Strategic Improvement Plan SCHOOL: Julian Curtiss School

Greenwich Public Schools, Greenwich, Connecticut DATE: November 3, 2015 1. SCHOOL NARRATIVE (Brief background statement on what lead to the focus of the SIP) In order to extend and align our school improvement work in Literacy, the School Data Team has chosen to continue our focus on the writing component of the Greenwich Comprehensive Literacy Framework in the 2015-2016 school year. We can take advantage of the reciprocity in reading and writing instruction, achieving higher-quality processing in both reading and writing by lifting the level of writing instruction. It has also become increasingly clear that children’s success in many disciplines is reliant on their ability to write. Writing is a skill that develops over time. The following is a summary of research based writing instruction captured in the GPS Achievement Report 2011. Research has not identified one single approach to writing instruction that is effective for every learner (NCTE, 2008). However, many researchers agree upon the following critical components of effective writing curriculum and instruction: 1. Students must have extensive time to learn to write and write to learn both in school and outside of school (Allington & Cunningham, 2001; Calkins, 1994; Murray, 1990; NCTE,

2004, 2008; Reeves, 2003; Reeves 2010; Sterling et.al., 2004) 2. Most writing opportunities should be authentic (connected to the real world) and provide students with opportunities to write in a variety of forms, structures and genres for a range

of purposes (Allington & Cunningham, 2001;Bomer, 2011;Calkins, 1994; Murray, 1990; NCTE 2004, 2008) 3. Effective reading and writing instruction occurs when taught in a cohesive, connected manner because reading and writing are innately connected cognitive processes. If one is to

write in one genre, it is helpful to first be familiar with structures of that genre (Allington & Cunningham, 2001; Bomer, 2011; Calkins, 1998; NCTE, 2004). Additionally, writing is inherently connected to talk. Oral rehearsal, conferring, small group/partnership discussions support the writing process (Bomer, 2011; Murray, 1990; NCTE, 2004).

4. Writing is best taught in a “workshop” structure to support a reflective, flexible process that provides students with multiple opportunities to generate, revise and edit their writing as individuals. This process is scaffolded by peers, adults and by small writing communities (Bomer, 2011;Calkins, 1994; Culham, 2004; Murray, 1990; NCTE, 2004). Students should be provided with a wealth of opportunities to compose and publish utilizing a variety of modalities and technologies (Culham, 2004; NCTE, 2004, 2008; NGA & CCSSO, 2011).

5. District curricula should emphasize Writing Across the Curriculum and demonstrate an increased focus and opportunities for students to write informational, research-based and argumentative texts (Bomer, 2011; Murray, 1990; NGA & CCSSO, 2011; NCTE, 2008; Reeves, 2003; Reeves 2010)

6. Collaborative teams of teachers should work together to utilize analytic rubrics and to calibrate scoring of student work. This process helps teachers to provide explicit feedback/language for improvement, reflection and progress-monitoring (Andrade, H. et.al., 2009; Bomer, 2011; Culham, 2004; NGA & CCSSO, 2011; Reeves, 2003; Reeves 201; Sadler & Andrade, 2004; Sterling et. al., 2004)

To extend the foundational work in writing completed in 2014-2015, expand on this work, and to align with the district goals in the 2015-2016 school year, the Julian Curtiss School Data Team reviewed the 5 goals of the Digital Learning Environment for the Greenwich Public Schools (as a 1:1 iPad Phase 3 school with students receiving devices in the fall of 2015). Those goals are: 1) Students will be critical thinkers of online content 2) Student will receive quality teacher feedback 3) Students will be self-reflective regulators of their own learning 4) Each student will receive a personalized learning environment 5) Students will be prepared for success on the Smarter Balanced Assessment In particular, the School Data Team determined that goal #2, “students will receive quality teacher feedback” (within the context of a Digital Learning Environment) would align with the focus of this year’s Strategic Improvement Plan. The school will focus on feedback in the area of writing to further develop our work in this area. 2. STATEMENT OF STUDENT OUTCOME INDICATOR AND GPS DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN GOAL Statement of Student Outcome Indicator: (written as SMART Goal) Within the Grade 3 2014-15 cohort, students will increase in the Writing claim from 81% (near/at/above) to 85% (near/at/above) by Spring 2016 and 87% (near/at/above) by Spring 2017.

Which District Strategic Improvement Plan Goal is addressed? 1. Reading 2. Math 3.  Writing 4. Other (Please specify) 5. Optional (Please specify) For Example: Additional goal for operations; communications; parent satisfaction; etc.)

Student Outcome Indicator Rationale: (Why was the Student Outcome Indicator chosen?) We are moving into the second year of our three year writing plan. Last year we focused on the structure, development and the language conventions across the writing genres. Teachers studied the complex components of writing workshop and familiarized themselves with the Writing Pathways resources. In the second year of this plan we will continue with a focus on opinion writing. The Common Core defines opinion writing by asking students to consider two or more perspectives on a topic or issue. This requires students to think more critically and deeply, assess the validity of their own thinking and anticipate counter claims in opposition of their assertion.

All Schools are required to align their School Improvement Plan with the GPS Strategic Plan Academic Goal: “To ensure each student achieves optimal growth within the core academic disciplines based on multiple variables.” Calkins (2013) delineates 7 essentials of strong writing instruction: 1. Writing needs to be taught like any other basic skill, with explicit instruction and

ample opportunity for practice. Almost every day, every student in grades K-5 needs

The CCSS places a tremendous emphasis on writing. In effect, the standards refocus the nation on students’ proficiency as writers. Similarly, this aligns with a map of thinking involved in understanding as presented in Making Thinking Visible by Richart, Church & Morrison, which is a highly leveraged process. Thinking moves are particularly useful when trying to understand new concepts, ideas, or events. Some examples include: building explanations and interpretations, reasoning with evidence, considering different viewpoints and perspectives, capturing the heart and forming conclusions. (Making Thinking Visible, pg.11) Writing Performance Data In June of 2015, the school average total score on the Writing Pathways Rubric was 28 points. Since the expectations of the next grade level rubric are increased, students need to maintain at least a total score of 28 to demonstrate one year’s growth. To support our SBA goal, we have set a writing goal that 80% of students in Grades K-5 increase by at least 5 points on the total score of the Teachers College Opinion Writing rubric by Spring of 2016. This goal will be support by our continued work with staff developers from Teachers College. SBA Performance Data - Spring 2015 Writing Claims: 3rd Grade - 81% (at/near or above) 4th Grade - 81% (at/near or above) 5th Grade - 84 % (at/near or above) Full School - 82% (at/near or above) SBA Claim/Targets (Writing): Claim 2: Students can produce effective writing for a range of purposes and audiences. Target 6a: Write Brief Texts: Write one or more paragraphs demonstrating ability to state an opinion about topics or sources; set a context, organize ideas, develop supporting evidence/reasons and elaboration, or develop a conclusion that is appropriate to purpose and audience and related to the opinion presented. Target 6b: Revise Brief Texts: Revise one or more paragraphs demonstrating ability to state opinions about topics or sources; set a context, organize ideas, develop supporting

between 50-60 minutes for writing instruction and writing. 2. Youngsters deserve to write for real, to write the kinds of texts that they see in the

world- non fiction chapter books, persuasive letters, stories, lab reports, reviews, poems--and to write for an audience of readers, not just for the teacher's red pen.

3. Writers need to put meaning onto the page. Young people will especially invest themselves in their writing if they write about subjects that are important to them. The easiest way to support this is to let children choose their own topics most of the time.

4. Children deserve to be explicitly taught how to write. 5. Children deserve the opportunity and instruction to cycle through the writing process. 6. Writers read. Writers need to study what other writers have done well, and give it a

try.

evidence/reasons and elaboration, or develop a conclusion appropriate to purpose and audience and related to the opinion presented. 8: Language and Vocabulary Use: Strategically use language and vocabulary (including academic or domain-specific vocabulary) appropriate to the purpose and audience when revising or composing texts. 9: Edit: Apply or edit grade-appropriate grammar usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling to clarify a message and edit narrative, explanatory/information, and opinion texts. Common Core Connections: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.4: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.5: Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach. 3. ADULT ACTION INDICATOR(S): ADULT ACTION INDICATOR(S) RATIONALE: (Written as a SMART Goal; what are the adults going to do differently to positively impact the Student Outcome Indicator) 100% of teachers will demonstrate improvement on their individualized adult TEPL goal in the area of feedback as measured by the Indicators of Effective Feedback Checklist.

(Statement of why you chose this strategy) Feedback is information provided by an agent (e.g. teacher, peer, book, parent, or one’s own experience) about aspects of one’s performance or understanding. A meta-analysis by John Hattie of over 1,200 studies has shown that feedback is one of the most powerful influences on student achievement. Feedback ranked 10th out of 138 influences across five domains (Teacher, Teaching, School, Curricula, and Home) and 5th within the domain of Teaching. There is a great deal of variability in the quality of feedback, and some types of feedback are more powerful than others. The most effective forms of feedback provide cues or reinforcement to the learner, are in the form of video, audio, or computer-assisted instruction feedback, or relate feedback to learning goals. Effective answers three questions, “Where am I going?” (learning intentions/goals/success criteria), “How am I going?” (self-assessment and self-evaluation), and “Where to next?” (progression, new goals) (Hattie, 2009). The power of feedback lies in closing the gap between where the student is and where they are

aiming to be (Sadler, 1989). The table below outlines a model of feedback that meets this purpose (Hattie, 2009).

The School Data team developed a checklist for teachers to use in order to evaluate effective feedback strategies being used within the classroom. These indicators are based on work by Grant Wiggins (Seven Keys to Effective Feedback) and Susan M. Brookhart (How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students). The indicators are divided into four categories:

• Goal Oriented • Actionable • Student-Friendly

• Timely/Consistent/Ongoing

4. ACTION PLAN AND RESULTS INDICATORS: (SEE ATTACHED) 5. COMMUNICATION PLAN: (How and when will the SIP progress be communicated to stakeholders including parents and staff?) Staff: • August 28, 2015 – Present Problem of Practice to faculty • October 5, 2015 – School Data Team analyzed TC rubrics and learning progressions in order to draft the SIP plan 2015-2016 • November 1, 2015 – School Data Team discussed problem of practice and determined goals and action plans to support the achievement of the goals • Faculty meetings will include review/updates on the SIP (at least four times during the school year) • School Data Team (SDT) meetings (once per month) will include regular review/updates of the SIP and Action Plans • SDT members will share information from the meetings with their grade level teams during Instructional Data Team meetings • SDT members will share their grade level team’s progress toward their Action Plans at SDT meetings Parents/Community: • October 1, 2015 – Introduction of SIP goal to parents/community at Open House • November 19, 2015 – Parent Presentation • November 19, 2015 – Publish new SIP on website and publish goals in the school newsletter • Communicate to parents through newsletter and weekly highlights what the staff will be doing on the early release days and the connection to the SIP • December 14, 2015 – SIP parent representative to attend meeting with School Data Team members • Continue monthly updates on website and in school newsletter. • Meet with SIP parent representative for a minimum of 3 sessions this school year to develop plans that will have the parents serve as ambassadors to the plan.

Strategic Improvement Plan progress must be communicated to key stakeholders throughout the course of the year. Members of the team are responsible for having the plan posted on their school’s website, and the SIT plan and process should be shared with the school and parent community at meetings and through bulletins, newsletters, and /or the school website.

3. SIP ACTION PLAN AND RESULTS INDICATORS

Adult Action Indicator:

Strategies Timeline Person (s) Responsible

Fiscal Implications Results Indicators C= Compliance A= Change in Adult Behavior S=Change in Student Performance (What data will you be collecting during the year to determine the effectiveness of your plan?)

Examine Writing Performance Data (SBA, TC Rubric)

August 31, 2015

School Data Team N/A C Data Shared

Draft Indicators of Effective Feedback Checklist

September 2015

Trish McGuire Brenda Brush Grace Blomberg Caren Iannazzo Kathy Schnefke

N/A A Posted in Schoology SDT Group

Review and adjust Indicators of Effective Feedback Checklist

November 2015

School Data Team N/A A School Data Team Minutes

Monitor delivery of feedback using the Indicators of Effective Feedback Checklist through: • Learning walks • Videos of teaching • Peer observations Initial and final

January 2016 through April 2016

All teachers A, S IDT Minutes School Data Team Minutes

checklist to be completed by a consistent team via walk-through as stated above. Writing Workshop Implementation Survey

November 2015 May 2016

All teachers of writing

N/A C Visual display of data

Professional learning with Teachers College staff with a focus on developing and refining methods of writing instruction

Grades K-2 9/11/15 9/15/15 3/8/15 4/19/15 5/24/15 Grades 3-5 9/24/15 11/12/15 1/8/15 3/4/15 5/13/15

Trish McGuire Brenda Brush TC Staff Developers: Liz Dunford (K-2) Meghan Hargrave (3-5) Literacy Staff All teachers of writing

Achievement Gap Budget - $22,000

A, S Formal and informal administrator observations Peer observations Teacher participation in lab classrooms Student performance data on TC Rubric

Attendance at Teachers College Workshops

September 2015 through May 2016

Brenda Brush Classroom teachers Specialists

Achievement Gap Budget - $2,000 (substitute coverage and transportation costs)

A Teacher notes shared in Schoology Sharing at faculty meetings and IDTs

Principal Membership in Teachers College Reading & Writing Project – includes attendance at TC Principal Days

9/30/15 10/28/15 12/2/15 1/13/15 2/24/15

Trish McGuire Achievement Gap Budget - $2,000 A Principal notes shared in Schoology

Analysis of on-demand Ongoing Classroom staff N/A C, A, S

writing pre-and post-assessments to determine next steps for effective instructional strategies in opinion writing

Minimum of 3 times per year

School Data Team

TC Opinion writing rubric

Professional Learning on feedback and digital learning Introduction to your Blended Learning Classroom DLE: Communication and Collaboration Collaboration and Feedback through Digital Learning Digital Toolbox Feedback Apps (Schoology, Nearpod, Google Apps, Notability, Self-paced) Critical Thinking of Online Content Creativity and Innovation Digital Learning Celebrations

Early Release Days and Full Days 8/31/15 9/16/15 10/21/15 11/3/15 1/13/15 3/9/15 5/11/15

All Staff N/A C, A Media staff provided self-guided research and collaboration on effective feedback using digital tools Feedback research and resources shared with staff in Schoology by School Data Team

Literacy coach will conduct grade-level coaching cycles with K-5 teachers focusing on Literacy instruction to include on-going PD and planning across literacy topics as well as providing ongoing effective feedback to students.

November 2015 – May 2016

Kathy Schnefke Classroom Teachers

Substitute Coverage - $1,000 C, A, S End of year coaching survey Examples of feedback in literacy small group instruction, conferring, student writing Writing and reading unit plans Pre- and post-assessment data including grade level rubrics and TC continuum

Align after school programs with the SIP and support at-risk students with additional instruction beyond the school day

November 2015 – May 2016

Trish McGuire Brenda Brush Literacy Staff School Data Team

Supplemental Funds - $8,500 A, S Schedules Pre-and post-assessment data

Walkthroughs for data collection on feedback checklist

October 2015 May 2016

Literacy Staff N/A A, S Completed checklists, tables/charts of compiled results data

Portfolio of two students (one “typical” and one either “high” or “low”) to measure growth in feedback – recording conferences, using Pathways rubric to make notes, checklist on components of feedback.

November 2015 through June 2016

Classroom teachers

N/A A, S Portfolios of student work Checklists Videos

Create data display to show goals, baseline data and progress being made toward goals.

December 2015 through June 2016

Trish McGuire Brenda Brush

N/A C, A, S Data displays in teachers’ room and conference room

School Data Team Monthly Trish McGuire Growth and Development - $8,000 for meetings after C, A, S

meetings to include regular review/updates of the SIP and Action Plans

September 2015 through June 2016

Brenda Brush School Data Team

school hours Agendas and minutes posted in Schoology Relevant information shared with staff through Schoology folder and faculty meetings

Strategic Improvement Plan Year-End Report SCHOOL:

Greenwich Public Schools, Greenwich, Connecticut DATE: 1. STATEMENT OF STUDENT OUTCOME INDICATOR AND GPS DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN GOAL Statement of Student Outcome Indicator: (written as SMART Goal)

Which District Strategic Improvement Plan Goal is addressed? 1. Reading 2. Math 3. Writing 4. Other (Please specify) 5. Optional (Please specify) For Example: Additional goal for operations; communications; parent satisfaction; etc.)

Adult Action Indicator: (Specific statement about what the adults will do to support student outcome indicator)

2. ACTION PLAN AND RESULTS INDICATORS (SEE ATTACHED) 3. STATUS OF STUDENT OUTCOME INDICATORS

1 Accomplished (Establish a new goal for the next school year)

1 Partially accomplished (Continue with the current goal for the next school year)

1 Not accomplished (Continue with the current goal for the next school year)

1 Modified (Modify the current goal for the next school year)

SIT Year End Process:

May/June – Review progress of implementation of SIT Action Plan

August/September – Review status of Student Outcome Indicators October 25th– Due to Deputy Superintendent

2. SIT ACTION PLAN AND RESULTS INDICATORS

Year-End Progress Report Adult Action Indicator:

Strategies Timeline Person (s)

Responsible Results Indicators Status/Progress