Academic Review

1
Manassas City Public Schools Grace E. Metz Middle
School
Academic Review School Improvement
Plan Mathematics March 13, 2007
2
State Summary3 Year Average Mathematics SOL
Performance
Grade Level 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007
Grade 8 80 81 78
Grade 7 -- -- 44
Grade 6 -- -- 49

• First Year of End of Course Math Test Grades 6,7
  8
• Data from DOE State Report Card

• DOE Middle School MathmaticsTask force findings
• Sixth grade 50-item test, only 20 items (40
  percent) were answered correctly by the majority
  of students (70 percent or more).
• Seventh grade 50-item test, only eight (8) items
  were answered correctly by the majority of
  students (70 percent or more).
• More than 70 percent of the students did not meet
  expectations as defined by the Virginia Standards
  of Learning on 84 of the seventh grade test
  items.

3
Grace E. Metz Middle School Accreditation Pass
Rates2004-2007

Subject 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007
English 82 80 83
Mathematics 90 90 48
History 86 86 85
Science 94 85 87
Accreditation Status Fully Accredited Fully Accredited Accredited with Warning in Math
First Year of End of Course English Test Grades
6,7 8 First Year of End of Course Math Test
Grades 6,7 8 Data from School State Report Card
4
Why did so many students fail the test?

• Lack of Understanding of the Test Blueprints
• Instructional Pacing Issues
• Unexpected Higher Level Thinking and Strategic
  Test Skill Questions

1
2
3
5
What does the blueprint say?
There must be a high performance in these three
categories in order for students to pass.
A lack of understanding of the blueprint Instruct
ional Pacing Issues
1
2
The New 6th and 7th Grade SOL Mathematics
Tests Turning Failure into Success for ALL
students (Hint Its NOT about the
math) Presenter Paula Brown, Benchmark
Assessment Specialist Hampton City Schools
6

Unexpected Higher Level Thinking and Strategic
Test Skill Questions
3

• Real life situations are not always real
  life

Can you buy carpet in minimum amounts? In real
life D is the correct answer choice.
Also to note this is an area problem with no
mention of area in the question stem.
The New 6th and 7th Grade SOL Mathematics
Tests Turning Failure into Success for ALL
students (Hint Its NOT about the
math) Presenter Paula Brown, Benchmark
Assessment Specialist Hampton City Schools
7
Academic Review School Improvement Planning

• The Regulations Establishing Standards for
  Accrediting Public Schools in Virginia, in 8
  VAC20-131-300.C.2, require a school to be
  Accredited with Warning (in specified academic
  area or areas) if its pass rate on any SOL test
  does not meet required benchmarks to qualify for
  any other accreditation rating. Any school rated
  Accredited with Warning must undergo an academic
  review in accordance with guidelines adopted by
  the Board of Education and in accordance with 8
  VAC 20-131-315 of the regulations.
• The school-level academic review is designed to
  help schools identify and analyze instructional
  and organizational factors affecting student
  achievement. The focus of the review process is
  on the systems, processes, and practices that are
  being implemented at the school and division
  levels.

8
Metz Middle SchoolAcademic Review Visit
AgendaJanuary 29, 2007

• 800 Welcome and Introductions
• 815 Status Report
• Dr. Michaelene Meyer and Mrs. Melissa Saunders
• 915 1000 Focus Group Interview with 8th grade
  math teachers
• Joanne Speaks, Emily Thornton, Susan
  Kiessling, Chris Hulme, JoAnne Alexander, Tammy
  Warner
• 915 1130 Classroom Observations
• 1130 100 Working Lunch Principals Interview
• Mrs. Melissa Saunders and Mr. Jeff Abt
• 100 300 Classroom Observations
• 200 245 Focus Group Interview with 7th grade
  math teachers
• Kathy Hassanzadeh, Amory Hatch, Mae Guzman,
  Kimnada Bobb,
• Terre Carson-Jones, Eric Mauck Mary Jane
  Boynton
• 245 415 Site Team Worktime
• 430 Report Out

9
Division and School Level Review of Tasks

• Curriculum Alignment
• Use of Instructional Time and School Scheduling
  Practices
• Use of Data for Making Instructional and Planning
  Decisions
• Professional Development
• School Improvement Planning
• Instructional Method or Model/Program

10
Curriculum Alignment

• Division
• Curriculum Management Process (CAMP)
• K-8 horizontal math curriculum teams
• Targeted professional development in math
• Curriculum writing
• K-12 Comprehensive plan for assessment

• School Level
• School level action plans
• Teacher resources
• Teacher team data analysis
• Classroom observations
• Measurement of Academic Progress Assessment data
  used to impact instruction 5-8

Use of Instructional Time and School Scheduling
Practices

• School Level
• Block schedule proposed for the 2007-2008 school
  year increasing instructional minutes in math
• Professional development planned for all staff in
  February in Teaching in the Block
• Targeted before school learning opportunity for
  6th grade students

• Division
• K-8 Grade level teams aligning curriculum scope
  and sequence
• K-12 Targeted professional development to
  re-examine use of instructional time
• Extended learning opportunities funded at schools

11
Use of Data for Making Instructional Decisions

• Division
• Collecting multi-source data for development of
  division and school improvement plans
• Curriculum/Assessment Management Plan ( CAMP)
• Targeted professional development in using data
  to make instructional decisions
• Division improvement of new teacher induction
  program

• School Level
• ARDT Testing
• MAP Assessment
• Student goal setting
• Guided review and analysis of math SOL data with
  math teachers

Professional Development

• School Level
• Targeted professional development in math through
  the department of instruction
• ( Dan Mulligan, curriculum review and alignment
  workshop days, DOE sponsored opportunities)

• Division
• Division development and delivery of professional
  development guidelines
• Division review and alignment of teacher
  evaluation tool

12
School Improvement

• Division
• Division SMART goals and action plans implemented
  at all school levels

• School Level
• SACS school improvement process
• SMART goal and action plans developed for
  curriculum, instruction and assessment in math

Instructional Method or Model Program

• School Level
• No formal model/program in place at this time
• Core strategy is to align curriculum to the SOLs,
  build common assessments to track progress of
  students in a formal manner, improve classroom
  assessment practices, enhance instructional
  practices by providing extended learning in math,
  and improving the quality of instruction through
  focused staff development

• Division
• Employing a backwards design process in
  implementing Standards-based education
• Re-aligning policy and practices for school
  improvement planning and implementation and
  professional development

13
Academic Review Report Findings

• Many areas of strengths noted throughout the
  report ( 26 indicators noted)
• Recognized our immediate response to addressing
  the Mathematics SOL performance issues
• Developed 7 Essential Actions with Projected
  Timelines
• - 3 Actions in Curriculum Alignment
• - 1 Action in Use of Time and Scheduling
• - 1 Action in Professional Development
• - 2 Actions in School Improvement Planning

14
School Improvement Plan

• 3 Year Math Action Research Plan/Smart Goal
• 80 of 7th and 8th Grade Students will pass the
  Math
• SOL Test in Spring 2007
• Math Assessment Action Plan
• Data-driven decision-making based on assessment
  to determine whether students and teachers are
  reaching their goals.
• Math Curriculum Action Plan
• Align curriculum, identification of core
  vocabulary words, use blue prints to sequence
  pacing guides.
• Math Instructional Strategies Action Plan
• Instructional Indicator, using researched best
  practices to increase higher level thinking
  skills in the mathematics classroom.
• Instructional Time and Scheduling Action Plan
• Reconfiguration of instructional day to increase
  instruction in mathematics.
• Professional Development Action Plan Teaching
  in the Block