengaged“inactivitiesandlearning”thatwere“challengingbutattainable”(B2)wereevident/veryevidentinfivepercentofclassrooms.TheDiagnosticReviewTeamalsofoundlittleevidencethatteachersheldstudentstohighexpectations,whichcorrelatedwiththeHighExpectationsLearningEnvironmentratingof1.6onafour-pointscale.OntheSchoolQualityFactorDiagnostic,theschoolwasasked,“Whatproportionoflearnersexperiencerigorousandchallenging tasks,activities,andprojects that focusondevelopinghigherorder thinking skillsandproblem-solving?”towhichtheyresponded,“Fewlearners.”Similarly,observationdatashoweditwasevident/veryevidentinfivepercentofclassroomsthatstudentsengaged“inrigorouscoursework,discussions,and/ortasks”thatrequiredtheuseof“higherorderthinking(e.g.,analyzing,applying,evaluating,synthesizing”(B4).


15


ImprovementPriorityCreateandimplementaprocesstoanalyzeanduseformativeandsummativedatatohelpteacherspurposelyplanrigorous, challenging instruction and student learning tasks aligned to state standards. School leaders shouldroutinelymonitorclassroominstructiontoensuretheindividuallearningneedsofstudentsaremet.(Standard2.7)Evidence:ClassroomObservationDataObservationdata,asdetailedpreviouslyinthisreport,showedthatinstancesofstudentsengaged“indifferentiatedlearningopportunitiesand/oractivities” thatmet theirneeds (A1)wereevident/veryevident in zeropercentofclassrooms. In addition, instances of students engaged “in activities and learning” that were “challenging butattainable”(B2)wereevident/veryevidentinfivepercentofclassrooms.Further,itwasevident/veryevidentin14percentofclassroomsthatstudentswere“activelyengagedinthelearningactivities”(D3).TheDiagnosticReviewTeamwasconcernedthatstudentswhoreceived/responded“tofeedback(fromteachers/peers/otherresources)to improveunderstandingand/orrevisework” (E2)wereevident/veryevident inonly19percentofclassrooms.These results illuminated theneed for a planningprocess that ensures teachers analyze anduse formative andsummativedatatomakeinformedinstructionaldecisionsthatimprovestudentlearning.StakeholderInterviewDataInterviewdatarevealedthatmoststaffmembersdidnotparticipateinaformalprocesstoanalyzestudentdatatodetermine individual student learning needs. Interview data also showed that classroom walkthroughs andobservations infrequently occurred and rarely resulted in specific, immediate teacher feedback to improveinstructionalpractices.Whenasked,“Whatevidencesupportedthatteacherspersonalize instructionalstrategiesand interventions to address individual learning needs of each student?” staff, typically, pointed to individualeducation plans for targeted populations and to leveled reading texts for students. Interview data, generally,revealeda lackofemphasison the learningneedsofeachstudent.Bothschoolanddistrict leadersagreed thatteacherswereexposedtodataduringtheirprofessionallearningcommunity(PLC)meetings,butusingdatatodriveinstructionalpracticeswasnotanestablishedprocess.DocumentsandArtifactsAreviewofthe2017-2018LeadershipAssessment/DiagnosticReviewAddendumrevealedtheschoolmadelittleprogressinusingcommonformativeassessmentdatatoinforminstructionalnextsteps.Further,theschoolmadeinadequateprogress in thedevelopmentofan instructionalprocess thatensured teacherspersonalized studentlearning tasks. In addition, few teachers intentionally designed intervention to address the individual academicneedsofstudents.Additionally,theSchoolQualityFactorreportindicatedthatsometeachers“demonstratedtheimpactofinstruction”throughformative,summativeand/orotheroutcomedata;however,interviewdatashowedmanystaffmembersquestionedwhetherthispracticewasroutineandembeddedintheschoolpractices.Interviewdataalsoshowedthatsomeinstructionalstaffmonitoredandevaluatedtheimpactofinstructiononstudentengagement,outcomesandoverallsuccess;however,theschoolscoredthisprocess,“Partiallyembedded.”TheSchoolQualityFactorreportalsorevealedthatfewlearnersengagedinrigorousandchallengingtasks,activitiesandprojectsthatfocusedondevelopinghigherorderthinkingandproblemsolvingskills.OfparticularconcerntotheDiagnosticReviewTeamwasthatthereportrevealedthat“few”actions,wordsandattitudesbystaffmembersdemonstratedtheirbeliefthatalllearnerscouldmeethighstandards.


16


A review of the Title I Needs Assessment report showed that data were used to determine the professionaldevelopmentneedsofstaff,whichincludedprojectbasedlearningandResponsetoInterventionstrategiesdesignedto“assistteacherswithprovidinghighlyeffectiveinstruction.”Conversely,classroomobservationdatarevealedthatstudentswhocollaboratedwiththeirpeersto“accomplish/completeprojects,activities,tasksand/orassignments”(D4)wereevident/veryevidentin10percentofclassrooms,andstudentswhoreceived/respondedto“feedback(from teachers/peers/other resources) to improve understanding and/or revise work” (E2) were evident/veryevidentin19percentofclassrooms.


17


ImprovementPriorityDevelopand implementadocumentedprocess toactively recruit, attractand retainqualified teacherswhoareinvestedintheschool’spurposeanddirection.Provideinduction,mentoringandcoachingprogramsthatequipallstaffmemberswiththeknowledgeandskillsnecessarytoimprovestudentoutcomesandinstructionaleffectiveness.(Standard3.3,3.4)Evidence:StakeholderInterviewDataInterviewdatarevealedthatadministratorshadnotdesignedorimplementedinduction,mentoringandcoachingprograms to ensure all staff members had the knowledge and skills necessary to improve student outcomes.Although the administrative team espoused the belief that teachers were supported through embeddedprofessionaldevelopment,classroomwalkthroughsandcoachingsessions,interviewdatarevealedthatclassroomwalkthroughs and observations occurred sporadically, coaching sessions infrequently and intentional follow-upinconsistently.Interviewdatarevealedageneralperceptionthattheschooldistrictneededtoaddresstheissueofteacher turnover. Interview data also indicated that only minimal professional learning was provided to newteacherstoacclimatethemtoschoolprocesses,programsandinitiatives.Interviewdatawithallstakeholdergroups,generally,identifiedteacherretentionasproblematic,andmanystaffmembersreportedthatitwasdifficulttobuildrelationshipsinaschoolwithhighstaffturnover.Finally,interviewdatashowedmanystudentsreportedthattheirteachersdidnotcareaboutthem.Onestudentspokeformanywiththecomments,“Wedon’tfeelliketeacherscareaboutus;theyputusdownandtheyleaveallthetime”and“Teachersleave,becausetheyaren’tsupported.“StakeholderPerspective/ExperienceDataClimateandCultureSurveydatarevealedwhenaskedtodescribewhattheythoughtoftheirteachers,35of225studentsresponded,“Inconsistent.”Similarly,classroomobservationdatarevealedthatitwasevident/veryevidentin39percentofclassroomsthatstudentsdemonstrated“acongenialandsupportiverelationshipwiththeirteacher”(C4).A review of the Climate& Culture Staff Survey indicated a level ofmistrust existed among staffmembers andbetweenstaffandstudents.Whenaskedtodescribetheirinteractionswiththeircolleagues,onlytwoof31staffmembers responded that interactionswere trusting. Similarly, classroom observation data revealed that itwasevident/veryevident in 29percentof classrooms that students took “risks in learning (without fearof negativefeedback)”(C2).Additionally,TeacherInventorydatashowedthatadministrativefeedbackregardingprofessionalpractices (E6)was inconsistentaseightof32 respondents reported that they received feedback, “Frequentandregularly.”Similarly,12of32teachersindicatedthattheyhadaccesstoinduction,mentoringandcoachingprogramsdesignedtomeetindividuallearningneeds(E2).DocumentsandArtifactsAreviewofthepresentationprovidedbytheprincipalrevealedthattheadministrativeteamrecognizedthatstaff(faculty,staff,administrators)turnoverneededtobeimproved.Administratorssharedthatthecurrentstaffattritionratewas 30 percent, and staff retention had remained consistently lowover the past several years.Moreover,interviewdata showed thatmost stakeholders concurred andpointed to studentperformance results as proof.IndeedmanystudentshadsignificantdeficienciesonallEndofCoursetestsascomparedtotheirpeersacrossthedistrictandstate.


18


AreviewoftheTeaching,Empowering,LeadingandLearning(TELL)Surveyresultsshowedthat37percentofstaffmembersreportedtheyweresupportedbyadministrators.Inaddition,48percentofstaffmembersreportedthatprofessional learning was deepening teacher content knowledge, and 39 percent of teachers reported thatprofessional learning was evaluated and communicated. Finally, a review of the Comprehensive SchoolImprovement Plan (CSIP) provided little evidence of an intentional induction ormentoring program to supportinexperiencedandstrugglingteachers.


19


ConclusionNarrativeStrengths:Theschoolservedapproximately450studentsingradesninethrough12.Whiletheschoolwaslocatedintheheartofthewestendcommunitythathadahighcrimerate,aneconomicallydepressedenvironmentandboardeduphomes,theschoolhadarichhistory.Atthehelmoftheschoolweretworetiredprincipalswhoassumedtheroleofco-principalswhentheschoolleaderwasremovedinOctoberof2017.Further,thediversityoftheschoolanditsprogramscouldserveasabeaconofhopeinthecommunityiftheschoolfullyachieveditspotential.TheschoolwasknownforitsacademiesandpathwaysthatincludedFlightandAeronautics,InteractiveMediaArts,Manufacturing,EngineeringTechnology,NavyJuniorReserveOfficersTrainingCorps(JROTC),HealthSciencesandProjectLeadtheWay.Manystudentschosetoattendtheschoolbecauseofitsaviationprogram.Whenaskedbystudentswhytheyattendedtheschool,overwhelminglytheirresponsesreferencedtheschool’saviationprogramandtheleadershipofthepreviousaviationinstructor.TheDiagnosticReviewTeamnotedthattheschoolcouldbenefitfrominvestinginandmarketingitsaviationprogram.In2016,theschoolwonfirstplaceintheNationalAirandSpaceEducationInstitute’sFlightChallengeTeamcompetition.Themissionof the schoolwas to recognize that everyEaglehad theunlimitedpotential tobecome innovative,dynamicandskilledwiththesuccessfulcompletionofachosencareerpathway.ThenewlycreatedschoolvisionwasSOAR!!!!“EveryEagle,EveryDay.”TheDiagnosticReviewTeamobservedstudentswerearticulateandcouldclearlydescribe their concerns with great insight. In addition, interview data revealed that students longed for highlyeffectiveteacherswhowouldremainattheschoollong-term.Duringaninterview,onestudentcommented,“IfIcouldchangeonethingatmyschool,Iwouldchangetheteachers’dedicationandcommitmenttostudents.Whenwegetgoodteachers,theydon’tstaybecausetheyarenotsupported.”Inaddition,anotherstudentstated,“Idon’tfeellikewearebeingpreparedforcollege.”And,finally,astudentwhoreceivedahighscoreonhisACTattributedhisscoretohisparentsandtoonegoodmathteacherwhonolongertaughtattheschool.School leadersdescribedtheirnewwalkthroughprocessthat includedleadersobservinginclassroomstoensureteachers implemented classroom expectations and provided students with engaging learning tasks; however,classroom observation data revealed that students rarely engaged in challenging and rigorous activities andcoursework. Interviewdataalsoshowedoneteacherstated,“Administrationdoeswalkthroughs,buttheyaren’tregularorconsistent;justgeneralfeedbackbutnothingteacherspecific.”TheDiagnosticReviewTeamnotedthelack of consistency throughout the building related to teacher implementation of new initiatives. One teachershared, “Things are haphazardly rolled out; therefore, they aren’t successfully implemented. Then they aredropped.”Another strength of the schoolwas its comprehensive systemof partners (e.g., Academies of LouisvilleModel,UnitedParcelService,D.D.Williamson,NinthGradeAcademy,GoogleFiber,TrilogyHealthcare,UpwardBound,MenofQuality,BigBrother/BigSister,JobsforAmericanGraduates)thatprovidedsupportfortheacademic,socialandemotional needsof students. The school alsohad abehavior coach,mental health counselors and theCardinalSuccessCounselingprogramtosupportthementalandbehavioralneedsofchildren.Nevertheless,interviewdatashowed some partners expressed frustration with the school’s lack of organization and inability to nurturerelationshipswith partners. Further, theDiagnostic Review Teamobserved theMen ofQuality program,whichbolsteredblackmales’self-esteemandassistedAfricanAmericanmalesincreasecivicawarenessthroughservice-learningexperiences.


20


Finally,districtleadershiphadprovidedsupporttoimprovetheinstructionalandorganizationaleffectivenessoftheschool.Forexample,theschoolwasprovidedliteracy,mathandbehaviorandacademycoaches.Inaddition,theschoolwasassignedgoalclaritycoaches.Althoughthesesupportswereavailable,theschoolhadnotdefinedtheirroles or used their talents to profoundly and positively impact student growth and nurture a culture of highexpectations.ContinuousImprovementPlanningProcess:

CommitmenttoContinuousImprovement Rating

Theinstitutionhascollectedsufficientandqualitydatatoidentifyschoolimprovementneeds.

Emerging

Implicationsfromtheanalysisofdatahavebeenidentifiedandusedforthedevelopmentofkeystrategicgoals.

Emerging

Theinstitutiondemonstratesthecapacitytoimplementtheircontinuousimprovementjourney.

Emerging

Whiletheschoolleadershipteamhadattemptedtoengageinacontinuousimprovementplanningprocess,evidencesuggestedthattheschoolhadnotestablishedasystemicprocessthatimprovedstudentperformanceandschooleffectiveness. Student performance data decreased as evidenced by the percentage of students who scoredproficient/distinguishedfrom2015-2016to2016-2017.Further,theschooldidnotmeetanyofitsproficiencyorgapdelivery targets in 2016-2017.Moreover, thepercentageof studentswhometbenchmark in English,math andreading lagged significantly behindother schools across the state. Interviewdata, and a reviewof theprincipalpresentationshowedthatratherthanmakingprogressinacademicachievement,theschoolhadregressed.As part of the continuous improvement process, the school identified and developed “3 Big Rocks” to addressinstructional and organizational effectiveness. Interview data showed that teachers, generally, knew the “3 BigRocks”;however,theycouldnotarticulateanimplementationplandesignedtoaccomplishthe“3BigRock”goals.Theschoolcouldbenefitfromadoptingandanalyzingdatafromavarietyofsourcesandusingfindingstodevelopstrategicgoalsandmonitorprogress.The principal shared the The Academy @ Shawnee Classroom Expectations during the principal presentation.According to the principal, these were created to improve classroom instructional practices and expectations.Teacherswereexpected topost student-friendly learning targets,maintainanagenda located inavisibleplace,provideanopeningactivityatthebeginningofeachclassperiod,takeattendancewithinthefirsttenminutesofclass,teachbell-to-bell,designaclosingactivity,assignhomeworkandhavelessonplanseasilyaccessible.However,conspicuously lacking in theseclassroomexpectationswasaplan for teachers to implementhighyield, rigorousinstructional practices/student learning tasks and formative assessments tomonitor student progress. Further,classroomobservationdatarevealedthatinstancesofstudentsengaged“indifferentiatedlearningopportunitiesand/oractivities”thatmettheirneeds,(A1)wereevident/veryevidentinzeropercentofclassrooms.Comparably,itwasevident/veryevidentinonlyfivepercentofclassroomsthatstudentsengaged“inactivitiesandlearning”thatwere“challengingbutattainable,”and“inrigorouscoursework,discussions,and/ortasks”thatrequiredstudentstousehigherorderthinking(B4).Thesefindingsconfirmedthatschoolleadersshouldcarefullyexaminetheextenttowhich classroom instruction consistently engages students in meaningful learning activities and results in


21


achievement of learning expectations. Although the school reported plans to build a continuous improvementprocess that included gathering input from a variety of stakeholders, engaging stakeholder in face-to-faceconversations to solicit feedback and direction and embedding a communication system to keep stakeholdersinvolved in the process, the Diagnostic Review Team located little evidence of a formal improvement processimplementedwithfidelity.Areviewofschooldocumentsindicatedthattheschoolwould“utilizetheSBDMAdvisoryCouncilasafeedbackloopprocesspartnertogetinputandmonitorfeedbackfromthefocusgroups,”yet,accordingtoschool leaders, theAdvisoryCouncil rarelymet. In fact, interviewdatashowed, forallpracticalpurposes, theAdvisory Council was a nonfactor in the school’s improvement efforts. School leaders are encouraged to buildrapportwithparentsandsecureadditionalteacherleadersandparentstoserveontheAdvisoryCouncil,therebycreatingacohesivepartnershipofinformedAdvisoryCouncilmemberswhocollaborateinsupportoftheschool’spurposeanddirection.Interviewdatashowedmoststaffmembersviewedthelackofconsistentandeffectiveschoolleadershipasareasonthe school had not made academic progress. Teacher and staff interview data also revealed having multipleprincipalsoverthepasteightyearshadresultedinabandonedgoalsandanewfocuswitheachnewleader.Atonepoint,forexample,theschoolhadinitiatedandimplemented“TheFundamentalFive”program,butwhenanewprincipalwashired,thisprogramwasabandoned.Theseresultshighlightedaneedfordistrictleaderstostrategicallyselect a new long-term, effective principal who has a “heart” for the children, staff and community and whounderstandsthe importanceofcreatingacollectivesenseofaccountability,ownershipandresponsibilityforthesuccessoftheschool.Additionally, interviewdatashowedteachers,staffmembersandadministratorsreasonedthatteacherturnovercreatedabarriertoschoolsuccess.TELLSurveydatarevealedthatonly44percentofteachersreported,“Overall,my school is a good place to work and learn.” Comparatively, Student Survey data disclosed that 82 of 225respondentschosetheword,“Rowdy,”todescribetheirexperiencesinclass.Duringclassroomobservations,theDiagnostic Review Team noted that student misbehavior frequently impeded instructional momentum anddisrupted learning.Suchdistractionsappeared tocreatehighstress levels for teachersandadministrators.Withteachersconstantlyleavingthisschoolforvariousreasonsandfewstaffmembershavingmorethanfiveyearsofexperience, students and staff claimed these factors created instability that inhibited the progress of plans,developmentofrelationshipsandadvancementofacademicachievement.Little evidence supported that decision-making was based on data that informed planning, instruction andprofessionallearningforteachers.Whiletheschoolhadavarietyofdatasources,interviewdatashowedteachersandsupportstaffmembers,typically,werenotcomfortableusingdatatomodifyinstructionormeettheindividualneedsofstudents.Manystaffmembershadlittleformaltraininginanalyzingdatatoinforminstructionaldecisions.Further,theprincipalpresentationrevealedthatteachershadonlyrecently(i.e.,January2018)startedmeetingincourse-specific professional learning communities to improve instruction, curriculum and assessment practices.Teachers rarely used data to identify barriers to student learning or to modify instruction or curriculum. Thecollectionandanalysisofdatacanprovideteacherswithinformationtohelpthemunderstandstudentneeds,groupstudentsbasedonthoseneedsanddesignlessonplanstoensurestudentneedsaremet.Finally,securinganeffective,dynamicleaderisacriticalnextstepfortheschool.Alsohiring,trainingandretainingqualified, professional staffmembers is encouraged as away to stabilize and improve the school’s culture andclimate and ensure staffmembers can implement school initiatives. Staffmembers are encouraged to developmeaningfulrelationshipswithstudents,whichcouldsignificantlyandpositivelyimpactstudentachievement.Amorestableschoolstaffcouldprovidethefoundationbywhichagenuineschoolcommunitycoulddevelopandcollectively


22


implementacomprehensiveimprovementplanningprocesstoattainschoolgoals.Currently,limitedtimeisspentonplanningandimplementingschoolimprovement.Finally,theschoolcouldbenefitfromrealigninghuman,fiscalandmaterialresourcestosupportidentifiedgoals,strategiesandactivitiesthataddressschoolimprovement.

NextStepsTheresultsoftheDiagnosticReviewprovidethenextsteptoguidetheimprovementjourneyoftheinstitutionwiththeireffortstoimprovethequalityofeducationalopportunitiesforalllearners.Thefindingsarealignedtoresearch-basedcriteriadesignedtoimprovestudentlearningandorganizationaleffectiveness.ThefeedbackprovidedintheDiagnosticReviewReportwillassisttheinstitutioninreflectingoncurrentimprovementeffortsandadaptingandadjustingtheirplanstocontinuouslystriveforimprovement.UponreceivingtheDiagnosticReviewReport,theinstitutionisencouragedtoimplementthefollowingsteps:• Reviewandsharethefindingswithstakeholders.• DevelopplanstoaddresstheImprovementPrioritiesidentifiedbytheDiagnosticReviewTeam.• Usethefindingsanddatafromthereporttoguideandstrengthentheinstitution’scontinuousimprovement

efforts.• Celebratethesuccessesnotedinthereport.


23


TeamRosterDiagnosticReviewTeamsarecomprisedofprofessionalswithvariedbackgroundsandprofessionalexperiences.AllLeadEvaluatorsandEngagementReviewTeammemberscompleteAdvancEDtrainingandeleot®certificationtoprovideknowledgeandunderstandingoftheAdvancEDtoolsandprocesses.ThefollowingprofessionalsservedontheDiagnosticReviewTeam:

TeamMemberName BriefBiographyDr.MargaretGilmore Dr.MargaretGilmoreservesasaDistrictLeadershipTransformationCoachforSouth

CarolinaDepartmentofEducation.Shehasover34yearsofexperienceineducationand is successful in building the capacity of school/district leaders in fostering aculturethatsupportschallengingandequitablelearningexperiencesforallstudents.Shehasservedasanadministratorinnumerousleadershiproles.InherroleassistantchiefacademicofficerforShelbyCountySchoolDistrict,shewasresponsibleforthedaily, effective and efficient delivery of instructional programs and assisted inproviding direct oversight of curriculum, instruction and school improvementinitiatives. Additionally, Dr. Gilmore is an instructional supervisor/manager ofcurriculumandinstructionforShelbyCountySchools.SheservedasaLeadEvaluatorfor numerous accreditation external reviews in Tennessee. Dr. Gilmore has alsoservedasaccreditationcoordinator,improvementplanningcoordinatorandcharterschool supervisor. She served on Tennessee AdvancED Council Board and wasawardedTennesseeExcellenceinEducationAward.Dr.GilmoreholdsaDoctorateinEducationalLeadershipandPolicyStudiesfromUniversityofMemphis.

SamWatkins SamWatkins is currently in his 33rd year of serving students in Kentucky.He hasserved in the capacity of teacher, assistant principal, athletic director, principal,director of district-wide programs and Education Recovery Leader. Mr. Watkinsearnedhisbachelor’sdegreeinteachingatEasternKentuckyUniversityaswellashismaster’s degree in business administration. He currently is working with focusdistrictsacrossthestateofKentuckytoimprovestudentacademicperformance.

DebraReed Debra Reed is an Education Recovery Leader for the Kentucky Department ofEducation. Her primary goal is to improve student achievement by buildingleadershipcapacityinadministrationandteachers,improvinginstructionalpracticeswithin the classroom and creating sustainable systems to ensure future studentsuccess.Mrs.Reedcompletedhermaster’sdegreeinsecondaryEnglisheducationatEastern Kentucky University. She holds professional certificates in schoolsuperintendent and supervisor of instruction and a statement of eligibility ininstructionalleadership.SheisalsoaNationalBoardCertifiedteacher.Mrs.ReedhasexperienceasaHighlySkilledEducatorandhighschoolEnglishteacher.

MikeYork Mr. Yorkhasbeen serving since2012asanEffectivenessCoach for theKentuckyDepartment of Education (KDE), focusing his work on instructional strategies inliteracy and mathematics, teacher leadership and professional learning. Prior toworkingfortheKDE,Mr.YorkworkedfortheMadisonCountyBoardofEducationfor eight years in various capacities, including secondary math and scienceinstruction,professionallearningandinstructionalcoachingatthedistrictlevel.HealsotaughtfortheUnitedStatesDepartmentofDefenseEducationActivityatRAFHigh Wycombe in England for fourteen years. He holds a master’s degree ineducation management from Oxford Brookes University (Oxford, England) and abachelor’s degree in mathematics and physical science teaching from EasternKentuckyUniversity.


24


TeamMemberName BriefBiographyAmandaHeaton Mrs.AmandaHeatonhasservedastheassistantprincipalofMontgomeryCounty

IntermediateSchoolinMt.Sterling,Kentuckyforthepastfouryears.Priortotakingan administrativeposition,Mrs.Heaton servedas a classroom teacher in FayetteCounty for seven years. Mrs. Heaton earned a bachelor’s degree in elementaryeducation and a master’s degree in school administration fromMorehead StateUniversityinMorehead,Kentucky.


25


StudentPerformanceDataSchoolName:TheAcademy@Shawnee

I.SchoolandStudentPerformanceResults

PercentagesofStudentsScoringatProficient/Distinguished(P/D)LevelsontheK-PREPEnd-of-CourseAssessmentsattheSchoolandintheState(2015-2016,2016-2017)**FromtheAssessmentTab

ContentArea

%P/DSchool

(15-16)

%P/DState

(15-16)

%P/DSchool

(16-17)

%P/DState

(16-17)

EnglishII 28.5 56.5 28.4 55.8

AlgebraII 17.7 42.3 11.9 38.1

Biology 12.7 37.6 12.1 41.2

U.S.History 36.4 59.2 19.8 57.5

Writing 12.5 43.5 5.2 58.5

Delta

• Allcontentareasdeclinedinthepercentageofstudentsscoringproficient/distinguishedfromthe15-16schoolyeartothe16-17schoolyear.

• Thepercentageofstudentsscoringproficient/distinguishedlaggedsignificantlybehindthepercentageofstudentsscoringproficient/distinguishedacrossthestate.

• Thepercentageofstudentsscoringproficient/distinguishedinwritingwas5.2%.

II.SchoolAchievementofProficiencyandGapDeliveryTargets(2016-2017)

TestedArea ProficiencyDeliveryTarget

for%P/D

ActualScore MetTarget(YesorNo)

GapDelivery

Targetfor%P/D

ActualScore

MetTarget(YesorNo)

CombinedReading&Math

43.0

20.6

No

41.4

18.9

No

Reading 48.2 29.1 No 46.4 24.8 NoMath 37.8 12.0 No 36.4 13.0 NoScience 40.9 12.5 No 38.8 13.3 NoSocialStudies 38.8 19.3 No 36.4 15.6 NoWriting 48.3 5.2 No 46.8 5.4 No

Plus

Delta


26


• Theschooldidnotmeetanyoftheirproficiencytargetsnoranyoftheirgaptargetsforthe16-17school

year.• Writinghadthelowestscoresofanycontentareawiththepercentageofstudentsscoring

proficient/distinguishedhoveringatthefivepercentmark.

III.PercentagesofStudentsMeetingBenchmarksonACT,Grade11,attheSchoolandintheState(2015-2016,2016-2017)

ContentArea PercentageSchool

(15-16)

PercentageState

(15-16)

PercentageSchool

(16-17)

PercentageState

(16-17)

English 15.9 54.3 16.2 55.8

Math 17.7 39.7 8.6 43.7

Reading 19.5 49.2 26.7 53.2

Plus

• ThepercentageofstudentsmeetingbenchmarkinEnglishincreasedfrom15.9percentinthe15-16schoolyearto16.2percentinthe16-17schoolyear.

• ThepercentageofstudentsmeetingbenchmarkinReadingincreasedfrom19.5percentinthe15-16schoolyearto26.7percentinthe16-17schoolyear.

Delta

• ThepercentageofstudentsmeetingbenchmarkinEnglish,mathandreadinglagsignificantlybehindthepercentageofstudentsmeetingbenchmarkinthesamecontentareasacrossthestate.

• Only8.6percentofstudentsmetbenchmarkinMath.

IV.SchoolAchievementofCollegeandCareerReadiness(CCR)andGraduationRateDeliveryTargets(2016-2017)

DeliveryTargetType DeliveryTarget(School)

ActualScoreT(School)

ActualScore(State)

MetTarget(YesorNo)

CollegeandCareerReadiness

56.1 31.0 65.6 No

GraduationRate(for4-yearadjustedcohort)

79.2

69.6 89.7 No

Plus

Delta

• TheschooldidnotmeetitsCollegeandCareerReadinessdeliverytargetforthe16-17schoolyear.• TheschooldidnotmeetitsdeliverytargetforGraduationRateforthe16-17schoolyear.


27


V.AdvancePlacementData(2016-2017)

NumberTestTakers

NumberexamsTaken

NumberofExamswithScores3-5

PercentofExamswithScores3-5

AllStudents School District State School District State School District State SchoolDistrict State

138 6928 32192 192 11123 51637 6 5181 25670 3.13 46.58 49.71

Non-DuplicatedGap

School District State School District State School District State SchoolDistrict State

114 3239 11252 158 4811 16820 4 1454 5870 2.53 30.22 34.9

Plus

Delta

• 3.13percentofAdvancePlacementExamstakenbystudentsattheschoolobtainedscoresinthe3-5range.

• 2.53percentofAdvancePlacementExamstakenbystudentsinthenon-duplicatedgapgroupobtainedscoresinthe3-5range.


28


ScheduleMonday,February19,2018

Tuesday,February20,2018

Time

Event Where Who

7:10a.m. Teamarrivesatschoolandsetsupinworkroom Schooloffice DiagnosticReviewTeamMembers

7:40a.m.–9:00a.m.

Classroomobservationsandstakeholderinterviews

School Diagnostic

ReviewTeamMembers

9:15a.m.–11:45a.m.

Classroomobservationsandstakeholderinterviews

School Diagnostic

ReviewTeamMembers

11:30a.m.---12:30p.m.

Lunch–TeamMemberseatwhenitcanfitintotheirindividualschedule School 11:45a.m.–3:00p.m.

Continuedclassroomobservations&stakeholderinterviews

School Diagnostic

ReviewTeamMembers

3:00p.m.–5:00p.m.

Teamreturnstohotel(afterdismissal)(Dinnerontheirown) 5:00p.m.–9:00p.m.

TeamWorkSession#2• TabulateclassroomobservationdatafromDay#1• Revieweleot™observations&results• Reflectondata,observations,andinterviews• Discuss&determinepotentialImprovementPrioritieswithdatapointsto

supporteachone• DiscusstheLeadership,Learning&ResourceDiagnosticQuestions• TeamMembersandLeadEvaluatordraftImprovementPriorities.• PrepareforDay3

Hotelconferenceroom

DiagnosticReviewTeamMembers

Review anddiscuss student performance data, stakeholderdata, SchoolQuality Factors Evidence,documents

andartifactsprovidedbytheinstitution


29


Wednesday, February 21,2018

Thursday, February 22,2018Time Event Where Who

7:30a.m.–11:00a.m.

FinalTeamWorkSession TeamMembers review allcomponents oftheDiagnostic Review Team’sfindings including:• Final ratings forstandards• Coherency andaccuracy oftheImprovementPriorities• Detailed evidence forallofthefindings• eleotsummary statements

School DiagnosticReviewTeamMembers

Time Event Where Who

7:30a.m. Teamarrives atschool School DiagnosticReviewTeamMembers 8:00a.m.–

4:00p.m. Continue interviews andartifact review, conduct classroom observations School Diagnostic

ReviewTeamMembers 11:30a.m.---

12:30p.m. Lunch–TeamMembers eatwhen itcanfitintotheir individual schedule School Diagnostic

ReviewTeamMembers 12:30---3:00

p.m. Continue interviews andartifact review, conduct classroom observations School Diagnostic

ReviewTeamMembers 3:00p.m.–

5:00p.m. Teamreturns tohotel (afterdismissal) andhasdinner ontheirown

5:00p.m.–9:00p.m.

TeamWorkSession #3(Agenda provided byLeadEvaluator)• Review findings fromtheday• Tabulate andreview finaleleotLearning Environmentratings• TeamMembers determine finalratings forallindicators• Reflections• Review eleot™ observation results• Review documents andartifacts• Finalize ImprovementPriorities

HotelConferenceRoom

DiagnosticReviewTeamMembers

advanc-ed.org

Toll Free: 888.41EDNOW (888.413.3669) Global: +1 678.392.2285, ext. 6963

9115 Westside Parkway, Alpharetta, GA 30009

About AdvancED

AdvancED is a non-profit, non-partisan organization serving the largest community of education

professionals in the world. Founded on more than 100 years of work in continuous improvement,

AdvancED combines the knowledge and expertise of a research institute, the skills of a management

consulting firm and the passion of a grassroots movement for educational change to empower

Pre-K-12 schools and school systems to ensure that all learners realize their full potential.

©Advance Education, Inc. AdvancED® grants to the Institution, which is the subject of the Engagement Review Report,

and its designees and stakeholders a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free license, and release to

reproduce, reprint, and distribute this report in accordance with and as protected by the Copyright Laws of the United

States of America and all foreign countries. All other rights not expressly conveyed are reserved by AdvancED.