Gerrish-Higgins CNA Report

Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report

Gerrish-Higgins School District
Roscommon, Michigan, United States

Prepared for the Michigan Department of Education

Submitted: Not submitted yet


Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report
Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Purpose of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Structure of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Summary of Uses for the CNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
District Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Strand I - Teaching For Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Standard 1 - Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Standard 2 - Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Standard 3 - Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Strand II - Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Standard 1 - Instructional Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Standard 2 - Shared Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Standard 3 - Operational and Resource Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Strand III - Personnel and Professional Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Standard 1 - Personnel Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Standard 2 - Professional Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Strand IV - School and Community Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Standard 1 - Parent/Family Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Standard 2 - Community Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Strand V - Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Standard 1 - Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Standard 2 - Information Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
CNA - Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Report - Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report: DRAFT COPY Page 2 of 34


Introduction

Purpose of the Report
The Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) was developed to be used as a tool to assist a school staff in
determining the strengths and challenges of their school. The CNA assesses the system processes and protocols of
practice that are in place to support student academic achievement. Completion of these reports will also fulfill
many of the federal requirements for a comprehensive needs assessment prior to decisions regarding how federal
funds will be spent in a building or district.

Structure of the Report
The School Improvement Framework establishes a vision for school improvement. The Process Cycle for School
Improvement has four major components that cycle in continuous praxis. They are:

Gather Data Where are we now (status) and where do we want to be (goals)?

Study/Analyze What did the data/information we collected tell us?

Plan How do we organize our work so that it aligns to our goals and resources?

Do Staff implements the strategies and action steps outlined in the plan

Gather Data II Where are we now (status) and did we reach our goals?

While the SI Framework provides the vision for school improvement, the CNA is a tool that supports two of the
four areas of the School Improvement Process: Gather Data and Study. The following pages provide probing
questions to create dialogue about student and school data. They are designed to facilitate a deeper reflection into
a school's data/information and protocols of practice in order to identify areas of need. Data/information from the
CNA can be used to write a school improvement plan that includes specific student achievement goals, objectives,
and strategies designed by the stakeholders. A CNA should be conducted once every three to five years,
coinciding with the school improvement planning cycle, and revisited annually.

Sources of data/information that serve the process of needs identification can include: School Improvement
Framework Rubric self assessment (which includes the EdYES! Performance indicators), the current school
improvement plan, information contained in the School Report Card, school's annual education report, and
student test data from multiple sources.



The CNA consists of three sections

Student Data Analysis:

Assesses current student achievement data and information about the school. The resulting Student Data
Analysis Report can be used for school improvement planning purposes. The report includes: 1)
Identification of Student learning goals, 2) Identification of possible contributing causes for gaps in
achievement, and 3) Objectives to achieve student learning goals. This process is done as the first step of
the CNA. The information links and template should be obtained from the NORMES website. The links are
available on your homepage.

Instructional Processes and Practices Analysis:

Assesses the system processes and protocols of practice that are in place to support student academic
achievement. The assessment focuses on all 90 of the Key Characteristics contained in the School
Improvement Framework Rubrics. Standard and Strand analysis reports have been included to organize the
identified strengths and challenges in system processes and protocols of practice. Completion of this section
will also provide information required to for the annual Education YES! Performance Indicators report.

Conclusions and Goals:

Provides a format to align identified student achievement challenges with system challenges.

Summary of Uses for the CNA
Guide the school's identification of additional resources (grants) to support its goals and objectives.
Annually evaluate progress on the 40 Education YES! Performance Indicators.
Annually review and/or evaluate all 90 indicators in the School Improvement Framework.
Serve as the basis for all other needs assessments that may be required of the school.
Form the basis of the school's professional learning plan as required by PA25.
Identify areas of need to be included in the school's technology plan.
Satisfy NCA requirement for a School Profile Report.
Comply with federal grant requirements of aligning resources with identified needs through a
comprehensive needs analysis.



District Information

District: Gerrish-Higgins School District

ISD/RESA: C.O.O.R. ISD

Public/Non-Public: Non-Public

Grades: PK,K,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12

District Code Number: 72010

City: Roscommon

State/Province: Michigan

Country: United States



Strand I - Teaching For Learning

The school holds high expectations for all students, identifies essential curricular content, makes certain it is
sequenced appropriately and is taught effectively in the available instructional times. Assessments used are
aligned to curricular content and are used to guide instructional decisions and monitor student learning.

Michigan Department of Education began publishing both the school's self-rating and the evidence reported for
each indicator in 2005. The school's self-rating for each characteristic, and the evidence provided, is available to
the public on the School Report Card.

Standard 1 - Curriculum
Schools/Districts have a cohesive plan for instruction and learning that serves as the basis for teachers' and
students' active involvement in the construction and application of knowledge.

Benchmark A: Aligned, Reviewed & Monitored

Indicators:

I.1.A.1 Aligned, Coherent and Inclusive Curriculum: The written curriculum incorporates the district's
expectations for good instruction and essential content and affirms a common vision and understanding of the
learning standards under which the district operates. Based on state standards, it is structured around a set of
interrelated programs for students and staff, guided by a common framework, and pursued over a sustained period
of time. The curriculum reflects a commitment to equity and diversity and its flexibility is designed to address the
wide range of needs and abilities of all students.

Response:
Getting Started
Partially Implemented
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
The district has an aligned K-8 curriculum in the four core academic areas, as well as other areas.
Evidence of progress to date includes: a formal written document and detailed grade level curriculum
maps.The Scott Foresman Reading and Everyday Math programs K-8 directly align with the GLCE's
and MCF. All teachers are working toward using and aligning the written curriculum with fidelity.In
support of the written curriculum, the Supervising Learning/Teacher Evaluation Process provides
documentation of administrative support and teacher feedback, of the alignment of standards-based,
cross curricular instruction in all four core content areas. The results support that standards-based
education which is aligned and driven by the MCF and the GLCE's. Curriculum teams meet regularly
and continue to review and revise the process. Subject alignment for music, physical education and
technology are also in place and aligned to the MI Frameworks and GLCEs where available. As a


participant of MiBLSi project, DIBELS benchmarks are also included in curriculum mapping.
Extensive work has been done with the Human Sexuality Advisory Committee and the teaching of
HIV/AIDS mandated by the State of Michigan for the Health Curriculum. The District Technology
Plan has been updated. Roscommon High School is in the process of implementing the new Michigan
Merit Curriculum, realigning classes and classroom instruction to meet the demands of this
curriculum. Freshman and sophomore level classes have been re-evaluated by staff to include best
practices and to help students meet the states content expectations (junior and senior classes are in the
process of realignment). RHS staff members have worked in Professional Learning Communities
(PLC), within each discipline, to work on identifying power standards and aligning these standards
with the curriculum.

Benchmark B: Communicated

Indicators:

I.1.B.1 Communicated and Articulated Curriculum: The district places a high value on effective communication
and articulation of the curriculum. In order to communicate this curriculum to all stakeholders, a variety of two-
way communication techniques are employed. The district facilitates a system-wide curricular dialog and clearly
defines expectations about essential content throughout instructional levels. This includes a cross-school review of
the content and the identification and elimination of gaps and overlaps.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
The written district curriculum is easily cross-referenced through the use of grade level brochures
which identify major content and themes taught at each grade level. These documents are sent home to
parents annually, given to all new families when registering, and available to teachers. Performance-
based report cards offer additional detail of curricular content, and examples of the cards are available
for cross-grade reference. Grade level teams meet regularly in order to collaborate about curriculum,
instruction, and to evaluate data. Data information cards are completed for every student, and passed
on to the next year's teacher, thus providing a myriad of information at a glance. Many job-embedded
opportunities are in place for staff to work together collaboratively, both as grade level and cross grade
level teams. District time is provided once a month for K-12 discussion of curriculum by content area.
MiBLSi provides an avenue for professional development K-8 this year and K-12 next year, to help
communicate and articulate core curriculum in reading. In support to the written curriculum, the
Supervising Learning/Teacher Evaluation Process provides documentation of administrative support
and teacher feedback, of the alignment of standards-based, cross curricular instruction in all four core
content areas. The results support that standards-based education which is aligned and driven by the
MCF and the GLCEs. Weekly departmental PLC meetings provide time for staff to continue working
of developing and, in some cases, modifying curriculum in order to meet state content expectations as
well as meet our overriding school goal of improving writing across the curriculum. Staff PD time has
been allocated to also include the teaching of reading strategies to students. Both reading and writing
are areas of concern based upon MME results. Using data triangulation of teacher assessment, NWEA,
and at the High School level MME/ACT results, teachers are able to generate appropriate interventions


for students. These interventions are based upon student abilities and we are continually working to
improve how teachers differentiate instruction within their classrooms. These practices and changes
are communicated to stakeholders through dialogue and the school listserv.

Focus Questions

1. What in our systems and practices may be impacting our student achievement goals?

The work that the staff has been doing in differentiated instruction, reading strategies (for expository text),
and writing prompts across each discipline will have the greatest impact on our students and their
achievement levels. We are in the infancy of our new MMC ideas, so student growth will only improve as we
improve our instruction.

Standard 2 - Instruction
Intentional processes and practices are used by schools and teachers to facilitate high levels of student learning.

Benchmark A: Planning

Indicators:

I.2.A.1 Systematic Planning for Quality Instruction: The district has a comprehensive vision for the delivery of
quality, culturally relevant instruction. District leaders work directly with school leaders to ensure a reflective and
evidence-based approach to teaching practice. There is a common expectation throughout all instructional levels
that research-based instructional strategies are collaboratively developed, observable in classroom practice and
measured by their impact on student achievement.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
We are data driven in our district! The data that we compile drives our instruction. DIBELS, NWEA,
SWIS, MIACCESS, MLPP, QRI, Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment (Pre-8), and report cards
align with the GLCEs. Gap Analysis is used to define curricular areas of need. Special Education uses
AIMS writing probes. We use MEAP results to help focus our writing, and evaluate which students go
to extended day. Comprehensive curriculum maps have been compiled and are utilized for each grade
level. Backward design units have been put together which incorporate higher level thinking skills.
Written documentation of curriculum planning takes place during districtwide PD release time and
grade level meetings.Curricular mapping at each grade level follows a prescribed scope and sequence
aligned to the state standards. Weekly collaborative sessions among grade level teams allows for
review of student data and an opportunity for ongoing discussion of student needs. Common
assessments, particularly in writing, are scored as a group. Results of summative assessments are
consistently recorded, and analysis of the data is used to plan future instruction. Cross district planning



is scheduled annually, and provides additional collaborative time in order to review pacing schedules
and curriculum equity from classroom to classroom. Input from teachers is key to the selection and
purchase of curricular support materials. Pilot programs are often used to field test researched based
programs, and professional development offerings are sufficient to sustain the initiatives provided.
(Everyday Math, Four Block Literacy, 6+1 Traits of Writing and Lucy Calkins are examples.)

Benchmark B: Delivery

Indicators:

I.2.B.1 Coherent and Effective Support for the Delivery of Instruction: The district provides a collaboratively
developed and implemented standards-based, system-wide framework of high quality instruction that includes
common instructional strategies in a real-world context. The emphasis is on challenging, rigorous and equitable
practices and support is provided to promote the success of all students. To achieve this shared vision of
instruction, the district collaborates with staff to provide context- and research-based professional development.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
Grade level teams through out the district work in collaborative teams. The district provides one
monthly 2 hour late arrival day for whole building Professional Learning Communities (PLC) with two
of those arly relaease days being used for districtwide curricular area meetings. This provides regular
discussion opportunity for teachers to have meaningful conversations about instructional strategies and
classroom practices as they apply to curricular units. Team planning results in shared responsibility
and greater equity of instruction from classroom to classroom. Professional development opportunities
and professional learning community approaches are used to promote continuous changes in
researched based instructional practices. Regularly scheduled observations are assured by contract, and
administrative walk throughs are routine. Through the Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment Pre-8,
we provide staff and schedule support for students who are targeted. We have a color coding system
which identifies benchmark (green), strategic(yellow), and intensive (red) students that reflects
changes within skill areas. Title I services change based on the color coding system. Curriculum
mapping provides scope and sequence, time lines and connections between units. Modifications are
made for students when necessary, and extensions are offered to those who require it. After school
intervention programs and summer school opportunities offer additional support to struggling students,
while in-class aid support is offered by highly qualified para-professionals. Teacher/student artifacts
demonstrate differentiated lessons and assignments through writing folders, lesson plans, and various
activities. We continually adapt our curriculum to meet the ever changing Michigan Grade Level
Content Expectations in all subject areas!

Focus Questions


PLC meetings where the focus is on continual development of the curriculum has the strongest impact on



student achievement and learning.

Standard 3 - Assessment
Schools/districts systematically gather and use multiple sources of evidence to monitor student achievement.

Benchmark A: Aligned to Curriculum & Instruction

Indicators:

I.3.A.1 Use of Multiple Measures to Support School-wide Decision-making: The district is committed to the use
of multiple measures to inform decisions at both the school and district level. Multiple sources of data are used to
guide instruction, monitor student achievement, assure equity, provide accountability and determine resource
allocation.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
At both of the districts' elementary schools staff consistently uses formative, periodic benchmark, and
culminating assessments to monitor student achievement and inform instruction. Assessment is an
essential part of planning. We use MEAP, MI-ACCESS, & NWEA as our schools' Standardized
assessments. Daily Practice Aligned to Standardized Assessments: GLCE's, Everyday Math Unit
Tests, Writing Prompts/Rubrics, Accelerated Reader, Science & Social Studies Rubrics, Spellings
tests, DIBELS progress monitoring, and formative assessments in Language Arts. Benchmark
Assessments: NWEA (Given 3 times a year), MEAP, Everyday Math Assessments, MLPP, DIBELS,
QRI, Fitness Grams, Music Assessments, and Report Cards. Culminating Assessments: Science Fair,
Science investigation journals, research project presentations, processed writing, projects, portfolio's,
and performances. Our assessment data consistently drives instruction. At the secondary level, various
assessments are used as outlined in the lesson, including teacher-designed tests and quizzes, rubrics,
authentic assessments, observation,etc. * Formal assessments (MEAP and NWEA) align with
standards & benchmarks, GLCE's. The NWEA is given three times a year to our students. This data is
analyzed and compared throughout the school year. Student results are used to measure our curriculum
goals.

Focus Questions


Using NWEA and MME/ACT data has been the driving force behind our curriculum choices and will
continue to be used to show student growth and achievement.



Strand II - Leadership

School leaders create a school environment where everyone contributes to a cumulative, purposeful and positive
effect on student learning.


Standard 1 - Instructional Leadership
School leaders create and sustain a context for learning that puts students' learning first.

Benchmark A: Educational Program

Indicators:

II.1.A.1 High Standards and Clear Expectations: There is a system-wide climate that supports student learning
with equity as a core value. Everyone in the district is united in purpose to assure that all students learn to high
standards in order to close achievement gaps. District leaders and school administrators set clear expectations and
decentralize responsibility for decisions through the provision of internal accountability measures.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
The building principals through out the district assume the role as leading by example through full
participation in the professional development opportunities sponsored by the local and intermediate
school districts. (i.e. MIBLSI (Academic and Behavioral), Professional Learning Communities). There
is full participation by building leadership in suggested and mandated teacher trainings at the district
level such as MLPP, LETRS, DIBELS, Data Usage and Professional Learning communities. One
district school leader has been trained as a state literacy trainer and works outside the district as a
regional consultant. Another principal serves as district representative for the COOR Intermediate
School District CCCPD advisory board which is responsible for professional development
recommendations at the ISD level. As part of participation in the MiBLSi grant (Pre-8 this year and
Pre-12 next year), building leadership teams guide schoolwide efforts for data analysis and school
wide program development and implimentation as it applies to continuing school improvement. The
superintendent has also served in a leadership role to support curricumlum discussion in World
Languages at both the intermediate school district and state level. Utilizing our PLC groups for
common planning has been the biggest key for us in not only targeting students, but also in targeting


focus areas within our curriculum. Within these PLC groups, content expectations and course
requirements are discussed as are common formative and summative assessment pieces. Also, we are
able to pursue smaller PD opportunities through introducing various reading strategies, for example,
and asking for teachers to try them in their classrooms and report back to the PLC about the impact the
strategy had on students. We have had staff-wide PD on expository text reading strategies, John
Collins/Mark Dressel writing processes, utilizing NWEA results, as well as looking at the work of
Mike Schmoker, Ruby Payne, and Paul Slocumb.

Benchmark B: Instructional Support

Indicators:

II.1.B.1 Culture of Collaboration: District leaders are continually seeking to build a culture of mutual respect,
collaboration, trust and shared responsibility for system as well as school improvement. A common value
throughout the district is that adults, as well as students, are continuous learners. As a result, Professional
Learning Communities exist at all levels of the organization.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
All members of staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.
Collaborative decision making is part of the district culture. Major curricular purchases are made with
input from the teaching staff from each of the four buildings. Materials sufficient to teach curriculum
are purchased, and programs with upgraded editions are provided as needed. Site based decision
making is at the center of the building culture thorugh the district whenever such a choice is possible.
Major decisions are generally made as a result of full staff discussion using a consensus model. The
community and parents have had a major voice in regards to the SCORE meetings that the
superintendent has implemented over the course of the last three years. We continueto implement
several positive changes as a result of this group. The Superintendent has also implemented a parent
and a teacher committee. Both groups meet monthly to discuss needed changes and budget issues. And
again, several positive changes have coem form both groups. We have continued to give teachers time
to visit and observe each other's classrooms. Teachers us the norms and ground rules they have
established for discussions, written reflections and after substantive discussions and specific protocols
for discussion. Through everything above, a very healthy professional learning community has
emerged which is driven by data results. The above collaborative practices occur across grade levels
and content areas. Grade levels cross each other, as well as content areas through the Understanding
By Design (Backwards Design) process. Staff members design shared teaching units from a "Big Idea"
process. Assessment instruments are devised first and Multiple Standards are incorporated across all
Content Areas. Change has been continual within our high school as we work to adapt to the MMC
requirements. Key points for us include PLC work, formal administrative observations, informal
administration walk-throughs. We also are able to emply two-hour late-arrival or early-dismissal days
for staff and PLC professional development opportunities. For us, the collaborative nature inherent in
the PLC allows us to constantly re-evaluate our curriculum maps and course requirements.



II.1.B.2 Instructional Program Coherence: In order to assure coherence across the entire system, district leaders
have established a vision of powerful teaching and learning in collaboration with stakeholders. The district
provides direction, assistance and resources to align, support, and enhance all parts of the system in seeking to
successfully achieve this vision.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
Our local MEA Teachers' Organization has demonstrated great support for following the vision of
each one of our buildings through contract language they wrote. Teacher contracts contain language
listing expectations for teaching standards appropriate with high expectations. The district and building
missions provide clear statements of goals of learning success for every student. Annual reports and
grade level brochures distributed to parents, clearly communicate desired student outcomes.
Performance based report cards are correlated with state grade level content expectations. Surveys
conducted as part of school improvement efforts have shown high levels of satisfaction by both parents
and students in matters connected to applying school rules fairly and consistently. The Mission
Statement also appears on the district website and in the student handbooks of each building which are
reviewed annually. The most recent revisions of these policy handbooks were completed within the
past year and included parent and community representation on the working committee. Change has
been continual within our high school as we work to adapt to the MMC requirements. Key points for
us include PLC work, formal administrative observations, informal administration walk-throughs. We
also are able to emply two-hour late-arrival or early-dismissal days for staff and PLC professional
development opportunities. For us, the collaborative nature inherent in the PLC allows us to constantly
re-evaluate our curriculum maps and course requirements. Change has been continual within our high
school as we work to adapt to the MMC requirements. Key points for us include PLC work, formal
administrative observations, informal administration walk-throughs. We also are able to emply two-
hour late-arrival or early-dismissal days for staff and PLC professional development opportunities. All
staff members in our district are active participants in school improvement work. We recently
completed a successful Quality Assurance Review (QAR) visit at the high school this past February.
Common planning and common formative and summative assessments are also employed. We have
also recently revisited and reworked our schools vision and mission statements, making sure that all
stakeholders were involved in the process and that both statements truly embody our school
improvement goals.

Focus Questions


The PLCs at all buildings are making a very postive impact on students achievemnent. It allows for
professionakl dialogue and planning.

Standard 2 - Shared Leadership


Structures and processes exist to support shared leadership in which all staff has collective responsibility for
student learning.

Benchmark A: School Culture & Climate

Indicators:

II.2.A.1 Coordinated Policies and Procedures: District policies and procedures are collaboratively developed,
well understood and consistently and fairly implemented. The district's priority is on clear communication of
these policies and procedures to assure the effective operation of the entire system, with an emphasis on equitable
practices and meeting the needs of the underserved.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
Our local MEA Teachers' Organization has demonstrated great support for following the vision of
each one of our buildings through contract language they wrote. Teacher contracts contain language
listing expectations for teaching standards appropriate with high expectations. The district and building
past year and included parent and community representation on the working committee. All members
of staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.


Content Areas.

Benchmark B: Continuous Improvement

Indicators:

II.2.B.1 Culture of Collective Responsibility: The district holds all adults accountable for student learning and the
attainment of high standards. Productive relationships are developed with all stakeholders and leadership is
distributed across these stakeholder groups. Therefore, the district expects individuals to be accountable for their
contributions to the collective result.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
All members of staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.
Content Areas. The building principals through out the district assume the role as leading by example
through full participation in the professional development opportunities sponsored by the local and
intermediate school districts. (i.e. MIBLSI (Academic and Behavioral), Professional Learning
Communities). There is full participation by building leadership in suggested and mandated teacher
trainings at the district level such as MLPP, LETRS, DIBELS, Data Usage and Professional Learning
communities. One district school leader has been trained as a state literacy trainer and works outside
the district as a regional consultant. Another prinicipal serves as district representative for the COOR
Intermediate School District CCCPD advisory board which is responsible for professional
development recommendations at the ISD level. As part of participation in the MiBLSi grant (Pre-8
this year and Pre-12 next year), building leadership teams guide schoolwide efforts for data analysis
and school wide program development and implimentation as it applies to continuing school
improvement. The superintendent has also served in a leadership role to support curricumlum



discussion in World Languages at both the intermediate school district and state level. Our local MEA
Teachers' Organization has demonstrated great support for following the vision of each one of our
buildings through contract language they wrote. Teacher contracts contain language listing
expectations for teaching standards appropriate with high expectations. The district and building
past year and included parent and community representation on the working committee. All members
of staff through out the district are active participants in the school improvement process.
Content Areas.

II.2.B.2 Continuous Improvement: The district is a learning organization committed to long-term improvement.
As a result, it establishes a system-wide strategic plan, fueled by data, with clear goals and accountability for
results. All schools in the district are, in turn, learning organizations committed to long-term data-driven reform
and all staff is held accountable for student achievement results.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
Through out the district we use disaggregated data from a variety of sources (MEAP,NWEA, MLPP,
DIBELS, Everyday Math, NCA instruments, grade-level and department created assessment data) to
monitor student progress, and help sustain continuous improvement. Data-driven instruction has
become so completely embedded into the instructional process that it has become second nature for



staff members. They make instructional decisions for students based on several different sources of
data on a daily basis. Through the use of district data systems available, student data can be compared
over time. State MEAP results and other standardized tests are used to identify learning trends over
time, as well as to point out the need for changes in instruction. Student progress is tracked throughout
the school year in order to support the building goal of a full year of growth for every child. Grade
Level Content Expectations are used as a guide to assure that every child possesses the skills necessary
to be successful at the next grade level. School improvement efforts and annual Title I School-Wide
needs assessments are reviewed to measure growth and adjust focus when necessary. Support
programs offer differentiated modifications and extensions for learners of all abilities.

Focus Questions


While all buildings are making continuos improvement the collaborative teams are still forming at the High
School Level.

Standard 3 - Operational and Resource Management
School leaders organize and manage the school to support teaching for learning.

Benchmark A: Resource Allocation

Indicators:

II.3.A.1 Accountability and Strategic Resource Allocation: The district's long range strategic plan allocates
resources in an equitable manner to assure adequate support for its educational programs and to meet the diverse
needs of its schools. Decisions are made in a transparent manner to assure accountability and equity in the
allocation of resources.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
Professional learning opportunities offer a variety of choices but are always tied to the Title I Needs
assessment. All Professional development most be research-based and tied to student need. While
some are mandatory, many others are optional. When the district requires participation, the offerings
occur during the school day, or stipends are provided. Follow up activities are available to those who
wish to learn more. Opportunities to participate in a variety of current topics are offered through
partnerships with several Northern Michigan Intermediate School Districts. Additional opportunities
are provided through the MiBLSi grant initiative (Pre-8 this year but Pre-12 next year). Staff is offered
the opportunity to identify areas of professional development that they wish to explore as a district.
Learning community opportunities are often offered locally for college credit. When teachers



participate in professional development instruction that takes them away from the classroom, the
district expectation is that teachers must identify (in advance of the conference) how the information
will be shared with a other teachers in the district. Administration supports teachers who wish to spend
time in another classroom by providing substitute coverage in their classroom. State conferences that
relate to school improvement are considered on a case by case basis again depending upon how they
realte to the identified student need through the Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment. New
programs are implemented with sufficient in-classroom support and time within the school week is
provided for collaborative discussion. Federal, state and local services and programs are effectively
coordinated through the district consolidated application process tosupport our school-wide plan. In
fact, Gerrish-Higgins is involved in a number of grants that the Business Manager, Shay Anderson;
Superintendent and Director of 31a, Dr.Millie Park Mellgren; and Title I Director, Kathy Rees, have
written with stakeholders through the consolidated application process. These groups have worked
very hard to coordinate the following grants. -Title I, Part A/D -Title II, Part A - Title II, Part D -Title
V -31a State At-Risk -ECE Kathy Rees is responsible for the Title I and Early Childhood grants. Dr.
Park Mellgren, Superintendent, coordinates services for students formally identified to receive at-risk
services. Mrs. Anderson coordinates Title II, Parts A & D and Title V. Mrs. Anderson, Dr. Park
Mellgren , and Mrs. Rees have coordinated their efforts to efficiently supply materials, professional
development activities, teacher stipends, release time and other support to the entire school district.
The district professional development request form has been very helpful to coordinate those types of
opportunities. On the forms, staff members are first and foremost requested to identify the connection
of the professional development activity to NCA/School Improvement Goals. They are also required to
obtain the approval of the project director if funding from one of the above grants is required. Mrs.
Anderson, Dr. Park Mellgren, and Mrs. Rees adjust the source of the funding, with the purpose of
coordinating all of the grants. For example, staff members who request to attend professional
development activities need to complete a plan of how they intend to share and use the information
themselves, upon their return. Their goal is to make meaningful choices for professional development,
which reflects a comprehensive, coordinated approach for educational reform. At the intermediate
school district level, Mrs. Mcnitt, Roscommon Elementary Principal is a member of the COOR
Intermediate Coordinating Committee for Professional Development(CCCPD). The CCCPD have
coordinated grant efforts and have offered extensive training sessions that are ongoing throughout the
year. School calendars provide opportunities for building teams to work on school improvement and
curricular considerations throughout the school year. Classroom instructional time is aligned with
district goals and care is taken to preserve sufficient blocks of uninterrupted learning time. Schedules
are planned around optimum student learning times whenever possible. Pull out programs and
supplemental curricular instruction are offered during times that are least invasive to the classroom
learning environment. Weekly common planning time is offered in a collaborative setting at each
grade level, providing an additional two hours of group planning beyond contract requirements.
Additionally, the district has seven late start days that provide fourteen more hours of time dedicated to
group collaboration between grade levels. Protocols have been established for these meetings, agendas
are in place, and minutes are recorded with the principal. The work completed with the behavior aspect
of the MiBLSi grant (pre-4 this year and Pre-12 next year) promotes the investment of time and
systems that result in less time spent on discipline, creating more time for student learning.

Focus Questions


Collaborative Decision making is still developing at the secondary levels where it appears to be more in place
at the elementary level.



Strand III - Personnel and Professional Learning

The school has highly qualified personnel who continually acquire and use skills, knowledge, attitudes, and
beliefs necessary to create a culture with high levels of learning for all.


Standard 1 - Personnel Qualifications
School/district staff qualifications, knowledge and skills support student learning.

Benchmark A: Requirements

Indicators:

III.1.A.1 Highly Qualified Personnel: The district recruits, hires and retains a highly diverse and qualified staff.
The primary attributes considered in the hiring process include: extensive knowledge of content area(s);
demonstrated use of effective research-based and developmentally appropriate instructional practices and
experience teaching a diverse population.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
All staff members through out the district are highly qualified as identified by No Child Left Behind.
Ongoing professional development is available to teachers that focus on both content knowledge and
best teaching practices. Every teacher has had intensive support (including peer coaching) to teach
Everyday Mathematics and the Lucy Calkins writing framework. In addition, grant initiatives (MiBLSi
- Pre-8 this year and Pre-12 next year) focus on strategies to improve student behavior and reading
skills. Staff members routinely demonstrate a high level of expertise and incorporate higher order
thinking in daily instruction. Building staff members have assumed a leadership role with a state
organizations and committees, while another serves as a professional math consultant. The one of the
building principals in the district serves as district representative to the COOR ISD team that is
responsible for planning professional development. Many staff members assume leadership roles
within the district and some have participated in state range finding and similar activities. Involvement
with the state MiBLSi (Pre-8 ths year and Pre-12 next year) grant has resulted in a team centered
approach to ongoing teacher development through training, guidance, feedback, resources/tools. A
coordinated focus on action plans have resulted from current data throughout the year. The leadership


team uses collaborative time to disseminate this information to the building staff on a monthly basis
and site based decision making is an essential part of the process. Professional development has
included: RTI, NWEA, MiBLSi, Non-bullying intervention, Junior Class Learning, MEAP, Backwards
Design, LETERS, Project Read, DIBELS, MLPP, QRI, and EPLI training, Non-violent crisis
intervention, four blocks, Road to the Code, PALS, KPALS, using data, independent professional
study and implementation of best practices, and staff led professional development (Project Read,
Bullying Training, Positive Behavior Support meetings). New teachers are paired with Master
Teachers to honor their required three year mentoring requirement and are given research-based
professional development opportunities. By maintaining the PLC meetings, administration provides
ample opportunity for all staff to be involved in the school improvement process. Collegial
conversations, through the PLC format and through the use of mentoring, maintain a high level of
professionalism and articulation of ideas.

Focus Questions


More development needs to take place in Recruitment of Highly Qualified.

Standard 2 - Professional Learning
Professional learning is conducted with colleagues across the school/district on improving staff practices and
student achievement.

Benchmark A: Collaboration

Indicators:

III.2.A.1 Coordinated Professional Development Based Upon Common Principles: The system provides job-
embedded, on-going, interrelated learning opportunities for all staff to improve their effectiveness. The intent of
professional development is to help build capacity and implement new skills system-wide emphasizing their
application in the classroom.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
Cross district teams meet regularly to discuss/refine curriculum delivery and mapping as a result of
late start release time offered monthly, and professional development time dedicated to this effort. In
addition, collaborative planning is scheduled weekly through out all of the buildings in the district and
participation is required at all grade levels and includes Special Education. This time is in addition to
the planning time assured by union contract. Monthly staff meetings are dedicated to school
improvement issues and most qualify as hours toward professional development. Peer coaching is used



to support our school improvement efforts in writing, and improved reading practices. Action research
opportunities are available to all staff members and have been incorporated into mandatory ISD
sponsored professional development at the beginning of the school year. (This year two days were
dedicated to the work of Ruby Payne.) A building framework for professional learning communities is
based on recent professional development centered on this work.

Focus Questions


Collaborative Decision making is still developing at the secondary levels where it appears to be more in place
at the elementary level.



Strand IV - School and Community Relations

The school staff maintains purposeful, active, positive relationships with families of its students and with the
community in which it operates to support student learning.


Standard 1 - Parent/Family Involvement
Schools actively and continuously involve parents and families in student learning and other school activities.

Benchmark A: Communication

Indicators:

IV.1.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships: The district uses system-wide strategies
to listen to and communicate with parents/families. They are provided meaningful roles in the decision-making
process and the district promotes a culture of participation, responsibility and ownership. The collaborative
relationships that are developed reflect the needs and strengths of the district, its schools and parents/families.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
We are a school of limited diversity. The largest group would be economic status. Forty-eight percent
is the population statistic used to qualify us as a Title I School-Wide site. All other categories of
diversity combine to total less than 10%. While we do not have to consider families who speak another
language, we do have to be concerned about families without telephones or computers. Because our
school encompasses a large geographical area, it is often difficult for parents to travel (high fuel costs)
the distance necessary for face to face conversations. To best communicate with all of our families, we
send home many hard copy documents. Care is taken to assure that they are reader friendly.
School/Parent/Family communication is conducted through Scoop Articles, Weekly Communicator
Articles, Classroom Newsletters, Family Involvement Nights, Classroom phones, Parent Survey,
Parent Workshops, District/School Website, Student-Led Conferences, Parent/Student Surveys, Title I
Parent Compacts, Home Visits, Classroom Volunteers, Child Studies/IEPs and Daily Planners are
utilized at the secondary level. We also offer parents the opportunity to attend the Kirtland Children's
Theater Productions. Information is also available through our district, building and classroom
websites. Parent Conferences are often scheduled in the evening so that parents do not have to leave


their jobs. Public transportation travel tokens are provided for parents who have no way to come to
school for meetings. Technology contact opportunities are offered through our building and district
websites, and through a ListServ, school information is communicated via the Internet. We offer open
lines of communication with stakeholders via school e-mail, use of student planners and progress
reports, and time available for parent-teacher conferences (three times per school year once a
trimester). As a district, we also offer an after-school, extended day program to struggling students.rv
which parents can sign up for on a voluntary basis.

Focus Questions


Communication Improvement is a continuos process which alway needs further development.

Standard 2 - Community Involvement
The community at large is supportive of and involved in student learning and other school activities.

Benchmark A: Communication

Indicators:

IV.2.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships: The district has developed on-going,
system-wide strategies to listen to and communicate with its stakeholders. It has created and mobilized
collaborative networks of these stakeholders to support the schools. They are given meaningful roles in the
decision-making process thereby promoting a culture of participation, responsibility and ownership.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
We are a school of limited diversity. The largest group would be economic status. Forty-eight percent
is the population statistic used to qualify us as a Title I School-Wide site. All other categories of
diversity combine to total less than 10%. While we do not have to consider families who speak another
language, we do have to be concerned about families without telephones or computers. Because our
school encompasses a large geographical area, it is often difficult for parents to travel (high fuel costs)
the distance necessary for face to face conversations. To best communicate with all of our families, we
send home many hard copy documents. Care is taken to assure that they are reader friendly.
School/Parent/Family communication is conducted through Scoop Articles, Weekly Communicator
Articles, Classroom Newsletters, Family Involvement Nights, Classroom phones, Parent Surveys,
Parent Workshops, District/School Website, Student-Led Conferences, Parent/Student Surveys, Title I
Parent Compacts, Home Visits, Classroom Volunteers, Child Studies/IEPs and Daily Planners are
utilized at the secondary level. We also offer parents the opportunity to attend the Kirtland Children's



Theater Productions. Information is also available through our district, building and classroom
websites. Parent Conferences are often scheduled in the evening so that parents do not have to leave
their jobs. Public transportation travel tokens are provided for parents who have no way to come to
school for meetings. Technology contact opportunities are offered through our building and district
websites, and through a ListServ which parents can sign up for on a voluntary basis. The
Superintendent meets with a group of parents monthly to discuss concerns and the implement change.
Parents are also part of the development of the consolidated grant applications. Parents and community
members have also participated in teh SCORE meetings. This group has defined district needs and
many possitive changes have occured because of this group. Various forms of Parent Surveys are also
utilized Pre-12 in order to obtain parent input of various topics and needs.

Focus Questions


Communication Improvement is a continuos process which alway needs further development. Stakeholder in
put is not consistently applied across all grade levels in our district.



Strand V - Data Management

Schools/districts have a system for managing data and information in order to inform decisions to improve student
achievement.


Standard 1 - Data Management
The school has policies, procedures and systems for the generation, collection, storage and retrieval of its data.

Benchmark A: Data Generation

Indicators:

V.1.A.1 Comprehensive, Accessible and Meaningful Data System: Through the use of multiple types and
sources of disaggregated data, the system informs efforts to close achievement gaps. This data is readily
accessible to stakeholders directly involved in data-based decision-making.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
We disaggregate our data obtained from NWEA, Work Keys, and the MME/ACT at the high school.
MEAP and Data obtained through NWEA and Test Whiz is compared over time to establish learning
trends. Item analysis of MEAP question statistics, together with review of released testing items, are
used to focus teaching practices appropriate to student needs. at the elmetnary level DIBELS fluency
data is used to identify Title I eligibility, for both in school and extended day programs. It allows for
comparison of local norms, state norms, and MiBLSi school project norms. DIBELS progress
monitoring is used to track student progress/improvement over time. User friendly graphic
representations of data are available with this program, and can be produced by both teachers and
administration. Individual student reading data is obtained through Quantitative Reading Inventories
GRades 4-8 that are administered and reported three times a year. A performance flow chart based on
current student data is used to determine the amount and frequency of assessment requirements for
each child. School Improvement Plans are reviewed annually and decisions are made based on that
data. Building action plans are reviewed three times per year. Changes are implemented whenever
necessary to address identified needs. Teachers take part in data meetings three times a year. These
sessions are led by the principal (and other support personnel) who are able to assist teachers as they


develop the skills necessary to analyze data within grade level and cross grade level teams. Individual
goals are established for all students who are below benchmark standards, and these goals are revised
as new data becomes available. Student and school information is collected, identified, and generated
through CA 60s, MLPP Reports, NWEA, SWIS, Everyday Math Assessment Reports, Test Whiz,
DIBELS, QRI, and DRA. The Title I Comprehensive Data Collection and Results Implementation
Process drives targeted skill areas. The supplemental support is fluid and responds and regularly
changes in direct response to data results. Through Collaborative Teams we use Gap Analysis Plans,
Curriculum Mapping, Everyday Math Pacing Guides and the Title I Comprehensive Data Analysis
processes to constantly up-date our instructional practices. We have collaborative planning time for 2
hours each month. Title I supplemental services (K-8) are revised as the result of this data analysis
process. The teams then apply the insights obtained through this process to develop curriculum in their
classrooms. The climate for the Collaborative Planning Time is such that it promotes a safe
environment for thinking out of the box and for taking positive risks. At the high school level course
decisions, classroom instruction, and instructional strategies are made based upon the data and how we
can best help our students to achieve. Data also drives how each course is designed to meet state
content expectations.

Focus Questions


Date collection, analysis and results application is not consistently applied across all grade levels in our
district.

Standard 2 - Information Management
The school/district staff collaborates to derive information from data and use it to support decisions.

Benchmark A: Analysis & Interpretation

Indicators:

V.2.A.1 Systematic Support for Data Analysis: District leaders are experienced in data analysis and assist in
training school staff in data analysis techniques. The district provides a range of assessment tools and training in
the analysis and use of data for the purpose of reviewing student performance and school and system
effectiveness.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
We use disaggregated data from a variety of sources (MEAP, NWEA, SWIS, MLPP, DIBELS,
Everyday Math, grade-level and department created assessment data) to determine learning priorities,



monitor progress, and help sustain continuous improvement. this wealth of data is collected and
reviewed. Individual student data is used to make decisions relative to differentiated opportunities for
students of all abilities. A response to intervention program, helps to established a multi-level approach
to intervention support/services. Instructional decisions are made both at the classroom and district
level, and evolve as a result of data collected through a variety of sources. Professional development is
on-going and provides opportunities for teachers to incorporate improved teaching strategies supported
by research. Collaborative planning time (2.5 hours weekly) provides teachers the opportunity to have
meaningful dialogue about effective teaching. Good ideas are routinely shared as a result of this
process. Program changes based on data have resulted in changes across the curriculum. These
changes include both acquisition of new materials and incorporation of improved practices. Action
plans are created and revised by the instructional staff in partnership with the building principal. We
are data driven in our district! The data that we compile drives our instruction. DIBELS, NWEA,
SWIS, MIACCESS, MLPP, QRI, Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment (Pre-8), and report cards
align with the GLCEs. Gap Analysis is used to define curricular areas of need. Special Education uses
AIMS writing probes. We use MEAP results to help focus our writing, and evaluate which students go
to extended day. Comprehensive curriculum maps have been compiled and are utilized for each grade
level. Backward design units have been put together which incorporate higher level thinking skills.
Written documentation of curriculum planning takes place during districtwide PD release time and
grade level meetings.Curricular mapping at each grade level follows a prescribed scope and sequence
aligned to the state standards. Weekly collaborative sessions among grade level teams allows for
review of student data and an opportunity for ongoing discussion of student needs. Common
assessments, particularly in writing, are scored as a group. Results of summative assessments are
consistently recorded, and analysis of the data is used to plan future instruction. Cross district planning
is scheduled annually, and provides additional collaborative time in order to review pacing schedules
and curriculum equity from classroom to classroom. Input from teachers is key to the selection and
purchase of curricular support materials. Pilot programs are often used to field test researched based
programs, and professional development offerings are sufficient to sustain the initiatives provided.
(Everyday Math, Four Block Literacy, 6+1 Traits of Writing and Lucy Calkins are examples.)

Benchmark B: Applications

Indicators:

V.2.B.1 Informed Data-Based Decision-Making: System-wide curricular and instructional decisions are based on
data and research at all levels. The district structures the decision-making process so that disaggregated data
provides the basis for a systematic analysis of instructional and organizational effectiveness, with the results of
this analysis employed to improve student and system performance.

Response:
Getting Started
Implemented
Exemplary

Evidence:
We are data driven in our district! The data that we compile drives our instruction. DIBELS, NWEA,
SWIS, MIACCESS, MLPP, QRI, Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment (Pre-8), report cards align
with the GLCEs and at the high school level MME/ACT. Disaggregated data provides the driving



force behind all decisions. . Gap Analysis is used to define curricular areas of need. Special Education
uses AIMS writing probes. We use MEAP results to help focus our writing, and evaluate which
students go to extended day. Comprehensive curriculum maps have been compiled and are utilized for
each grade level. Backward design units have been put together which incorporate higher level
thinking skills. Written documentation of curriculum planning takes place during districtwide PD
release time and grade level meetings.Curricular mapping at each grade level follows a prescribed
scope and sequence aligned to the state standards. Weekly collaborative sessions among grade level
teams allows for review of student data and an opportunity for ongoing discussion of student needs.
Use of departmental PLC groups as well as K-12 curriculum meetings, along with a movement
towards building/district-wide PLC groups, establishes a solid foundation from which we can make
solid, appropriate curricular decisions.Common assessments, particularly in writing, are scored as a
group. Results of summative assessments are consistently recorded, and analysis of the data is used to
plan future instruction. Cross district planning is scheduled annually, and provides additional
collaborative time in order to review pacing schedules and curriculum equity from classroom to
classroom. Input from teachers is key to the selection and purchase of curricular support materials.
Pilot programs are often used to field test researched based programs, and professional development
offerings are sufficient to sustain the initiatives provided. (Everyday Math, Four Block Literacy, 6+1
Traits of Writing and Lucy Calkins are examples.)

Focus Questions


Date collection, analysis and results application is not consistently applied across all grade levels in our
district.



Goals

Content Area: Math

Student Goal Statement: To increase the percentage of student meeting expectations for the MEAP 2009
testing period. In addition, increase students meeting benchmark according to the criteria set forth on the
NWEA test.

Gap Statement: A percentage of students at the elementary level are not meeting grade level expectations in
math. For instance, 87% of the students in third grade met expectations in the MEAP according to the Fall
2008 test. However in the Fall of 2008 at St. Helen Elementary 82% of the students in second grade were not
meeting benchmark according to the NWEA Assessment. In addition, 59% in 3rd, and 60% in 4th are not
meeting benchmark in math based on the current 08/09 NWEA assessments. At Roscommon Elementary
School 2008 MEAP Scores showed Fourth grade students (skills acquired through third grade) scored 83%
proficient. Post data trends indicated a decline in proficiency over the past three years of approximately 3%
per year. At the middle school level, 17% of the students did not meet grade level expectations acccording to
the MEAP data from the Fall 2008 testing.

Cause for Gap: The AYP Math targets are: 3=67%, 4=65%, 5= 2%, 6=60%, 7=57% and 8=54%. At the
elementary and middle school levels we have certainlly moved students out of the lower categories. Data
analysis has revealed several students who's cut scores were very close to the next level. Interventions have
been implemented to close the gap for these students to move them into the next level. The gap was identified
by MEAP and NWEA results, students were identified and then strategies and services were implemented.
The cause for the gap was the fact that without assessment data we were unaware of the exact needs that went
beyond the Universal Intructional needs of our students.

Key Characteristics Impacted by Goal: None selected

Content Area: English Language Arts

Student Goal Statement: To increase the percentage of student meeting expectations for DIBELS testing
during the 2009/2010 school year. We can track this through the DIBELS progress monitoring process.

Gap Statement: A large percentage of students at the elementary level are not meeting grade level
expectations in oral reading fluency. For instance, at 1st grade 46% of the students at Roscommon
Elementary School and 47% of the students at St. Helen Elementary School are not meeting benchmark in
letter naming fluency according to the latest DIBELS test. In addition at 3rd grade, 49% of the students at
Roscommon Elementary School and 59% of the students at St. Helen Elementary School are not meeting
expectations in oral reading fluency according to the latest DIBELS test. At Roscommon Middle School
according to the spring 2009 data, 54% of our students failed to meet the projected goal.

Cause for Gap: The AYP Targets for Reading are: 3=60%, 4=59%, 5=57%, 6=56%, 7=54%, and 8=53%. At
the elementary and middle school levels we have certainlly moved students out of the lower categories. Data
analysis has revealed several students who's cut scores were very close to the next level. Interventions have
been implemented to close the gap for these students to move them into the next level. The gap was identified
by MEAP and NWEA results, students were identified and then strategies and services were implemented.



The cause for the gap was the fact that without assessment data we were unaware of the exact needs that went
beyond the Universal Intructional needs of our students.

Key Characteristics Impacted by Goal: None selected



CNA - Conclusion

1. As the district staff reviewed the school and district responses to questions asked about the system processes
and practices, (key characteristics at the school level and indicators at the district level) what trends were noticed
that may have an impact on student achievement?

In reviewing our assessment data and reflecting upon the district curriculum and the instructional practices
through-out our district it is very apparent that writing needs to be greatly improved K-12. The Everday Math
program utilized K-8 works well but it needs to be monitored through a Pacing Guide to insure that everything
is covered in the spiral. If units do not get done then Mathematical Gaps are created. Our reading program has
been successful, however, our data indicates at 3rd and 4th grade in both of our elementary buildings that the
CORE Curriculum needed to be more intentionally taught. At the Middel school level it has become apparent
that it is very difficualt for the teaching staff to complete and respond to data. Both Elmementary Buildings in
our district made AYP and were awarded an "A" on our Michigan School Report Card and are on Step 0 in
regards to AYP. The Middle School also made AYP, achieved a "B" on the Michigan School Report Card and
are also on Step 0. However, the reflections in this section must be addressed in order for student achievement
to continue to improve.

2. What did the district staff identify as over-arching system challenges that would need to be addressed at the
district level? At the building level?

Writing must be systematically and intentionally taught through out the district. St. Helen Elementary is
currently Piloting for the district an Assessment/Instruction Writing Program called, "My Access". Students
type in their narratives and are immediately given feed back based on the MEAP 6 point rubric. The program
assesses the writing sample and scores it instantly. The students are then directed to very specific activities to
address the types of errors they made in the writing sample. This was our first full year of Piloting the Program
and we have obtained some fantastic results. As a district we have indentified that a need for assessing writing
and responding to that assessemnt has been an over-arching sytem challenge for us. Roscommon Elementary
has been using the Lucy Cawkins Writing materials and have even provided a Title I Teacher who goes in and
models the lessons in every classroom once a week. Due to staff cuts the Middle School and High School are
experiecing tremendous instructional delivery difficulties. The budget is a real part of our world which greatly
henders our efforts.

3. What process did the district used to complete the Comprehensive Needs Assessment for the district?

Each building team through out the district, consisting of multiple stakeholders, contributed to the District
Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report. The actual assessment pieces were collected by the Title I
Staff,however all staff contributed to administering the assessment instruments.



Report - Summary
Indicators Getting Partially Implemented Exemplary
Started Implemented
Strand I - Teaching For Learning

Standard 1 - Curriculum

Benchmark A - Aligned, Reviewed & Monitored

I.1.A.1 Aligned, Coherent and Inclusive Curriculum

Benchmark B - Communicated

I.1.B.1 Communicated and Articulated Curriculum

Standard 2 - Instruction

Benchmark A - Planning

I.2.A.1 Systematic Planning for Quality Instruction

Benchmark B - Delivery

I.2.B.1 Coherent and Effective Support for the Delivery of Instruction

Standard 3 - Assessment

Benchmark A - Aligned to Curriculum & Instruction

I.3.A.1 Use of Multiple Measures to Support School-wide Decision-making

Strand II - Leadership

Standard 1 - Instructional Leadership

Benchmark A - Educational Program

II.1.A.1 High Standards and Clear Expectations

Benchmark B - Instructional Support

II.1.B.1 Culture of Collaboration

II.1.B.2 Instructional Program Coherence

Standard 2 - Shared Leadership

Benchmark A - School Culture & Climate

II.2.A.1 Coordinated Policies and Procedures

Benchmark B - Continuous Improvement

II.2.B.1 Culture of Collective Responsibility

II.2.B.2 Continuous Improvement

Standard 3 - Operational and Resource Management

Benchmark A - Resource Allocation

II.3.A.1 Accountability and Strategic Resource Allocation

Strand III - Personnel and Professional Learning

Standard 1 - Personnel Qualifications

Benchmark A - Requirements

III.1.A.1 Highly Qualified Personnel

Standard 2 - Professional Learning

Benchmark A - Collaboration

III.2.A.1 Coordinated Professional Development Based Upon Common Principles



Report - Summary: Continued.....

Indicators Getting Partially Implemented Exemplary
Started Implemented
Strand IV - School and Community Relations

Standard 1 - Parent/Family Involvement

Benchmark A - Communication

IV.1.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships

Standard 2 - Community Involvement

Benchmark A - Communication

IV.2.A.1 Purposeful Communication and Collaborative Relationships

Strand V - Data Management

Standard 1 - Data Management

Benchmark A - Data Generation

V.1.A.1 Comprehensive, Accessible and Meaningful Data System

Standard 2 - Information Management

Benchmark A - Analysis & Interpretation

V.2.A.1 Systematic Support for Data Analysis

Benchmark B - Applications

V.2.B.1 Informed Data-Based Decision-Making


Gerrish-Higgins CNA Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Gerrish-Higgins CNA Report

Similar to Gerrish-Higgins CNA Report (20)

More from KathyRees

More from KathyRees (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Gerrish-Higgins CNA Report