Docstoc

FRAMEWORK for TENNESSEE COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMWIDE PLANNING PROCESS

Document Sample
FRAMEWORK for TENNESSEE  COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMWIDE PLANNING PROCESS Powered By Docstoc
					                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



       FRAMEWORK for
  TENNESSEE COMPREHENSIVE
SYSTEMWIDE PLANNING PROCESS
          (TCSPP)



                             May 2008




     Dr. Archie Bone, Director of Schools




                                               http://jc-schools.net
    1221 Gay Street
     P.O. Box 190
 Dandridge, TN 37725
 Phone: 865-397-3194
  Fax: 865-397-3301




              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 1 of 245
                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                          TABLE OF CONTENTS


ASSURANCES ………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..4
TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1…..……………………………………………………………………………….………..5
EVALUATION OF OUR PROCESS FOR DEVELOPING PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVING SCHOOLS
                                                        46
TCSPP TEMPLATE 2.1………………………………………………………………………….….….…………30
BELIEFS, MISSION, AND SHARED VISION
TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1………………………………………………………………………………..…….……31                47
EVALUATION OF OUR PROCESS FOR DEVELOPNG PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVING SCHOOLS
                                                      91
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1A………………………………………………………………………………………….47
CURRICULAR PRACTICES
                                                      102
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1B……………………………………………………………………………………….…53
CURRICULUM GAP ANALYSIS
                                                      105
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1C……………………………………………………………………………………….…57
CURRICULUM REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1D……………………………………………………………………………………….…59
                                                      108
CURRICULUM SUMMARY QUESTIONS
                                                      111
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2A……………………………………………………………………………………….…61
INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES
                                                      121
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2B……………………………………………………………………………………….…64
INSTUCTIONAL GAP ANALYSIS
                                                      126
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2C……………………………………………………………………………………….…68
INSTUCTIONAL REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS
                                                      130
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2D……………………………………………………………………………………….…71
INSTUCTIONAL SUMMARY QUESTIONS
                                                      134
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3A……………………………………………………………………………………….…74
ASSESSMENT PRACTICES
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3B……………………………………………………………………………………….…78105
                                                      138
ASSESSMENT GAP ANALYSIS
                                                      142
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3C……………………………………………………………………………………….…82
ASSESSMENT REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS
                                                      145
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3D……………………………………………………………………………………….…85
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY QUESTIONS
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4A……………………………………………………………………………………….…87
                                                      148
ORGANIZATIONAL PRACTICES
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4B……………………………………………………………………………………….…90
                                                      154
ORGANIZATIONAL GAP ANALYSIS
                                                      158
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4C……………………………………………………………………………………….…93
ORGANIZATIONAL REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS
TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4D……………………………………………………………………………………….…96
                                                      161
ORGANIZATIONAL SUMMARY QUESTIONS




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 2 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1……………………………………………………………………………………..……98
                                                     165
ACTION PLAN
                                                           190
TCSPP COMPLAINCE MATRIX…………………………………………………………………………........107
                                                                                 220
TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.1……...……………………………………...……………................................…..…137
TCSPP PROCESS EVALUATION
                                                         225
TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.2………………………...……………………………………………………….…...….140
TCSPP IMPLEMENTATION EVALUTION
                                                         237
TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.3…………………………………..………………………………………….….…..…..148
TCSPP MONITORING AND ADJUSTING EVALUATION
                                                          240
TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.4………………………,,…………………………………………………..………..…..151
TCSPP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
                                                         241
TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.5………………………,,…………………………………………………..………..…..152
EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION RESULTS
                                                        243
APPENDIX ………………………..…………………………………………………..…………………....…..153


ADDENDUM..…..……………………………………………………..…………………....….. 244

NOTE: The information updated for the 2008 TCSPP has been inserted in green,
bold, italicized font.




                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 3 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process
                       (TCSPP)
                                    Assurances
                         with Signature of Director of Schools




I certify that Jefferson County School System has utilized the data and other
requirements requested from each department, as shown in the Compliance Matrix 5.1,
in the development of our TCSPP. The school system will operate its programs in
accordance with all of the required assurances and certifications for each program area.




I CERTIFY that the assurances referenced above have been satisfied to the best of my
knowledge.


                                                                 May 7, 2008

 Signature of Director of Schools                                Date Signed




                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 4 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                  TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1

                           Evaluation of Our Process for
                     Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

The first two charts require the listing of the Leadership Teams of the system.

Composition of the Systemwide Leadership Teams –Listing required
                     Member                                                 Role
Dr. Archie Bone                                    Director of Schools (as of May 5, 2008)
                                                   Interim Director of Schools (during the work
Bill Nolen
                                                   on the TCSPP)
                                                   Federal Programs/ Grant Director & Director of
Sherry Finchum
                                                   Accountability & Curriculum PreK-5
Debbie Berry                                       Director of Special Education

Connie S. Campbell                                 Director of Assessment & Curriculum Grade 6-12

Faye Humbard                                       Director of Technology
                                                   Director of Student Support & Transitional
Mandy Schneitman
                                                   Services
Susan Roberts                                      Reading Specialist, K-12
John Cagle                                         Director of Career Technical Education
Kim Hawkins                                        Parent
Susan Price                                        Teacher
Lynn Husen                                         Principal
Jim Vines                                          School Board Member, Community Member
Casey Lemons                                       High School Student
Carol Baker                                        Paraprofessional & Human Resource Manager



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
             Component 1 Member                                             Role
Connie S. Campbell                                 Chair, Director of Assessment & Curriculum Grade 6-12
Susan Price                                        Elementary Teacher, Parent
John Cagle                                         Vocational Director
Bertie French                                      Mentoring Coordinator
Jan Coley                                          High School Teacher
Ruth Pohlman                                       Literacy Coach
Faye Humbard                                       Technology Director
John Neal Scarlett                                 School Board Chairman




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 5 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
Carol Baker                                       Paraprofessional & Human Resource Manager
Emily Fox                                         School Board Member

              Component 2 Member                                          Role
Bill Nolen                                        Chair, Interim Director of Schools (during the
                                                  work on the TCSPP)
Tommy Arnold                                      Elementary Assistant Principal
Casey Lemons                                      Student
Nancy Ann France                                  High School Assistant Principal
Bertie French                                     Mentoring Coordinator
Robert Vick                                       Elementary Principal


              Component 3 Member                                          Role
Connie S. Campbell                                Chair, Director of Assessment & Curriculum Grade 6-12
JanColey                                          Instructional Technology Specialist
Faye Humbard                                      Technology Director
Susan Roach                                       High School Counselor
Jim Hodge                                         Middle School Principal
Sam Hollingshead                                  Middle School Teacher
Anne Marie Potts                                  School Board Member
Susan Roberts                                     Reading Specialist, K-12




Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
              Component 4 Member                                          Role
Sherry Finchum                                    Chair, Federal Programs/Grant Director &
                                                  Director of Accountability & Curriculum PreK-5
Michael Phagan                                    Board Member
Alan Hensley                                      Middle School Teacher
Jan Coley                                         Instructional Technology Specialist
Susan Roberts                                     K-12 Literacy Specialist
Karla Mills                                       Elementary Teacher
Irene Hance                                       Assistant Title I
Sean Lares                                        Middle School Teacher
Amie Lambert                                      Middle School Principal
Jennifer Sanford                                  High School Teacher
Pat Wilder                                        High School Teacher




                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 6 of 245
                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
Andie Potts                                     6-8 Reading Intervention Teacher
Sara McCue                                      Special Education
Kim Hawkins                                     Parent
Steven Strange                                  CTE Teacher
Lynn Husen                                      Elementary Principal
Kristi Waltke                                   Literacy Coach




    Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing
                                      required
         Component 5 Member                                      Role
Debbie Berry                                Chairs, Director of Special Education
Mandy Schneitman                            Director of Student Support & Transitional
                                            Services
Sandra Austin                               Elementary School Principal
David Lockhart                              School Board Member
Tim Collins                                 Middle School Assistant Principal
Craig Day                                   Grade 5 Teacher
Debbie Webb                                 Educational Diagnostician
Robin Beeler                                Parent of Special Needs Child
Jim Vines                                   School Board Member
Judy Hickman                                High School Assistant Principal

         Component 6 Member                                      Role
Debbie Berry                                Chairs, Director of Special Education
Mandy Schneitman                            Director of Student Support & Transitional
                                            Services
Sandra Austin                               Elementary School Principal
David Lockhart                              School Board Member
Tim Collins                                 Middle School Assistant Principal
Craig Day                                   Grade 5 Teacher
Debbie Webb                                 Educational Diagnostician
Judy Hickman                                High School Assistant Principal
Jim Vines                                   School Board Member




                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 7 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                 TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1
      Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

  The following questions address the use of various data in Component 1. They are
  designed as a culminating activity to help you assimilate the work of Component 1. This
  information will be turned in to the TDOE as part of Component 1 of the TCSPP.


  Collection of Data - Narrative Response Required

How were data collected and organized for school system profile?
Jefferson County School’s Central Office directors collaborated in the collection and discussions of
both quantitative and qualitative data for the system. All directors were involved in use of the
system’s Report Card, particularly Part I and in the development of our Mission, Vision, and
Beliefs. The system’s Report Card, Parts II, III, and IV were used for discussing questions in the
Reflective Matrix, identifying the roles of Title I. Technology, Federal Programs, Special Education,
Career Ladder, and Career Technical education for all subgroups of students. As an offshoot of
our reflections we will endeavor to graduate all students in our system. The Systemwide Profile
provided us a snapshot of current practices and achievement.

Student performance data addressed included: achievement test results, Value Added,
nonacademic data, i.e., attendance patterns, promotion patterns, dropout and graduation rate
patterns as well as diagnostic information. We have developed a survey for teachers soliciting
input regarding our current practices. We also use surveys for all constituencies, i.e. parents, the
community, and students to gather information regarding their perceptions of the school
organization and culture. These results have guided our planning activities as we begin the
process of a building program for a newly revamped high school and the addition of two K-6
schools. We have examined and collected fiscal data over the past three years to review
expenditure and growth patterns per program area, per student subgroup area. This evaluation
will determine appropriate expenditure patterns.

Additionally, we referred to each school’s School Improvement Plan to review historical
background, facilities, environmental and safety concerns, socio-economic factors, parent/guardian
demographics, honors classes, unique programs, parental support, school-business partnerships,
major employers, and any other demographic factors. Perceptual Data was collected through
online and print surveys.

We conducted conversations addressing the issues of “adequacy” and “equity” in our system and
have not reached a decisive plan at this time. From these discussions, we have found gaps in
services provided as well as redundancy in expenditures for purchases in all our schools. We plan
to use this process as a communication tool to be more cost effective, time effective and to
increase our overall effectiveness in providing services to all our schools and students. A review
of the 2007 Report Card indicated that the Jefferson County School district rated below the
state average in per pupil expenditures and local education funding. Jefferson County


                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 8 of 245
                                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Schools had a lower per pupil expenditure than every surrounding county as seen in the table
below:
                                         Knox         Maryville        Oak                   Jefferson
 Funding Comparison                      County        City           Ridge         Alcoa    County
 ADA per pupil expenditure               $7,204        $8,458         $9,943        $8,980       $6,558
                                                      Maryville        Oak                   Jefferson
 TVAAS Comparison            Knox County                City          Ridge         Alcoa    County
 Reading/Language                    A                   A              A             A             B
 Math                                A                   A              A             A             B
 Science                             A                   A              A             A             B
 Social Studies                      B                   A              A             A             A

                                         Knox         Maryville        Oak                   Jefferson
 2006 Funding Comparison                 County        City           Ridge         Alcoa    County
 ADA per pupil expenditure               $7,259        $8,681         $10,155       $9,258       $6,669
                                                      Maryville         Oak                  Jefferson
 TVAAS Comparison            Knox County                City           Ridge        Alcoa    County
 Reading/Language                    A                   A              A             A             A
 Math                                A                   A              A             A             A
 Science                             A                   A              A             A             A
 Social Studies                      A                   A              A             A             A

 2007 Funding                   Knox        Maryville          Oak                     Jefferson
 Comparison                     County        City            Ridge         Alcoa      County
 ADA per pupil
 expenditure                    $7,732       $8,979          $10,602        $9,415         $6,976
                             Knox           Maryville          Oak                     Jefferson
 TVAAS Comparison            County           City            Ridge         Alcoa      County
 Reading/Language                A                A               A             A            A
 Math                            A                A               A             A            A
 Science                         A                A               A             A            A
 Social Studies                  A                A               A             A            A


Jefferson County continues to fall below the state funding levels as seen in the chart below:




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 9 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Jefferson County collects qualitative and quantitative data as follows: We use our annual Report
Card for planning purposes for achievement and nonacademic data collection and analysis as well
as surveys from all stakeholders. Data are organized by our testing coordinator and kept in a
central file. We use demographic data, i.e., attendance, promotion, dropout/graduation rate data
as well as Free and Reduced information, special education percentages served, etc.

Community Data

The overall look of Jefferson County, demographically, is similar in some respects to neighboring
counties. Jefferson County students’ needs reflect the results of living in a low-income rural area.
According to the most recent census data, our county has had the least growth in per capita
income in the state. Per capita income in 1999 (dollars) was $16,841 compared to $21,587 at the
national level. 9.6% of Jefferson County families live below poverty level, compared to 9.6%
nationally. According to the Census there was a 11.5% increase in population from April 1, 2000
to July 1, 2006.

All K-5 schools in our county are school wide Title I schools, serving a high percentage of students
from low-income families. Free and reduced lunch figures are as follows: Dandridge Elementary
53%, Jefferson Elementary 63%, Jefferson Middle School 52%, Jefferson County High School
43%, Maury Middle School 54%, New Market Elementary 65%, Piedmont Elementary 69%, Rush
Strong Elementary 54%, Talbott Elementary 62%, White Pine Elementary 67%, for a county total
percent of 58%.

2006-2007 free and reduced lunch figures:        Dandridge Elementary 53%, Jefferson
Elementary 58.4%, New Market Elementary 60.2%, Piedmont Elementary 66.2%, Rush
Strong Elementary 55.4%, Talbott Elementary 59.8%, and White Pine Elementary 58.1%.


                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 10 of 245
                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




A high school diploma is held by only 71% of our population compared to 80.4% nationally. The
Jefferson County population with a Bachelor's degree or higher is 12.8% compared to 24.4% for
the US.
                                                    EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
                                                    PERCENTAGE OF ADULTS 25 AND OVER
                            70
                                                                                                   Jefferson
                            60
                                                              58.2 55.9                            County

                            50
                                                                                                   US
               PERCENTAGE




                            40
                                      29.0
                            30
                                                                                            24.4
                                             19.7
                            20
                                                                                     12.8
                            10

                             0
                                 No high school diploma   High school diploma,   Bachelor's degree or
                                                             some college,             higher
                                                           associate's degree




Based on 2002 data, the Special Education percentage for Jefferson County Schools is 18.3%,
much higher than the state average of 16.1% and the national average of 13.4% . In 2005
Jefferson County’s special education population number has been cut to 15.6% below the state
average of 15.9%. The 2006 population is at 13.8%, lower than the state average of 14.9%.
Nationally, between school years 1985-86 and 2003-04, the percentage of students with
disabilities educated in regular classrooms for most of the school day with non-disabled students
grew from 26 percent to 50 percent.

The average Jefferson County Per Pupil Expenditures per Funded ADM $6,241, which is below
the state expenditure of $6,970 and well below the national average of $8,554. The district’s 2006
ADA amount is $6,669, below the state average of $7,469.

The 2007 average Jefferson County Per Pupil Expenditures per Funded ADA $6,976, which is
below the state expenditure of $7,794 and well below the national 2007 projected ADA of
$10,318.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 11 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Table 3 expresses the differences in the communities within Jefferson County.

Table 3 Community Demographics
                                                                Jefferson County
 2004 Population                                          47,953
 2005 estimate                                            48,394
 2006 Estimate
                                                          49,372
 Population Increase from 2001 to 2004                    7.4%
 State Population Increase from 2001 to 2004              3.7%
 Median Age                                               36.5
 Median Household Income (1999)                           $32,824
 Median Household Income (2003)                           $34,523
 Median Household Income (2004)
                                                          $35,323
 Per Capita Income (1999)                                 $ 16,841
 Families below poverty level                             9.6%
 Individuals below poverty level 2003                     13.4%
 Average Household size (2000)                            2.49
 Housing Units (2002)                                     20,187
 Housing units, 2005                                      21,379



School System Data

Jefferson County School District consists of one high school, one adult high school, two middle
schools, two PreK-8 elementary schools, and five PreK-5 schools. The system operates a Head
Start, a developmental preschool, 7 pre-K programs, a Family Resource Center, and supports an
Adult Education Program. Thus, Jefferson County Schools serves the educational needs of
Jefferson County residents ranging in age from infants to older adults.

As a system, Jefferson County is experiencing a stable number in student population. Due to
financial constraints, attention has been given to maintain an optimal pupil-teacher ratio. Overall
the demographic subgroups of the system have also remained stable. There continues to be a
slight increase in the number of Hispanic, economically disadvantaged and migrant students;
however these numbers are still a small percentage of the total population. The system looks to
the future and predicts an influx of minority students which would mirror the expectations of the
county and region as the area develops its economy to address a more global perspective.




                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 12 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Comparison with neighboring
systems and the state Jefferson
County has on of the lowest
annual pupil expenditure per
ADA as the Table 4 indicates.




                                                                       Table 4
Student Data

The Jefferson County School System serves 7,310 students according to 2007 data (7473 based
on January 2008 figures). According to NCLB regulations, the system is required to report on
limited English proficient, economically disadvantaged, and special education subgroups as these
subgroups have at least 45 students in them.

Student demographic data are broken down in the following table:

Table 4
                      Jefferson County Report Card Data
                          2004             2003             2002
 Subgroup           Number %         Number %           Number %

 White                 7,221     94.5%       7,079       95%         6679    98.5%
 African-American        200      2.6%         214      2.9%          199        2.9%
 Hispanic                171      2.2%         111      1.5%           61        0.9%
 Asian                    40      0.5%          44      0.6%           25        0.4%
 Native American           6      0.1%           7      0.1%            6        0.1%
 Pacific Islander          2      0.0%           0      0.0%            0        0.0%
 Total                 7,640                 7,455                   6,970


 Limited English         126      2.0%          94      1.3%           92    1.34%
 Proficient
 Students with         1,116     15.6%       1,214     16.3%         1254    18.3%
 Disabilities



                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 13 of 245
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


 Economically           3,506        54.1%         3,199      42.9%      3172           49.5%
 Disadvantaged
 Title I                2,027        28.3%         1,629      23.8%      1629           23.8%


2006 Report Card Data
                                                                                  Students
                                                                                    #               %
              White                                                             7,372           94.3%
              African American                                                    216            2.8%
              Hispanic                                                            185            2.4%
              Asian                                                                31            0.4%
              Native American                                                       8            0.1%
              Pacific Islander                                                      3            0.0%

              Limited English Proficient                                          146            2.1%
              Students with Disabilities                                        1,005           13.8%
              Economically Disadvantaged                                        3,688           53.4%
              Title 1                                                           3,809           55.5%



                                             2007 Report Card Data
                                           Student Body Demographics

                                                                 # of      % of
                                                              Students   Students
                                     African American            197        2.4
                                  Asian / Pacific Islander        38        0.5
                                          Hispanic               236        2.9
                                 Native American / Alaskan        12        0.1
                                           White                7,590       94
                                 Limited English Proficient      155        1.9
                                 Students with Disabilities     1,044      14.3
                                       Economically             3,852      56.1
                                      Disadvantaged
                                           Title 1              3,809      47.2

                                          Female                3,894      48.2
                                           Male                 4,179      51.8




There have been variations in the subgroup data to show a trend of increase in limited English
proficient and economically disadvantaged and decrease in students with disabilities. The East
Tennessee area is experiencing an influx of Hispanic families with Limited English Proficiency; and
Jefferson County has experienced a slight increase from 2002 (1.34%) to 2004 (2.0%) of the
student population in this category. The system’s Hispanic population has more than doubled from
61 in 2002 to 171 in 2004, and tripled in the 2006 school year. The Hispanic population grew to


                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 14 of 245
                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


236 in 2007.


                                                  Jefferson County’s
                                                   Limited English
                                                 Proficient Population
                                                  2007 2006 2005
                                                 14.3% 2.1% 2.0%


Family Resource Center and Adult Basic Education
The Jefferson County Schools Family Resource Center and Adult Basic Education is an advocate
to many of the 2,760 individuals that were served as of mid-year 2005-2006. The charts below
shows the magnitude in which family services gave needed support.
               Total # of Referrals received by FRC                                                1427

                                               Attendance Referrals:
    •       Referral at 5 days unexcused                                                 361
    •       Referral at 10 days unexcused                                                 47
    •       Referral for Tardies/ Leaving School Early                                    54
    •       Referral to Truancy Review Board                                              29
    •       Referral to Juvenile Court                                                     5
    •       Contacts made through Intervention Strategies                                675

        •    Intervention Strategies (phone calls, letters, home visits) begin once a child has missed 5 unexcused
                                   days and continue as long as there is an attendance issue.


                                           2006-2007 In-School Network
             Total # of School Referrals received by FRC                                           1775
(This # includes any referral received on school-aged student)

                                                  Attendance Referrals:
    •       Referral at 5 days unexcused                                                 1287
    •       Referral at 10 days unexcused                                                 156
    •       Referral for Tardies/ Leaving School Early                                    324
    •       Referral to Truancy Review Board                                              103
    •       Referral to Juvenile Court                                                     44
    •       Contacts made through Intervention Strategies                                2097


* Intervention Strategies (phone calls, letters, home visits) begin once a child has missed 5 unexcused days
   and continue as long as there is an attendance issue. Intervention strategies offered by the FRC helped to
              prevent 83% of attendance referrals from going to Truancy Review Board or Court.




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 15 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                         2007-2008 Mid-Year Report

                                             In-School Network

  Total # of Referrals received by FRC                                                 1406 (353 of these
            referrals are school related)


                                    Attendance Referrals:
   •   Referral at 5 days unexcused                                                 381
   •   Referral at 10 days unexcused                                                  9
   •   Referral for Tardies/ Leaving School Early                                    26
   •   Referral to Truancy Review Board                                               3
   •   Referral to Juvenile Court                                                     8
   •   Contacts made through Intervention Strategies                                        605
Total # of Preschool Referrals                                                        427

Developmental Screenings
   •   Total number of children screened                                              250
   •   Referral for vision services                                                    11
   •   Referral for developmental services                                             14
   •   Referral for speech services                                                    19
   •   Referral for preschool program                                                 134

* All children identified for Early Intervention are tracked and assessed for developmental progress. (Tracking
includes: re-screen, phone call, letter and/or visit)
* 185 of the 250 children screened report having a preschool experience (including
Preschool, Head Start, or daycare) prior to entering Kindergarten.
Parenting Program: Toddlers Learning Corner (Parenting support group for parents of children birth to age 3)

   •   Total number of families served                                                25
   •   Total number of children served                                                26

Preschool in a Bag: (Quarterly mail-out for parents of children ages 3-5, to help parents prepare children for
Kindergarten)
    • Total number of children served                                               89


                                     2006-2007 Pre-School Services:
Total # of Pre-School Referrals                                                     233

Developmental Screenings
   •   Total number of children screened                                            439
   •   Referral for vision services                                                  31
   •   Referral for Developmental services                                           16
   •   Referral for speech services                                                  26



                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 16 of 245
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    •   Referral for Preschool Program                                                   141

* All children identified for Early Intervention are tracked and assessed for developmental progress. (Tracking
                                includes: re-screen, phone call, letter and/or visit)
   * 304 children entering Kindergarten Fall 2006 were reported as having a preschool experience (including
                        Preschool, Head Start, or daycare) prior to entering Kindergarten.

Parenting Program: Toddlers Learning Corner (Parenting support group for parents of children birth to age 3)

    •   Total number of families served                                                   36
    •   Total number of children served                                                   43

Preschool in a Bag: (Quarterly mail-out for parents of children ages 3-5, to help parents prepare children for
Kindergarten)
Total number of children served                                                    97


                                          2007-2008 Mid-Year Report



Total # of Pre-School Referrals                                                         475

Developmental Screenings (2008 Entry Children)
   • Total number of children screened                                  320
   • Referral for vision services                                        27
   • Referral for Developmental services                                 15
   • Referral for speech services                                        26
   • Referral for Preschool Program                                     237
 *All children identified for Early Intervention are tracked and assessed for developmental
            progress. (Tracking includes: re-screen, phone call, letter and/or visit)
  * 254 of the 320 children screened who will enter Kindergarten Fall 2008 report having a
    preschool experience (including Preschool, Head Start, or daycare) prior to entering
                                          Kindergarten.

Parenting Program: Toddlers Learning Corner (Parenting support group for parents of
children birth to age 3)

    •   Total number of families served                                                 33
    •   Total number of children served                                                 39

Preschool in a Bag: (Quarterly mail-out for parents of children ages 3-5, to help parents
prepare children for Kindergarten)
   • Total number of children served                               100

Community/Agency Networking:

Total # of Referrals



                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 17 of 245
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


(received from community and agency)
    • Christmas in Jefferson County Food Baskets Referrals                               738
    • Christmas in Jefferson County Toy Referrals                                        872
    • Caring for Kids Dispersants                                                       $500
    * Money donated by school personnel, which is coordinated and distributed by the Family Resource Center to
    needy families
   •   Interagency Council Meetings
       *Group meetings (held 8 times a year) involving social service agencies
   •   Number of agencies involved in networking/ interagency meetings                   67

2006-2007 Community/Agency Networking:

Total # of Referrals
(received from community and agency)
    • Christmas in Jefferson County Food Baskets Referrals                              759
    • Christmas in Jefferson County Toy Referrals                                       779

   • Caring for Kids Dispersants                                                      $500
   * Money donated by school personnel, which is coordinated and distributed by the Family Resource Center to
   needy families
   •   Interagency Council Meetings
       *Group meetings (held 8 times a year) involving social service agencies
   •   Number of agencies involved in networking/ interagency meetings                  67


                                        2007-2008 Mid-Year Report
Community/Agency Networking:

Total # of Referrals                                                                    577
(received from community or agency)
   • Christmas in Jefferson County Food Baskets Referrals                               707
   • Christmas in Jefferson County Toy Referrals                                        739

   • Caring for Kids Dispersants                                  $300
   * Money donated by school personnel, which is coordinated and distributed by the
   Family Resource Center to needy families
   •   Interagency Council Meetings
       *Group meetings (held 8 times a year) involving social service agencies
   •   Number of agencies involved in networking/ interagency meetings        70


  Demographics

  Age
  Range        Male White     Female White    Male Minority     Female Minority       TOTAL
  0-3 years              26              27                 2                    1       56
  4-5 years            303              222                10                    18     283
  6-10 years           892              886                42                    50    1870


                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 18 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


  11-13
  years                   230            196              15                   4      445
  14-18
  years                    27             31               1                   1       60
  19+ years                3              39               1                   3       46
  TOTAL                  1481            1401             71                  77     2760

2006-2007 Demographics

Age Range        Male White     Female White Male Minority Female Minority            TOTAL

0-3                  4              5                 0                  0                       9

4-5                430            421                10                  2                     432

6-10               601            556                22                 22                    1201

11-13              133            123                 4                  5                     265

14-18               50             31                 2                  0                      83

19+                  8              67                1                  1                      77

TOTAL              1234           1203               39                  30                   2506

Adult Basic Education

 Date                            Regular Diplomas                Special Ed Diplomas
 Dec. 17, 2004                   10                              3
 May 27, 2005                    31                              9
 Aug. 1, 2005                    2
July 1, 2005 – June 30, 2005 112 GED’s

From January 2001, through July 2006, the adult high school has enrolled 635 students. Of these 227 have graduated
and 123 have left the adult high school and gone on to earn their GED.
The Jefferson County Adult High School is funded 100% by the Jefferson County School Board. The school system
receives funding based on the average daily attendance of the adult high school. The 2005-2006 budget was $54,143.
    • Teacher salary and benefits were $52,443
    • Instructional materials and other costs were $1,700
    • 94 students were served at a cost of $576 per student

Of the 94 students enrolled in 2005-2006, 76 transferred from Jefferson County High School and were not counted as
dropouts for JCHS. The remaining 18 students were referred to the adult high school by JCHS.

High school completions for 2005-2006 were:
    • 29 regular diplomas
    •   1 certificate of attendance
    •   6 special education diplomas
    • 15 GED




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 19 of 245
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


2006-2007:
Adult High School Enrolled 122
Regular Diploma             53
Certificate                  3
Special Ed.                  7
GED                         23


WIA
The Workforce Investment Act project had 82 active participants in the 2004-2005 school year (84
active participants in 2005-6 in Jefferson County and 30 active participants in the Cocke County
Out-Of-School WIA program). There were 31 students who exited prior to 7/1/04, but were in first
and/or third quarter retention. There were 18 students in Jefferson County and 2 students in
Cocke County who exited prior to 7/1/05, but were in first and/or third quarter retention. .An
additional 32 participants exited from 7/1/04 to 6/30/05. WSCC, the fiscal agent, did not process
exits submitted the last quarter of 04-05
Of 32 participants exited:
   •    81 % received a diploma or GED.
   •    3% received an occupational certificate.
   •    15% were exited return to school; of those, 2 are students at JCHS, 1 is a student in adult education, 1 moved
        out of state, and 1 is institutionalized
   •    72% were employed after exit.
   •    3% were in post secondary after exit.

Jefferson County:
84 % received a diploma or GED.
2% received an occupational certificate.
2% received a B. S. Degree
87% were employed after exit.
2% were in advanced training after exit.

Cocke County Out-Of-School:
78% received a diploma, GED, or occupational certificate.
89% were employed after exit.

The 2007-2008 Jefferson County Schools Workforce Investment Act program is comprised of the
Jefferson County program and the Cocke County Out-of-school program. Numbers for the Jefferson
County Program follow:

Jefferson County Schools WIA program had 91 active/follow up participants in the 2006-07 school year.
The program exited 57 participants during the year. Of those exited,

       89% received a diploma or a GED
       2% received a BS degree
       2% received an AS degree
       12% were attending post secondary
       4% were in advanced training
       85% were employed after exit




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 20 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Cocke County Out-of-school WIA program had 46 active/follow up participants in the 2006-07 school
year. This is an increase of 23 participants from the previous year. In other words, the program served
twice the number of participants from the previous year. The program exited 10 participants during the
year. Of those exited,

     90% received a diploma or GED
     90% were employed after exit


The system enrolled a total of 3,506 economically disadvantaged students for the 2004-2005
school year based on the month of October. Table 6 shows the breakdown by school.
     Table 5
              School                   Free Reduced % Free &Reduced ADA
               Dandridge Elementary             313            80                      50%
               Jefferson County High School     626           177                      39%
               Jefferson Elementary             376            52                      58%
               Jefferson Middle School          290            65                      53%
               Maury Middle School              272            69                      53%
               New Market Elementary            113            42                      51%
               Piedmont Elementary              188            52                      66%
               Rush Strong School               242            69                      51%
               Talbott Elementary               101            14                      51%
               White Pine School                343            67                      59%
               Total                           2864           687                      53%


                                                2006-2007
              School                              Free      Reduced     % Free &Reduced ADA
              Dandridge Elementary                 330           92                     55%
              Jefferson County High School         659          229                     43%
              Jefferson Elementary                    418        49                    60%
              Jefferson Middle School                 289        64                    54%
              Maury Middle School                     232        82                    54%
              New Market Elementary                   165        53                    66%
              Piedmont Elementary                     189        47                    64%
              Rush Strong School                      252        91                    55%
              Talbott Elementary                       93        25                    54%
              White Pine School                       370        93                    62%
              Total                               2997          825                    57%



              2007-2008 Free-Reduced Lunch
              School                              Free      Reduced     % Free &Reduced ADA
              Dandridge Elementary                 334          95                      53%
              Jefferson    County       High       725         176                      43%
              School




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 21 of 245
                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Jefferson Elementary                      461            56                             63%
Jefferson Middle School                   283            61                             52%
Maury Middle School                       229            59                             54%
New Market Elementary                     180            46                             65%
Piedmont Elementary                       218            58                             69%
Rush Strong School                        244            97                             54%
Talbott Elementary                        109            31                             62%
White Pine School                         430        105                                67%
Total                                    3213        784                                58%




                      Career and Technical Education

                      Program Area                               Course Enrollment       %
Agricultural Education                                                            378   13.65
Business Technology Education                                                     394   14.23
Family and Consumer Sciences Education                                            917   33.12
Health Science Education                                                          144    5.20
Marketing Education                                                               212    7.66
Trade and Industrial Education                                                    680   24.56
Vocational Cooperative Methodology                                                 44    1.59

Student Enrollment by Grade
    Grade              VTE Student                   %             % 9-12      9-12 Total
     12                                    301           21.86
     11                                    358           26.00
     10                                    391           28.40
      9                                    327           23.75       100.00             1377

Special Populations
                                     VTE Secondary            Total Secondary   Difference
Students with Disabilities            182    13.22%              288     13.16%      -0.06%
Economically Disadvantaged            488    35.44%            1,016     46.40%      10.96%
Limited English Proficiency            12     0.87%               23      1.05%       0.18%


                   Disaggregate Groups:                            1S1
                   White, non Hispanic                             90.48%
                   African American, non Hispanic
                   Hispanic
                   Asian or Pacific Islander                      100.00%
                   America Indian or Alaska Native
                   Unknown/Other
                   Male                                            87.93%




        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 22 of 245
                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                      Female                                       92.75%
                                      Unknown Gender
                                      Nontraditional                               93.41%
                                      Students with Disabilities                   86.67%
                                      Economically Disadvantaged                   83.33%
                                      Single Parents                               71.43%
                                      English as a Second Language
                                      Other Educational Barriers                   68.18%


The 2005 Perkins Report Card identified the following areas, which had a score of a B, as
need for improvement:
1S1 : Academic Attainment (proficiency in Math, English and Writing Assessment and successfully pass exit exams
(Gateway Exams) in Algebra I, English II, and Biology)
2S1: Completion (met requirements to receive a high school diploma)
4S2: Completion Non-Traditional (student participation in Vocational-Technical Education programs)

Table 6 headed, “Discipline Referrals/Suspensions at JCHS” indicates a stable trend in disciplinary
actions that occurred during the two academic years as the percentage of students being
suspended stayed at 17% for the 2-year period.

The 2006 Perkins Report Card identified the following areas, which had a score of a B, as
need for improvement:
1S2: Skill Proficiencies

                                     2006 Career and Technical Education
                  Enrollment: Information is for 2005-2006 school year

                  Total Course Enrollment: 2,629

                  Course Enrollment by School
                                                                                 Course Enrollment
                                       School
                  Jefferson Co High School                                                               2,629

                  Course Enrollment by Program Area
                                Grades 9-12 -- Program Areas                     Course Enrollment        %
                  Agricultural Education                                                          410    15.60
                  Business Technology Education                                                   410    15.60
                  Family and Consumer Sciences Education                                          939    35.72
                  Health Science Education                                                        169     6.43
                  Marketing Education                                                             203     7.72
                  Trade and Industrial Education                                                  498    18.94



                                    No 7th or 8th Grade Program Area Data
                  Student Enrollment by Grade
                      Grade               CTE Student                %            % 9-12      9-12 Total
                       12                                    316         21.76
                       11                                    421         28.99
                       10                                    365         25.14
                        9                                    346         23.83        99.72             1,448



                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 23 of 245
                                      Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                         0                                      4           0.28



Total 9-12 CTE Students: 1,448 Total 9-12 HS Students: 2,279 % System Average: 63.54                            % State Average: 59.06

*The following comparison is based on the 9-12 CTE Students versus Total 9-12 Secondary students




                 Sub-Group Disaggregation: Information is for 2005-2006 school year                            What's this?


                 Special Populations
                                                       CTE Secondary             Total Secondary   Difference
                 Students with Disabilities             44      3.04%             387       16.98%      13.94%
                 Economically Disadvantaged             88      6.08%             825       36.20%      30.12%
                 Limited English Proficiency            11      0.76%              28        1.23%       0.47%


               Ethnicity
                                                          CTE Secondary              Total Secondary   Difference
               White, non Hispanic                         1,375  94.96%              2151      94.38%      -0.58%
               African American, non Hispanic                 47   3.25%                78       3.42%       0.17%
               Hispanic                                       23   1.59%                39       1.71%       0.12%
               Asian or Pacific Islander                       1   0.07%                  9      0.39%       0.32%
               America Indian or Alaska Native                 2   0.14%                  2      0.09%      -0.05%
               Unknown/Other                                   2   0.14%                  0      0.00%      -0.14%

      Perkins Report

                     Core Indicator                                             System                                        State
      1S1 : Academic Attainment                   00-01       01-02       02-03        03-04       04-05         05-06        05-06
      Baseline 1999-2000                         88.57%
      Negotiated Performance Level               89.07%       89.57%      90.07%       90.57%      91.74%        90.79%       85.76%
      Actual Numerator                                   86         128         117          135         115            160   14,721
      Actual Denominator                                 92         134         128          147         127            171   16,086
      Actual Performance Level                   93.48%       95.52%      91.41%       91.84%      90.55%        93.57%       91.51%
      Change ( + or -)                            4.41%        5.95%       1.33%        1.27%      -1.19%          2.78%      5.75%
      Status                                       A            A           A            A           B              A          A

                    Core Indicator                                             System                                         State
      1S2: Skill Proficiencies                   00-01        01-02       02-03        03-04       04-05         05-06        05-06
      Baseline 1999-2000                         93.94%
      Negotiated Performance Level               93.94%       90.79%      90.79%      90.79%       90.79%        96.65%       95.86%
      Actual Numerator                                 81           129        122          141         117             161   15,511
      Actual Denominator                               92           134        128          147         127             171   16,086
      Actual Performance Level                   88.04%       96.27%      95.31%      95.92%       92.13%        94.15%       96.43%
      Change ( + or -)                           -5.90%       5.48%        4.52%       5.13%       1.34%         -2.50%       0.57%
      Status                                      B            A           A            A           A               B          A




                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 24 of 245
                                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                    Core Indicator                                                      System                                                State
         2S1: Completion                        00-01         01-02            02-03              03-04           04-05         05-06        05-06
         Baseline 1999-2000                     88.57%
         Negotiated Performance Level           89.07%        89.57%           90.07%             90.57%          91.74%        90.79%        85.76%
         Actual Numerator                            86               128               117             135            115            160     14,721
         Actual Denominator                          92               134               128             147            127            171     16,086
         Actual Performance Level               93.48%        95.52%           91.41%             91.84%          90.55%        93.57%        91.51%
         Change ( + or -)                        4.41%            5.95%            1.33%            1.27%         -1.19%         2.78%         5.75%
         Status                                  A                A                 A               A              B              A               A

                     Core Indicator                                                         System                                            State
         3S1: Placement                          00-01            01-02             02-03           03-04         04-05          05-06        05-06
         Baseline 1999-2000                      78.70%
         Negotiated Performance Level            79.70%           80.70%           80.70%           81.20%        81.70%         89.89%       89.89%
         Actual Numerator                                47               54                84              89          129            97     13,789
         Actual Denominator                              62               60                86           101            133            99     14,966
         Actual Performance Level                75.81%           90.00%           97.67%           88.12%        96.99%         97.98%       92.14%
         Change ( + or -)                         -3.89%           9.30%           16.97%           6.92%         15.29%         8.09%         2.25%
         Status                                      A                A                 A            A              A             A               A

                       Core Indicator                                                           System                                        State
         4S1: Participation Non-Traditional             00-01         01-02             02-03        03-04         04-05         05-06        05-06
         Baseline 1999-2000                          20.58%
         Negotiated Performance Level                20.83% 21.08% 21.33% 21.58% 22.21% 20.87%                                                21.48%
         Actual Numerator                                    284              162            237            238         267           285     26,824
         Actual Denominator                              1,009                663           1,075       1,122       1,114         1,189 107,823
         Actual Performance Level                    28.15% 24.43% 22.05% 21.21% 23.97% 23.97%                                                24.88%
         Change ( + or -)                                7.31%            3.35%         0.71%        -0.37%         1.75%         3.10%        3.40%
         Status                                           A                A                A            B             A           A              A

                      Core Indicator                                                         System                                           State
         4S2: Completion Non-Traditional             00-01         01-02            02-03           03-04          04-05         05-06        05-06
         Baseline 1999-2000                          25.00%
         Negotiated Performance Level                25.25% 25.35% 25.45%                           25.55%         25.80% 25.18% 24.02%
         Actual Numerator                                    26               34             33              24            11           36        3,486
         Actual Denominator                                  92            119              111             155            91          140    12,083
         Actual Performance Level                    28.26% 28.57% 29.73%                           15.48%         12.09% 25.71% 28.85%
         Change ( + or -)                            3.01%            3.22%          4.28% -10.07% -13.71%                        0.53%        4.83%
         Status                                          A                A             A               B              B           A              A

                                                                                                            Core Indicator
        2005-06 System & State Performance
                                                                   1S1                  1S2              2S1               3S1              4S1           4S2
          Negotiated Performance Level                             90.79%               96.65%           90.79%            89.89%           20.87%        25.18%
System
          Average System Level of Performance                      93.57%               94.15%           93.57%            97.98%           23.97%        25.71%
State     Average State Level of Performance                       91.51%               96.43%           91.51%            92.14%           24.88%        28.85%




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 25 of 245
                                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Disaggregate Groups:                                         1S1       1S2        2S1       3S1           4S1       4S2
White, non Hispanic                                          93.55%    93.55%     93.55%   97.94%        24.01%    26.40%
African American, non Hispanic                               88.89%   100.00%     88.89%                 20.51%    11.11%
Hispanic                                                  100.00%     100.00%    100.00%                 23.81%    20.00%
Asian or Pacific Islander                                 100.00%     100.00%    100.00%   100.00%
America Indian or Alaska Native                           100.00%     100.00%    100.00%                  0.00%    100.00%
Unknown/Other                                                                                            50.00%
Male                                                         92.05%    93.18%     92.05%   100.00%       32.19%    33.82%
Female                                                       95.18%    95.18%     95.18%   96.00%        16.75%    18.06%
Unknown Gender
Nontraditional                                               96.43%    94.29%     96.43%   97.14%        23.85%    25.71%
Nontraditional Underrepresented Gender                    100.00%      88.89%    100.00%   100.00%       100.00%   100.00%
Tech Prep                                                 100.00%     100.00%    100.00%   100.00%        0.00%    50.00%
Students with Disabilities                                   90.00%    90.00%     90.00%   100.00%       20.00%    33.33%
Economically Disadvantaged                                   78.95%    94.74%     78.95%   96.30%        13.75%    21.43%
Single Parents                                               83.33%    66.67%     83.33%   100.00%       16.67%     0.00%
English as a Second Language                              100.00%     100.00%    100.00%                 20.00%    100.00%
Other Educational Barriers                                   85.71%   100.00%     85.71%   100.00%       25.86%    20.00%



2007 CTE Perkins Report Card
                 System            Total Course Enrollment                                               2,484
                 School            Jefferson County High School                                          2,484




                                                                                 Course Enrollment         %
              Grades 9-12 - Program
                                    Agricultural Education                                        369 14.86
              Areas
                                          Business Technology Education                           361 14.53
                                          Family and Consumer Sciences
                                                                                                  924 37.20
                                          Education
                                          Health Science Education                                177     7.13
                                          Marketing Education                                     185     7.45
                                          Technology               Engineering
                                                                                                     1    0.04
                                          Education
                                          Trade and Industrial Education                          467 18.80




                                          No 7-8 Grade Program Area Data




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 26 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




             Student Enrollment by Grade 2006 - 2007
               Grade            CTE Students             %         % 9-12          9-12 Total
                 12                              341     23.76              -                     -
                 11                              360     25.09              -                     -
                 10                              394     27.46              -                     -
                 9                               331     23.07          99.37                1,426
                 0                                 9       0.63             -                     -




             Comparison: 9-12 CTE Students vs. Total 9-12 HS Students 2006
             - 2007
              CTE Secondary       Total Secondary      % System Average         % State Average
                     1,426              2,330                 61.20                  58.66




                                                                                     View
      Subgroup Disaggregation 2006 - 2007                                          Chart ?
Special Populations                         CTE Secondary     Total Secondary Difference
Students with Disabilities                        37    2.60%       207  8.88%              6.29%
Economically Disadvantaged                        62    4.35%       842 45.84%             41.49%
Limited English Proficiency                         5   0.35%         -       -                  -


       Subgroup Disaggregation 2006 - 2007                                            View Chart
 Ethnicity                                           Total Secondary Difference
                                             CTE Secondary
 African American                         47 3.30%          62 2.66%            -0.64%
 Asian / Pacific Islander                  2 0.14%           8 0.34%             0.20%
 Hispanic                                 26 1.82%          51 2.19%             0.37%
 Native American / Alaskan                 0 0.00%           1 0.04%             0.04%
 White                                 1,349 94.60%      2,208 94.76%            0.16%
 Unknown /Other                            1 0.07%           0 0.00%            -0.07%
 Note: (Based in the 9-12 CTE Students versus Total 9-12 Secondary Students)


                             Perkins III Report                                                               ?
  Core Indicator                                         System                                       State



                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 27 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


1S1:       Academic
Attainment
                    00-01         01-02    02-03      03-04      04-05    05-06      06-07     06-07
Baseline    1999-
                  88.57%
2000
Negotiated
Performance       89.07% 89.57% 90.07% 90.57% 91.74% 90.79% 91.24% 86.21%
Level
Actual Numerator       86    128    117    135    115    160    157 14,420
Actual
                       92    134    128    147    127    171    163 15,978
Denominator
Actual
Performance       93.48% 95.52% 91.41% 91.84% 90.55% 93.57% 96.32% 90.25%
Level
Change (+ or -)    4.41%  5.95%  1.33%  1.27% -1.19%  2.78%  5.08%  4.04%
Status              A      A      A      A      B      A      A      A

  Core Indicator                                        System                                      State
1S2:              Skill
Proficiencies
                          00-01   01-02    02-03      03-04      04-05    05-06      06-07     06-07
Baseline    1999-
                  93.94%
2000
Negotiated
Performance       93.94% 90.79% 90.79% 90.79% 90.79% 96.65% 97.56% 96.77%
Level
Actual Numerator       81    129    122    141    117    161    161 15,415
Actual
                       92    134    128    147    127    171    163 15,978
Denominator
Actual
Performance       88.04% 96.27% 95.31% 95.92% 92.13% 94.15% 98.77% 96.48%
Level
Change (+ or -)   -5.90%  5.48%  4.52%  5.13%  1.34% -2.50%  1.21% -0.29%
Status              B      A      A      A      A      B      A      B

  Core Indicator                                        System                                      State
2S1: Completion           00-01   01-02    02-03      03-04      04-05    05-06      06-07     06-07
Baseline   1999-
                 88.57%
2000
Negotiated
Performance      89.07% 89.57% 90.07% 90.57% 91.74% 90.79% 91.24% 86.21%
Level
Actual Numerator      86    128    117    135    115    160    157 14,420
Actual
                      92    134    128    147    127    171    163 15,978
Denominator
Actual           93.48% 95.52% 91.41% 91.84% 90.55% 93.57% 96.32% 90.25%



                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 28 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Performance
Level
Change (+ or -)         4.41%     5.95%      1.33%      1.27%        -1.19%     2.78%     5.08%     4.04%
Status                   A         A          A          A             B         A         A         A

  Core Indicator                                      System                                        State
3S1: Placement      00-01       01-02     02-03      03-04      04-05         05-06     06-07     06-07
Baseline    1999-
                  78.70%
2000
Negotiated
Performance       79.70% 80.70% 80.70% 81.20% 81.70% 89.89% 90.00% 90.00%
Level
Actual Numerator       47     54     84     89    129     97    200 13,819
Actual
                       62     60     86    101    133     99    201 14,695
Denominator
Actual
Performance       75.81% 90.00% 97.67% 88.12% 96.99% 97.98% 99.50% 94.04%
Level
Change (+ or -)   -3.89%  9.30% 16.97%  6.92% 15.29%  8.09%  9.50%  4.04%
Status              B      A      A      A      A      A      A      A

  Core Indicator                                      System                                        State
4S1:    Participation
Non-Traditional
                      00-01     01-02     02-03      03-04      04-05         05-06     06-07     06-07
Baseline    1999-
                  20.58%
2000
Negotiated
Performance       20.83% 21.08% 21.33% 21.58% 22.21% 20.87% 20.87% 21.48%
Level
Actual Numerator      284    162    237    238    267    285    279 22,368
Actual
                    1,009    663  1,075  1,122  1,114  1,189  1,131 98,907
Denominator
Actual
Performance       28.15% 24.43% 22.05% 21.21% 23.97% 23.97% 24.67% 22.62%
Level
Change (+ or -)    7.31%  3.35%  0.71% -0.37%  1.75%  3.10%  3.80%  1.14%
Status              A      A      A      B      A      A      A      A

 Core Indicator                                      System                                        State
4S2:     Completion
Non-Traditional
                    00-01     01-02     02-03      03-04       04-05     05-06        06-07     06-07
Baseline   1999-
                 25.00%
2000
Negotiated       25.25% 25.35% 25.45% 25.55% 25.80% 25.18% 24.56% 22.98%



                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 29 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Performance
Level
Actual Numerator      26     34     33     24     11     36     36  3,075
Actual
                      92    119    111    155     91    140    139 11,339
Denominator
Actual
Performance      28.26% 28.57% 29.73% 15.48% 12.09% 25.71% 25.90% 27.12%
Level
Change (+ or -)   3.01% 3.22% 4.28% -10.07% -13.71% 0.53% 1.34% 4.14%
Status             A      A      A      B      B      A      A      A

                                                                                                  View
         Perkins III Core Indicator Performance 2006 - 2007                                      Chart
           Performance Level                                    Core Indicator %
                                           1S1        1S2        2S1        3S1        4S1      4S2
          Negotiated    Performance
System                                      91.24      97.56         91.24    90.00     20.87    24.56
          Level
          Actual Performance Level          96.32      98.77         96.32    99.50     24.67    25.90
State     Actual Performance Level          90.25      96.48         90.25    94.04     22.62    27.12

Subgroup Disaggregation                    1S1        1S2           2S1      3S1       4S1      4S2
African / American                         100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00     43.90   100.00
Asian / Pacific Islander                        -          -             -   100.00    100.00        -
Hispanic                                   100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00      9.52    50.00
Native American / Alaskan                  100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00         -     0.00
White                                       96.18      98.73         96.18    99.45     24.18    24.06
Unknown / Other                            100.00     100.00        100.00        -      0.00     0.00
Male                                        92.31     100.00         92.31   100.00     38.60    37.26
Female                                      98.98      97.96         98.98    98.94     13.63    19.32
Unknown Gender                                  -          -             -        -         -        -
Nontraditional                              98.56      98.56         98.56    99.39     24.67    25.90
Nontraditional      Underrepresented
                                           100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00    100.00   100.00
Gender
Tech Prep                                  100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00     16.13    16.67
Students with Disabilities                  85.71      85.71         85.71   100.00     33.33    20.00
Economically Disadvantaged                  93.75     100.00         93.75   100.00     32.00    35.71
Single Parents                             100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00     10.00    25.00
English as a Second Language               100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00      0.00     0.00
Other Educational Barriers                 100.00     100.00        100.00   100.00     26.32    38.46

                                 Perkins IV                                                             ?
                                Core Indicator                                        System    State


                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 30 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                    2006 -        2006 -
1S1: Academic Attainment - Reading/Language Arts
                                                                                     2007          2007
Baseline 2005 - 2006                                                                84.50%        91.00%
Negotiated Performance Level                                                        84.50%        91.00%
Actual Numerator                                                                      338.5      28,028.0
Actual Denominator                                                                    360.5      31,899.0
Actual Performance Level                                                            93.90%        87.87%
Change (+ or -)                                                                      9.40%        -3.14%
Status
 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)                                                              y             n
 Improving Status                                                                            y             n
 Meets Federal Requirements                                                                  y             y

                                 Core Indicator                                    System         State
                                                                                    2006 -        2006 -
1S2: Academic Attainment - Mathematics
                                                                                     2007          2007
Baseline 2005 - 2006                                                                85.99%        83.00%
Negotiated Performance Level                                                        85.99%        83.00%
Actual Numerator                                                                        235        18,319
Actual Denominator                                                                      239        19,187
Actual Performance Level                                                            98.33%        95.48%
Change (+ or -)                                                                     12.34%        12.48%
Status
 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)                                                              y             y
 Improving Status                                                                            y             y
 Meets Federal Requirements                                                                  y             y

                                 Core Indicator                                    System         State
                                                                                    2006 -        2006 -
4S1: Student Graduation Rates
                                                                                     2007          2007
Baseline 2005 - 2006                                                                87.21%        79.50%
Negotiated Performance Level                                                        87.21%        79.50%
Actual Numerator                                                                        228        20,015
Actual Denominator                                                                      247        21,683
Actual Performance Level                                                            92.31%        92.31%
Change (+ or -)                                                                      5.10%        12.81%
Status
 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)                                                              y             y
 Improving Status                                                                            y             y
 Meets Federal Requirements                                                                  y             y


    Perkins IV Core Indicator Performance 2006 - 2007                                        View Chart



                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 31 of 245
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                        Performance Level                                         Core Indicator %
                                                                         1S1            1S2             4S1
System        Negotiated Performance Level                                 84.50           85.99            87.21
              Actual Performance                                           93.90           98.33            92.31
State         Actual State Level of Performance                            87.87           95.48            92.31

Subgroup Disaggregation                               1S1                   1S2                      4S1
African / American                                           81.25                100.00                    83.33
Asian / Pacific Islander                                         -                     -                        -
Hispanic                                                     83.33                100.00                   100.00
Native American / Alaskan                                        -                     -                        -
White                                                        94.25                 98.26                    92.44
Unknown / Other                                             100.00                100.00                   100.00
Male                                                         91.35                 97.92                    91.09
Female                                                       95.60                 98.60                    93.15
Unknown Gender                                                   -                     -                        -
Nontraditional                                               94.00                 98.75                    95.76
Nontraditional      Underrepresented
                                                             92.03                 97.83                    91.67
Gender
Tech Prep                                                    95.46                100.00                    87.50
Students with Disabilities                                   72.73                 57.14                    50.00
Economically Disadvantaged                                   89.66                 94.74                    90.00
Single Parents                                               93.33                100.00                   100.00
English as a Second Language                                 66.67                100.00                   100.00
Other Educational Barriers                                   88.57                 91.30                    87.50

Table 6
Discipline Referrals/Suspensions at JCHS
            2003-2004        2003-2004     2003-2004        2004-2005       2004-2005      2004-2005
                               Total       Percentage                         Total        Percentage
                             Population                                     Population
           2075 Referral       2,025           17%        2293 Referral       2,197           17%
             instances                                      instances
          345 Suspensions                                375 Suspensions


                        2005-2006                     2005-2006 Total        2005-2006 Percentage
                                                        Population
                2836 Referral instances                    2279                         18%
                   409 Suspensions
                     5 expulsions



Referrals at the high school are ranked in Table 6 according to the number of incidents each
infraction occurs.


                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 32 of 245
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   1.   Classroom disturbance (307 incidents)
   2.   Tardy (288 incidents)
   3.   Level 1 classroom infraction (148 incidents)
   4.   Stealing (133 incidents)
   5.   Not dressing out for PE or ROTC (124 incidents)


Table 7
                                    Jefferson County Schools 2004-05

                             %                             %                         %
              Suspensions    Suspensions      Expulsions   Expulsions    Remands     Remands    Enrollment
     DES               14              2%              0            0%         0           0%          839
     JCHS             350             16%              4            0%        58           3%         2197
     JES               36              4%              1            0%         0           0%          860
     JMS              142             20%              0            0%         6           1%          709
     MMS              132             20%              0            0%        19           3%          676
     NMS                2              1%              0            0%         0           0%          319
     PES                3              1%              0            0%         0           0%          382
     RSS              136             22%              0            0%         3           0%          617
     TES                2              1%              0            0%         0           0%          243
     WPS              326             41%              0            0%         5           1%          798
     Totals         1143              15%              5            0%        91           1%         7640

Table 7 demonstrates that White Pine School had the highest percentage of suspensions (41%)
with Maury Middle School and the High School both at 3% of their population remanded. The
district total percentage of remands was 1% with a total of 15% suspended.

   2005-                                     Incidents                   Incidents
   06         Incidents of   %               of            %             of          %

              Suspensions    Suspensions     Expulsions    Expulsions    Remands     Remands    Enrollment
   DES                  4             0%              0            0%           0         0%           846
   JCHS               392           17%               5            0%          44         2%          2279
   JES                 62             8%              0            0%           0         0%           816
   JMS                160           23%               1            0%          14         2%           703
   MMS                114           18%               0            0%          19         3%           646
   NMS                  2             1%              0            0%           0         0%           324
   PES                  4             1%              0            0%           0         0%           408
   RSS                170           26%               0            0%           3         0%           661
   TES                  7             3%              0            0%           0         0%           242
   WPS                152           19%               0            0%           5         1%           796

Table 7 2005-06 demonstrates that Rush Strong School had the highest percentage of
suspensions (26%). The district total percentage of remands was again 1% with a total of 14%
suspended, down 1% from the previous year.




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 33 of 245
                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



 2006-                                          Incidents                                        Incidents
 07      Incidents of     %                     of                    %                          of                 %

         Suspensions      Suspensions           Expulsions            Expulsions                 Remands            Remands   Enrollment
 DES              12               1%                    0                    0%                       0                 0%          823
 JCHS            418             21%                     1                    0%                      61                 3%         1961
 JES              42               5%                    0                    0%                       0                 0%          797
 JMS              94             14%                     0                    0%                      11                 2%          685
 MMS              60             10%                     1                    0%                      10                 2%          600
 NMS              18               5%                    0                    0%                       0                 0%          338
 PES               3               1%                    0                    0%                       0                 0%          388
 RSS              97             15%                     0                    0%                       9                 1%          658
 TES               1               0%                    0                    0%                       0                 0%          217
 WPS             190             24%                     0                    0%                       4                 1%          799

The table above demonstrates that White Pine School had the highest percentage of
suspensions (24%) with the High School having the highest number of remand at 3% of
their population.


Attendance is not an issue for grades K-8, however there was an increase in absences in grades
9-12, dropping the high school to 92.2% below the state average of 93%. The 2006 attendance
percentage is at 92.5%, still slightly below the state average of 93%. The 2007 attendance
percentage is 94.6, above the state goal of 93%.

The following 2004-2005 graphs indicate the attendance percentages for K-5 schools, 6-8 schools,
K-8 schools and the high school.
The following graphs shows 2005 attendance at the district and four school grade level
configurations:



                                                 District Attendance



                    State Goals                       93%




                          2005                                                                     94.40%




                          2004                                                                             94.60%


                              92.00%   92.50%      93.00%          93.50%               94.00%    94.50%        95.00%

                                                            2004   2005   State Goals




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 34 of 245
                                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                              6-8 ATTENDANCE


                                                                       93%
          State Goals
                                                                       93%




                                                                                                         93.80%
                    MMS
                                                                                                                                        94.50%




                                                                                                         93.80%
                     JMS
                                                                                            93.50%


                         92.00%                92.50%               93.00%               93.50%                 94.00%               94.50%      95.00%


                                                                                 2004             2005

                                                    K-5 ATTENDANCE
                                               K-8 ATTENDANCE
                                                              93%
                   State Goals
                                                              93%

                                                        93%                                          94.70%
                          TES
State Goals                                                                          94.10%
                                                        93%
                                                                                                          95.00%
                         PES
                                                                                                               95.30%

                                                                                                                         95.70%
                         NMS
                                                                                                                    95.40%
                                                                                                  94.00%
      WPS                                                                                             94.80%
                          JES
                                                                                                      94.80%             94.50%

                                                                                                  94.60%
                         DES
                                                                                                      94.80%

                             91.50%   92.00%      92.50%   93.00%      93.50%   94.00%      94.50%     95.00%      95.50%   96.00%

                                                                                                                         94.50%
                                                                       2004      2005
      RSS
                                                                                                                              94.70%


          92.00%             92.50%               93.00%               93.50%               94.00%                 94.50%               95.00%


                                                               2004             2005




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 35 of 245
                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                       9-12 ATTENDANCE



                                                                                                            93%
             State Goals
                                                                                                            93%




                                                              92.20%
                  JCHS
                                                                                                                     93.20%




                         91.60%    91.80%     92.00%       92.20%     92.40%         92.60%    92.80%    93.00%   93.20%   93.40%


                                                                         2004         2005

Jefferson County High School’s 2005 graduation rate of 94.9 percent and the 2006 graduation rate
is 94.1%, which are both above the state standard for graduation rate of 90 percent and is an
increase from the 2004 graduation rate of 85.2%. The graduation rate for 2006-07 was 89.20%.
The number that graduated included those with regular diplomas, GEDs, special education
diplomas and certificate of attendance. The federal government only recognizes regular diplomas
in calculating graduation rate. The percentage of students dropping out for the 2003-2004 school
year was 2.8% as compared with 0.5% for the 2004-2005 school year, and 0.8% for 2006. The
number of students listed as dropout increased from that of 3 in 2006 to 21 in 2007. There
was a positive increase in the number of students continuing education after high school from 42%
for the 2003-2004 school year to 55% for the 2004-2005 school year.

                  All          Regular       Regular        Special       Certificates        GED
              Graduates       On-Time         Late         Education            of            Option
                 and          Graduates     Graduates      Diplomas       Attendance
 2006-2007    Completers
 Jefferson
 Co High
 School                 475         448                1            14                  2           10




Special Education Student Data

The basis for determining disability for a student in the Jefferson County School System is based
upon Tennessee State Eligibility Standards and Federal Law. These students comprise the


                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 36 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


subgroup of ‘Students with Disabilities’ as described in the No Child Left Behind Act (ESEA).

The Jefferson County School System’s Department of Exceptional Children Services is
responsible for all special education and related services for students within the age range of three
to twenty-one years. This Department registers all students transferring within the System and
work closely with the Department of Children’s Services to expedite enrollment of children in
State’s custody. Many of the students that are in protective custody also receive special
education services or are in need of a comprehensive assessment to determine their educational
and emotional needs.

The Support Services Department conducts an annual Child Find Event specifically designed to
screen students between the ages of birth-to-five years. The purpose of this effort is to identify
those students that might meet eligibility criteria as a student with a disability as early as possible
in order to provide intervention services prior to the child entering kindergarten. If the achievement
gap can be closed or even lessened prior to kindergarten, the chances of the child’s success in
school are much greater.

The Jefferson County School System identified and served 1,116 students (2005-2006 served
1,034, 2006-2007 served 1158) in special education that were between six to twenty-one years of
age. During the 2004-2005 school year, there were 60% (2005-2006 there were 44%, 2006-2007
26.96%) of students with IEPs graduated from high school with a Regular High School Diploma.
Students with IEPs who dropped out of high school were at 13% (2005-2006 25.4%, 2006-2007
9.57%). 100% of children with IEPs participated in a regular assessment with accommodations;
alternate assessment against grade level standards; alternate assessment against alternate
achievement standards The proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade level standards
and alternate achievement standards was 100% for portfolio assessment and 29% for alternative
assessment. No schools were identified as having a significant discrepancy in the rate of
suspensions and expulsions of children with disabilities for greater than 10 days in a school year.
The number and percent of children with IEPs ages 6 thru 21 served in either public/private
separate schools or in residential placements is 2%. 34% of preschool children with IEPs receive
special education and related services in settings with typically developing peers (2005-2006
52%).

2006-07
   • 100 % of children with IEPs who participated in a regular assessment with
      accommodations; alternate assessment against grade level standards; alternate
      assessment against alternate achievement standards.
   • 100% proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade level standards and
      alternate achievement standards.
   • The number of schools that were identified as having a significant discrepancy in the
      rate of suspensions and expulsions of children with disabilities for greater than 10
      days in a school year. 0
   • The number and percent of children with IEPs ages 6 thru 21 served in either
      public/private separate schools or in residential placements. .3%.
   • The % of preschool children with IEPs that received special education and related
      services in settings with typically developing peers. 92.6%



                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 37 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Overall, it appears that the Jefferson County School System’s subgroup population of Special
Education students is well served. Jefferson County Schools will continue to strive to remain on
the cutting edge in learning about and utilizing new interventions, new technologies that might
benefit the students, and any other supports that might come to the attention and be determined
appropriate to meet the needs of this special population.

MATH 2007 SpEd Report Card

2007 Math SpEd with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades 7 and 8
2007 Math SpEd with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3, 4, 5, and 6

                        Proficiency Rate for Students with IEPs - Math

     60
                                                                            55.56
                                   50.7                         49.06
     50
                       44.64                  45.83
          43.28                                       44.12 43.55
     40
                                          38.89
              36.67        36.54
                                                                        29.83
     30
                                                                                        25

     20



     10


                                                                                    0
      0

          Grade 3      Grade 4      Grade 5       Grade 6    Grade 7     Grade 8    Grade 10

                        2005-2006 Assessments for Students with IEPs
                        2006-2007 All Assessments for Students with IEPs


Reading/Language 2007 SpEd Report Card

2007 Reading/Language SpEd with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades5, 6, 7, 8 and 10
2007 Reading/Language SpEd with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3 and 4




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 38 of 245
                                      Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




            Proficiency Rate for Students with IEPs - Reading/Language
                                        Arts

 80
                                                                                71.11
 70                                 64.82
                                61.97              60.29           60.38
 60   55.88                                                                                      56
                     51.79                                                               52.63
                          50                                  48.39
 50        45
                                               41.67
 40                                                                         35.09
 30


 20


 10


 0

       Grade 3       Grade 4      Grade 5       Grade 6         Grade 7      Grade 8       Grade 10

                      2005-2006 All Assessments for Students with IEPs
                      2006-2007 All Assessments for Students with IEPs

ACT Explore Comparison by School:

                               8th Grade Explore College Ready

                                                                              55%
 Composite (16)                                                       46%
                                                       33%
                                                                39%

                                   14%
      Science (20)               11%
                                10%
                                 12%

                                                             37%
      Reading (15)                                                           53%
                                                               39%
                                                             36%

                                                       32%
         Math (17)                                                 43%
                                         19%
                                                    31%

                                                                                     62%
      English (13)                                                                            70%
                                                                             53%
                                                                                       64%

                        MMS College Ready   JMS College Ready    RSS College Ready   WPS College Ready




                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 39 of 245
                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Educator Data
According to the state’s Jefferson County System Profile 2005, the district employs 523 classroom
teachers and administrators (2006 profile 483). Thirty-five percent have a BS or BA degree.
Forty-one percent of the licensed staff members have attained an MS and another 14% have
obtained an MS +45 as their highest level of education. Ten percent of the staff members have an
EDS or PHD.
2006 - Thirty-five percent have a BS or BA degree. Forty percent of the licensed staff members
have attained an MS and another 13% have obtained an MS +45 as their highest level of
education. Twelve percent of the staff members have an EDS or PHD.

2007 Personnel Issues
One ELL teacher is addressing student needs at 7 schools; One literacy coach is split
between 2 schools.

Grades 6-8
Out of the 13 science teachers in grades 6-8, only 3 are science majors.
Out of 16 math teachers in grades 6-8, only 2 are math majors

Teacher Induction Program
For 2006-2007 school year there were 42 new teachers in our district, which means 8.8% of
the total teaching population is newly hired teachers. There are 43 new teachers in the
district for the 2006-2007 school year, making 9.6% of the teaching population newly hired
teachers. In light of this we began an organized Teacher Induction Program during the
2006-2007 school year directed by the Mentoring Coordinator. This year we have added
mentoring training. There are a total of 34 paid mentors that are a part of the Teacher
Induction Program. Since many of these are secondary teachers, a high school mentoring
facilitator has been added to the program.




          Highly Qualified Teacher Information


          % Core Courses Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers                          99.8


          # Core Courses Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers                        1,159


          % Core Courses Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers                        .2


          # Core Courses Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers                         2


          LEA by School Highly Qualified Poverty Data Detail


          Highly Qualified Poverty Data Summary



                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 40 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                            Teacher and Administrator Information                   ?
                      Teachers            461           Administrator      26
                      Teacher Permits (#)   1           Teacher Waivers (#) 2
                      Teacher Permits (%) .2            Teacher Waivers (%) .4


          Teacher and Administrator Credentials - Level of College Completed                 ?
                            PHD EDS MS+45 MS BS/BA 3 Yrs. 2 Yrs. 1 Yr. 0 Yrs. Total
        Female              3   34 44     140 124                      1      346
        Male                5   13 18     39 37                        4      116
        Gender Not Reported     1         12 12                               25
                                                                              487


          Waiver by Course Code

                         Course Code Course Description              # of Waivers
                                  9601 Librarian/Media Specialist         2



We will use our survey data to see if our system’s mission, vision, and beliefs are focused on the
needs of our community and our parents. We want to be sure to link our mission to actual student
and other client services. Our vision is a look to the future and our building program is reflected in
our vision as well as our beliefs.



Survey Results

Stakeholder Survey (Source: 2005 Online Parent & Community Survey 459 Responses)

An analysis of survey data indicates that parent perceptions were most favorable (80% or higher
in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:
My child’s teachers:
    • are friendly and easy to talk to. (88%)
    • make learning interesting and relevant. (86%)
    • motivate students to learn. (84%)
    • take an interest in students’ educational future. (82%)
    • are knowledgeable and understand their subject matter. (81%)
    • assign meaningful homework that helps students learn. (81%)
    • teacher the basic academic skills in reading. (84%)
    • teach the basic academic skills in mathematics. (87%)


                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 41 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   •   teach students to speak and write correctly in English. (84%)

At my child's school:
   • The staff in the principal’s office treat me with respect when I contact my child’s school.
      (82%)
   • The school staff respond to my needs and concerns in a reasonable period of time. (81%)
   • My child is getting a good education at this school. (82%)

Least favorable responses were given to questions pertaining to:
My child's school:
   • has a proper number of students enrolled to enable access to learning opportunities and
       provide each student physical space. (30%)

NOTE: An analysis of stakeholder survey data indicated that there were no areas in which
perceptions were least favorable (60% or higher in disagreement).

Teacher Survey (Source: 2006 Online Teacher Survey 342 Responses)
An analysis of teacher survey data indicated that teacher perceptions were most favorable (80%
or higher in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:

   •   Our school day is structured for maximum instructional use. (81%)
   •   Regular monitoring of student performance and demographics occurs. (83%)
   •   Assessment information is used to improve instruction. (84%)
   •   School policies support school goals. (84%)
   •   High expectations for students are expected.
   •   Students understand they are to treat each other respectfully. (80%)
   •   Most special needs students are integrated into other classes (88%)
   •   Special needs students are given extra support in integrated classes (80%)

Least favorable responses were given to questions pertaining to:
   • We work in teams which assume responsibilities for the same students. (27%)
   • Teachers have significant input into professional growth plans. (29%)
NOTE: An analysis of teacher survey data indicated that there were no areas in which teacher
perceptions were least favorable (60% or higher in disagreement).

Student Survey (Source: 2006 Online Student Survey 3024 Responses)

Most favorable (80% or higher in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:
  • I feel safe in our school. (81%)
  • I feel comfortable interacting with students in school. (86%)
  • I put a lot of energy into my schoolwork. (84%)
  • I have access to books and equipment that I need at school. (83%)
  • My schoolwork is helping to prepare me for life after school. (82%)
  • My parents/guardians always know whether or not I am at school. (90%)
  • I get along with most of my teachers. (85%)
  • I am able to understand most of the material covered in my class. (82%)



                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 42 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   •   I feel confident that I will be successful in school. (84%)

Least favorable responses were given to questions pertaining to:
   • Students participate in establishing behavioral standards. (23%)
   • I frequently ask questions during class. (26%)
   • I help to decide rules for our school. (59%)
   • I do a lot of extra reading for my own benefit. (26%)
   • The most important things that happen to me usually happen at school. (38%)
   • My parents/guardians usually go to parents’ nights and other school events. (34%)
   • My teachers spend time just talking with me. (35%)

An analysis of student survey data indicated that there were no areas in which student perceptions
were least favorable (60% or higher in disagreement). Fifty-nine percent of students did disagree
or strongly disagree with the statement, “I help decide the rules at my school.”

2006-2007 Technology
Technology integration has been a focus of Jefferson County educators and is used as an
instructional tool. Every teacher has a teacher station which consists of a computer
attached to a wide screen TV for whole group usage. Many classrooms are equipped with
mini computer lab setups. The utilization of technology has increased the number of
computers and the need for increase bandwidth, specifically in grades 6-12. Jefferson
County High School has 675 computers online, Jefferson Middle School has 157 computers
online, Maury Middle School has 157 computers online, Rush Strong School has 245
computers online, and White Pine School has 288 computers.




  Use of Data - Narrative Response Required
  How will you use your perceptual data (Surveys, Interviews, and Questionnaires) as
  you revisit/recreate the mission, vision, and beliefs of the system?

  Surveys completed by stakeholders will determine perceptions concerning selected
  aspects of the school system and its operation. An analysis of the data collected
  through these surveys will provide insight into perceptions that are favorable and
  unfavorable in the areas of instruction, facilities, programs, personnel, and
  administration. The results of these surveys will provide input from all stakeholders,
  guiding the leadership team in the construction of the mission, vision, and beliefs of
  Jefferson County Schools. Survey results will provide staff, student and parent
  perception of our district’s climate and culture. These results will be tabulated,
  providing a clear picture of strengths and needs in educating the hearts and minds of
  all students. This profile will reveal a district’s strengths and weaknesses, and will
  allow the leadership team to ask appropriate questions regarding student achievement,


                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 43 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


teaching practices and programs, and school culture. Data collected during profiling
can be used as baseline information against which subsequent improvement strategies
can be measured.




Collection of Student Performance Data - Narrative Response Required
What types of student performance data are included in your profile?

Jefferson County Schools collect qualitative and quantitative data as follows: We use
our annual Report Card for planning purposes for achievement and nonacademic data
collection and analysis as well as surveys from all constituents including parents, the
community, staff, and students. We will utilize TestMate Clarity to disaggregate data
and develop a variety of longitudinal and latitudinal reports. This data are organized
and analyzed by our Testing Coordinator. It is shared with the system directors,
building principals, and teachers. Each school receives a copy of the report and an
additional copy kept in a digital form. We use demographic data, i.e., attendance,
promotion, dropout/graduation rate data as well as Free and Reduced information,
special education percentages served, etc. 2007 student performance data is
available through TurnLeaf, TVAAS, and ThinkLink.

In reading and language arts (K-5) we include formative, authentic, and benchmark
assessments three times each year.




Use of School Processes Data - Narrative Response Required
How have system office personnel provided equity and adequacy in resources,
support, and personnel to our schools?
The operating assumption for all policies, planning and decisions will be that all
students -- including those from low-income families, racial and language minorities,
students with disabilities, can and will achieve at high levels. Teachers have been
provided equal access to instructional resources along grade level divisions. The
district has engaged in long-range collaborative strategic planning that strives for
continuous academic improvement for all students. Programs such as Balanced
Literacy, technology initiatives, and special education provide equity in instruction to
educators and meet the needs of students throughout the district. All teachers are
provided access to the Blueprint for Learning and online teaching resources through
the district website. The website provides equal access to stakeholders and provides



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 44 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


translation capabilities to English Language Learners.




Delivery of Services - Narrative Response Required
What insights have we gained as to our delivery of services to schools?
Feedback from self-assessments have yielded the following needs:
• Improve two-way communication between the central office and the schools so that
   it becomes more responsive and accountable to all stakeholders.
• Provide continuity through professional development opportunities -- some ongoing,
   some transitional -- that target priority needs.
• Build the capacity of all district wide staff to be ambassadors for educational
   excellence. A commitment to open communications and new communication tools
   will help keep all stakeholders up to date. Improving student achievement will make
   all of us more effective advocates for children.
• Ensure that the district is making the best use of existing space and planning
   strategically for future space requirements.


Evaluation of the Collaborative Process- Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of the collaborative process used in the TCSPP?
Strengths:
• The opportunity to collaboratively pool the expertise of each member of the
   leadership and component teams toward a common goal.
• The evaluation and assessment process through the collection and analysis of data
   in relation to the district’s mission, goals, and beliefs.
Needs:
• The coordination of scheduling of component team work sessions.
• Advance guidance from the state department in order to provide the leadership
   team direction in the process.

(Collaboration should be a major focus in the development of each component. Revisit
after completing the work of all 6 components.)




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 45 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 2.1
                  BELIEFS, MISSION, and SHARED VISION


BELIEFS:


1. Data and research-based instruction will be utilized to drive decision-making and
   address various learning styles to meet individual student needs. Through a
   rigorous and relevant framework, all students will achieve proficiency and beyond.
2. Decision-making involves the collaboration of all staff and stakeholders to promote
   high expectations for all students in a safe and positive learning environment.
3. All policies and procedures are designed to achieve the system’s goals for student
   learning.
4. All resources will be employed to provide internal and external two-way
   communication and to establish a clear purpose and direction.
5. An atmosphere of mutual respect will be encouraged among all stakeholders.



MISSION STATEMENT:


Challenging individuals to achieve excellence




SHARED VISION STATEMENT:

We envision that Jefferson County Schools will educate self-driven students who will
become productive members of the school, community, and beyond. The instructional
needs of our diverse student population will be met in a safe environment, while using
state-of-the-art technology. Efficient, highly-qualified instructors, involved parents,
motivated students, and other stakeholders will all serve to ensure student success.
Collaborative responsibility will result in the support, fulfillment, and continuous
improvement of our system’s mission.




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 46 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1
    Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

The following summary questions address the use of various data in Component 3.
They are designed as a culminating activity to help you assimilate the work of
Component 3. This information comprises Component 3 of the TCSPP to be turned in to
the Tennessee Department of Education.


Evaluation of Aggregated Data - Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of your system based on the aggregated data?
Strengths
Part I: Non-Academic
• Good Standing Status, 2007 all schools in Good Standing
• K-8 Attendance/Promotion (97% equal to state goal) 2006 95.0% 2007 = 97.9%
• 9-12 Dropout/Graduation Rate (94.6% above state goal of 90%) 2006 94.1%,
   2007= 89.6%
• The percentage of students dropping out for the 2003-2004 school year was 2.8%
   as compared with2.0% for the 2004-2005 school year, and 0.8% for 2006.
   2007= 4.5
• There was a positive increase in the number of students continuing education after
   high school from 42% for the 2003-2004 school year to 55% for the 2004-2005
   school year, and 2005-2006. The 2007 exit survey indicated that 25% would be
   attending a four-year college, 30% would be attending a 2 year college, 8%
   would be attending a technical school, 3% were going into the military, and
   34% were going directly into the workforce.
• 79% Core Courses Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers (an increase over the
   previous year percentage of 70.7%) and a percentage equal to the state average.
   The 2006 percentage is 98.6%. In 2007 99.8% of core courses were taught by
   highly qualified teachers.
• An increase in 2005 by 91 teachers who had a professional development activity
   over the number of teachers in 2004. On the 2005-06 survey, 98% reported that
   had participated in a professional development activity. On the 2006-07 Teacher
   Professional Development Questionnaire Data Summary Report ,96%
   reported that they had participated in 1-14 days of professional development.
• 65% of Certified Personnel have a degree beyond a Bachelor degree
    2007 = 64%
An analysis of parent survey data indicates that parental perceptions were most
favorable (80% or higher in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:
   My child’s teachers:
   • Are friendly and easy to talk to. (88%)
   • Make learning interesting and relevant. (86%)
   • Motivate students to learn. (84%)



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 47 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   • Take an interest in students’ educational future. (82%)
   • Are knowledgeable and understand their subject matter. (81%)
   • Assign meaningful homework that helps students learn. (81%)
   • The basic academic skills in reading. (84%)
   • The basic academic skills in mathematics. (87%)
   • To speak and write correctly in English. (84%)
   At my child's school:
   • Staff in the principal’s office treat me with respect when I contact my child’s
       school. (82%)
   • School staff respond to my needs and concerns in a reasonable period of time.
       (81%)
   • My child is getting a good education at this school. (82%)
An analysis of a teacher and community survey data indicates that parental
perceptions were most favorable (80% or higher in agreement) in their responses to
questions concerning:
   • Our school day is structured for maximum instructional use. (81%)
   • Regular monitoring of student performance and demographics occurs. (83%)
   • Assessment information is used to improve instruction. (84%)
   • School policies support school goals. (84%)
   • High expectations for students are expected.
   • Students understand they are to treat each other respectfully. (80%)
   • Most special needs students are integrated into other classes (88%)
   • Special needs students are given extra support in integrated classes (80%)

An analysis of the 2008 parent survey data indicates that parents were positive
in their responses (less than 25% or higher disagree or strongly disagree)
related to the following questions:
My child’s school:
    • is safe and secure.
    • maintains high academic standards.
My child’s teachers:
    • are friendly and easy to talk to.
    • make learning interesting and relevant.
    • motivate students to learn.
    • take an interest in students’ educational future.
    • are knowledgeable and understand their subject matter
    • assign meaningful homework that helps students learn.
    • do their best to include me in matters directly affecting my child’s progress in school.
My child’s school is effectively teaching students:
    • the basic academic skills in reading.
    • the basic academic skills in mathematics.
    • to speak and write correctly in English.
    • to investigate problems in science.
    • to use computers.
    • to think critically and reason out problems.
    • to develop good study and work habits.
    • to get along with different kinds of people.
At my child's school:
    • The principal does an effective job running my child’s school.



                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 48 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    •   The principal is available and easy to talk to.
    •   The assistant principals are effective administrators.
    •   Guidance counselors are concerned about and try to help students with educational and personal
        problems.
    •   Staff in the principal’s office treat me with respect when I contact my child’s school.
    •   School staff respond to my needs and concerns in a reasonable period of time.
    •   My child is getting a good education at this school.
    •   he overall climate or atmosphere at my child’s school is positive and helps my child learn.
    •   The opportunity to take part in enrichment activities such as Scholar's Bowl, Cheerleading, and
        sports, is provided.
An analysis of the 2008 parent survey data indicates that parents were negative
in their responses (more than 25% or higher disagree or strongly disagree)
related to the following questions:
My child’s school:
    • is kept clean and in good condition
    • has a proper number of students enrolled to enable access to learning opportunities and provide
        each student physical space.
    • uses adequate disciplinary measures in dealing with disruptive students.
    • makes available textbooks, equipment, and supplies needed for learning.
    • serves lunches that are nutritious and taste good.
    • keeps bathrooms clean and in good condition.

When rating programs 85 % of parents rated the district website as excellent or good. Extra curricular
activities had the highest negative rating (13% poor/fair).



An analysis of the 2008 teacher survey data indicates that parents were positive
in their responses (less than 25% or higher disagree or strongly disagree)
related to the following questions:
    •   Our school day is structured for maximum instructional use.
    •   Student assignment is based on student needs, not administrator preference.
    •   Flexible groupings are used for instructional purposes.
    •   School administrators regularly monitor teacher performance.
    •   Regular monitoring of student performance and demographics occurs.
    •   I have considerable autonomy about implementing curriculum.
    •   A steering committee manages the change process.
    •   Authentic assessment of student achievement is in place.
    •   There is an effective match between assessment and curriculum.
    •   Assessment information is used to improve instruction.
    •   Results of assessment are used to improve instruction.
    •   Goals are reflected in personnel selection.
    •   School policies support school goals.
    •   High expectations for students are expected.
    •   Most special needs students are integrated into other classes.
    •   Special needs students are given extra support in integrated classes
    •   The staff collaborates on decisions regarding special needs students.
    •   Student work is displayed on a regular basis.
    •   Adequate release time is provided for staff development.
    •   Needs for professional development are assessed.
    •   Professional development opportunities are provided through internal working school relations.

An analysis of the 2008 teacher survey data indicates that parents were negative
in their responses (more than 25% or higher disagree or strongly disagree)


                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 49 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


related to the following questions:
   •   Our school year is structured for maximum instructional use.
   •   We work in teams which assume responsibilities for the same students.
   •   School structure supports school collaboration
   •   Teachers share in the decision-making process.
   •   Students understand they are to treat each other respectfully.
   •   Students understand they are to treat adults respectfully
   •   Teacher advisor programs complement the counseling program.
   •   Teachers have significant input into professional growth plans,

86% of the responding teachers indicated they had Internet access at home.

In a survey of first year teachers, the majority responded that they felt our district had
done an excellent job of training/welcoming new teachers. They indicated the
strengths of our education system were as follows:
    • The district website (79%)
    • Technology integration and courses (61% )
    • Professional development opportunities (52%)

In the 2008 survey of first year teachers, the majority responded that they felt our
district had done an excellent job of training/welcoming new teachers. They
indicated the strengths of our education system were as follows:
    • The district website (89%)
    • Technology integration and courses (52% )
    • Professional development opportunities (44%)

A student survey revealed the following strengths (80% or higher in agreement) in their
responses to questions concerning:
   • I feel safe in our school. (81%)
   • I feel comfortable interacting with students in school. (86%)
   • I put a lot of energy into my schoolwork. (84%)
   • I have access to books and equipment that I need at school. (83%)
   • My schoolwork is helping to prepare me for life after school. (82%)
   • My parents/guardians always know whether or not I am at school. (90%)
   • I get along with most of my teachers. (85%)
   • I am able to understand most of the material covered in my class. (82%)
   • I feel confident that I will be successful in school. (84%)

The 2008 student survey revealed the following strengths(less than 25% or
higher disagree or strongly disagree) related to the following questions:
   •   Students understand they are to treat each other respectfully.
   •   I frequently ask questions during class.
   •   I help to decide rules for our school.
   •   Our discipline rules are fair to students.
   •   I do a lot of extra reading for my own benefit.
   •   The most important things that happen to me usually happen at school.
   •   My parents/guardians usually go to parents’ nights and other school events.
   •   My teachers spend time just talking with me.



                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 50 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Part II: K-8 Academic
• K-8 Reading/Language Arts
• K-8 Writing

2007 Math K-8
AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
     African Amer. 4% increase.
     Hispanic 13% increase
     Economically disadvantaged 3% increase
     Students with Disabilities 4% increase
     Limited English Proficient 19% increase

2 NCE point increase in math over 1 year period
2007 Math SpEd with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades 7 and 8

2 of the 6-8 schools were above or equal to the national average on the math
portion of the Explore test.


 Explore     Maury                 Jefferson               Rush                 White
             Middle                Middle                  Strong               Pine
 8th         School    National    School       National   School    National   School    National
 Grade       Mean      Mean        Mean         Mean       Mean      Mean       Mean      Mean
 2007        Score     Score       Score        Score      Score     Score      Score     Score
 Math (17)      14.1       15.1          13.8       15.1      16.1       15.1      15.1       15.1


Reading K-8
AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
  • African Amer. 8% increase.
  • Asian/Pacific Islander 4% increase
  • Hispanic 15% increase
  • Economically disadvantaged 4% increase
  • Students with Disabilities 9% increase
  • Limited English Proficient 23% increase

Language Arts: 3 NCE points away from A.
2 Point NCE Gain from previous year.

Reading/Language 2007 SpEd Report Card
2007 Reading/Language SpEd with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades5, 6, 7, 8
and 10




                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 51 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



             Maury                Jefferson              Rush                White
             Middle               Middle                 Strong              Pine
 Explore     School    National   School      National   School   National   School    National
 8th Grade   Mean      Mean       Mean        Mean       Mean     Mean       Mean      Mean
 2007        Score     Score      Score       Score      Score    Score      Score     Score
 English
 (13)           14.9       14.2        13.5       14.2     14.5       14.2      14.1       14.2
 Reading
 (15)           14.3       13.8        14.1       13.8      15        13.8      13.9       13.8

Based on the results from the 2007 Explore, two of the four 6-8 schools
performed above the national mean in English and reading. The remaining
schools were only slightly below the national mean score.


Part II: 9-12 Academic
• Gateways:
Algebra Gateway – In 2003 84% of those tested were proficient/advanced, compared
to 75% at the state level. In 2004 the proficient/advanced number increased to 87%
compared to the state’s 86%. In 2005 the number proficient/advanced dropped slightly
to 84% but was still above the 76% state average. In 2006 the number of
proficient/advanced rose to 86.4%. In 2007 the number of proficient/advanced was
at 89%.

English II Gateway – In 2003 92% were proficient/advanced as opposed to only 87% at
the state level. In 2004 the number of proficient/advanced rose to 94% as compared to
the state average of 87%. The 2005 proficient/advanced average was 93% as
opposed to only a 90% state average. The 2006 proficient/advanced average was
96.6%. In 2007 the number of proficient/advanced was at 92%.


Biology Gateway - The 2006 proficient/advanced average rose again to 97.1 indicating
the Gateway Biology is no longer an area of need. The 2007 Gateway Biology
proficient/advanced score was 95%.

2007 Math 9-12 AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
   • African Amer 14% increase
   • Students with Disabilities 13% increase

There was a slight increase in the 2007 ACT Math score:
   • 2006 = 19
   • 2007 = 19.3

Grades 9-12 English I and II scores were above the predicted Value Added
Scores. The ACT English score (20.82) was slightly above the predicted score.
The writing assessment score was also above the predicted score.



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 52 of 245
                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


2007 Reading/Language Arts AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
   • Students with Disabilities 13% increase

2007 ACT Scores:
There was a slight increase in Reading over the previous year
2006 = 20.2
2007= 20.9
There was a slight increase in English over the previous year
2006=20.3
2007=21.4

End of Course:
Math Foundations – The 2003 proficient/advanced average was 72% and increased to
83% in 2004. The 2004 proficient/advanced average for the state was lower at 76%.
In 2005 92% of those tested were proficient/advanced as opposed to state average of
only 85%. The proficient/advanced 2006 Math Foundations score dropped slightly to
83% (86% in 2007).
English I – The 2003 proficient/advanced average was 84%, while the state’s
proficient/advanced average was lower at 82%. The 2004 proficient/advanced average
increased to 85%, still above the state’s 83%. Finally, in 2005 those who tested
proficient/advanced at the district level scored at 90% while the state lagged behind at
88%. The proficient/advanced 2006 English I score increased significantly to 93%.
(84% in 2007).
U.S. History – The proficient/advanced score increased from 92.6% in 2005 to 96.4%
in 2006.
• ACT: The district had a slight increase from 19.8 to 20.2 (2004-2005) based on 3-
    year averages. There was a slight increase in the 2006 composite score to 20.3.
    (20.5 Composite for 2007).
Part III: K-8 Value Added
                                                                 3-Year
             Grade        2004-05       2005-06      2006-07
                                                                 Average
             4th          1.3           2.8          1.6         1.9
             5th          3.9           3.8          4.2         4
             6th          2.3           1            1.8         1.7
             7th          3.5           1.5          1.6         2.2
             8th          4.3           3.3          4.3         4

                                                                   3-Year
            Grade         2004-05      2005-06       2006-07
                                                                   Average
            4th           3.5          -2.2          0             0.4
            5th           5.2          3.6           4.7           4.5
            6th           6.3          2.3           4.9           4.5
            7th           -0.2         0.8           2.4           1
            8th           1.5          5.3           4.6           3.8



                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 53 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                     3-Year
            Grade         2004-05        2005-06       2006-07
                                                                     Average
            4th           6.3            8.4           7.7           7.5
            5th           1.6            2.2           -0.2          1.2
            6th           5.5            3.1           0             2.9
            7th           3.5            -0.8          1.6           1.4
            8th           3.1            0.6           -0.7          1

                                                                     3-Year
            Grade         2004-05        2005-06       2006-07
                                                                     Average
            4th           4.6            3.7           2.7           3.6
            5th           2.3            1.1           0.9           1.4
            6th           -0.1           -2.4          1.1           -0.5
            7th           2.5            3.5           2.5           2.8
            8th           4.2            0.2           1.8           2.1

•   K-8 TVAAS: All areas showed improvement, with reading increasing in 2004 from
    the grade of a D to a B in 2005 and in 2006 and 2007 the value added score was
    an A. The Math 2004 value added score was a C, while the 2005 score jumped to
    a B and in 2006 and 2007 the value added score was an A. In Science, the 2004
    value added score was a C, which increased to B in 2005 and in 2006 and 2007
    the value added score was an A. Social Studies also showed improvement from
    2004 to 2005, moving from a B to an A respectively and in 2006 and 2007 the value
    added score remained at an A.
    Reading/Language Arts: Grade 5 had a resounding 7.4 net value added gain
    during a 3-year average. Grade 6 had a 3.3 gain in value added over the 3-year
    average. Grade 8 had a slight gain of 1.0 in value added over the same 3-year
    average. In 2006 Grade 8 had another increase to a 5.3 value added gain.
    Math: Grade 5 had a slight net gain of .8 value-added over the 3-year average
    while Grade 7 had a value added gain of 1.6 over the same 3-year average Grade
    8 also had a net value gain of 1.6 in the 3-year average. In 2006 Grade 5 had
    another increase to a 3.8 value added gain and Grade 8 had a 3.3 gain.
    Social Studies: In grade 7 the value added net 3-year average gain was 2.2, but
    had a loss of -0.8 in 2006. In 2006 Grade 4 had a 8.4 gain.

2007 TVAAS Math Largest gains: Grades 5 and 8
Reading/Language Arts Value Added 3-8:
Greatest Gains: Grades 5 and 6




                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 54 of 245
                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Achievement Growth Differences/Gaps




                                                     Math 4th Grade students
                                                     are showing growth in
                                                     the lowest and middle
                                                     groups in 2007 and over
                                                     the cohort years. The
                                                     highest      performing
                                                     students are showing a
                                                     significant decrease in
                                                     achievement gains.



                                                       5th grade math students have
                                                       a slope pattern over the
                                                       cohort years with the lowest
                                                       group making the greatest
                                                       gains and the highest
                                                       performing students making
                                                       the least achievement gains.
                                                       The 2007 data indicates that
                                                       all      quintiles      made
                                                       achievement gains, especially
                                                       the lowest performing group.




                                                      6th grade math students have a
                                                      reverse slope over the cohort
                                                      years     with   the   highest
                                                      performing students making
                                                      the greatest academic gains
                                                      and the lowest group making
                                                      the least gains. The 2007 data
                                                      shows the 4th and 5th quintiles
                                                      making positive achievement
                                                      gains     with    the   lowest
                                                      performing students making
                                                      negative gains.




              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 55 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                    The 7th grade math growth for
                                    both the cohort and 2007 data
                                    indicate significant achievement
                                    growth for all groups, with the
                                    exception of the highest quintile
                                    in the 2007 school year.




                                     The 2007 8th grade math scores
                                     indicate a reverse slope. The cohort
                                     years show the 5th quintile making
                                     the greatest gains, but all groups
                                     made significant achievement gains.
                                     The cohort years show the middle
                                     group making the greatest gains
                                     and the lowest group reaching the
                                     reference line indicating they made
                                     the state’sexpected gains.


                                       2007 data for 4th grade
                                       reading indicates that the
                                       highest group made the
                                       greatest gains and the lowest
                                       groups had a negative
                                       achievement gain. Quintile 2
                                       made only slight achievement
                                       gains and 4 performed at the
                                       reference line. The middle
                                       group also had a negative
                                       achievement gain. Over the
                                       cohort years only the 3rd and
                                       5th      quintiles    showed
                                       achievement gains. Quintiles
                                       2 and 4 showed a loss in




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 56 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                      5th grade reading scores were
                                      very impressive in each
                                      performance group.         The
                                      lowest groups, quintiles 1 and
                                      2 made the greatest gains
                                      during the 2007 school year
                                      and quintiles 3 and 4 made the
                                      greatest gains over the cohort
                                      years.     The lowest group
                                      performed at the reference line
                                      over the cohort years.




                                      Reading grade 6 had significant
                                      achievement growth in both the
                                      cohort years and 2007. No
                                      group     performed    at    an
                                      achievement rate lower than the
                                      reference line.




                                          Grade 7 Reading data shows a
                                          slope in 2007 with the lowest
                                          group performing at the largest
                                          growth rate. The cohort years
                                          have the lowest and middle
                                          students performing below the
                                          reference line indicating a loss
                                          in achievement gains.




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 57 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                        The           8th        grade
                                        reading/language arts data
                                        shows significant achievement
                                        gains in all groups in both the
                                        2007 and cohort years.




                                           The 4th Grade Science gains
                                           are greatest in the 3rd – 5th
                                           quintiles in the 2007 school
                                           year.          The      cohort
                                           achievement      growth     is
                                           greatest in quintiles 3 and 4.
                                           There was a loss of
                                           achievement in the lowest
                                           performing group in both
                                           the 2007 and cohort years.




                                  The 5th grade science greatest
                                  gains were in the 2nd – 4th
                                  quintiles in both the cohort and
                                  2007 school year.




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 58 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                  The 5th grade science scores indicate
                                  the greatest achievement gains in the
                                  2007 school year were experienced by
                                  the 2nd and 4th quintiles. The highest
                                  performing group had a significant
                                  loss in achievement gains during the
                                  2007 school year. The cohort years
                                  indicate all groups had achievement
                                  gains in science.




                                6th grade science achievement gains
                                are greatest in the highest
                                performing group for the 2007
                                school year. Two groups, the lowest
                                and the middle groups made gains
                                below the reference line in 2007. All
                                groups performed below the
                                reference line in the cohort years
                                with the highest group having the
                                most significant loss.




                               7th grade science achievement gains in
                               2007 were greatest for the highest
                               performing group, however all quintiles
                               made gains with the exception of the
                               2nd quintile which performed slightly
                               below the reference line. Over the
                               cohort years there is a reverse slope
                               with all groups performing above the
                               reference link, however the highest
                               group had the greatest achievement
                               gain.




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 59 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                 8th grade science scores indicate all
                                 groups are making achievement
                                 gains in both the 2007 and cohort
                                 years with the exception of the
                                 highest performing group which had
                                 a loss of gains in achievement.




                                The 4th graders made excellent
                                achievement gains in the 2007 and
                                also during the cohort years. The
                                lowest performing group had the
                                least academic gain in the cohort
                                year, yet still progressed above the
                                state’s reference line.




                                 5th grade social studies performance
                                 indicates the lowest performing
                                 group      made        the    greatest
                                 achievement gains in 2007. Over
                                 the cohort years all groups were at
                                 or above the state’s reference line
                                 with the exception of the highest
                                 group which scored below. Both the
                                 4th and 5th quintiles indicated a lack
                                 of achievement gains in 2007.




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 60 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                 The 6th grade social studies scores
                                 indicate a reverse slope during the
                                 cohort years with the lowest group
                                 making the least achievement
                                 growth. In 2007 the lowest groups
                                 had     a   significant   loss   in
                                 achievement growth.




                              The 7th grade social studies value
                              added results for the cohort years
                              indicate a slope in achievement growth
                              with the lowest performing group
                              making the greatest gains and the
                              highest group performing below the
                              state’s reference line indicating a loss
                              in achievement growth. In 2007 the 2nd
                              and 3rd quintiles indicate the greatest
                              achievement growth with all quintiles
                              performing above the state’s reference
                              line.




                                The 8th grade social studies value
                                added results in the cohort years
                                show achievement growth at all
                                quintiles with the exception of the
                                lowest, which performed at the
                                state’s reference line. In 2007 only
                                the highest group had achievement
                                growth with the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th
                                quintiles performing below the
                                state’s reference line.




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 61 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Part III: 9-12 Value Added
• Gateways:
   The Gateway Algebra students scored above the predicted score over a 3-year
   average.
   The Gateway English students also tested above the predicted score over the 3-
   year average.
• End of Course: Math Foundations students tested above the predicted score over
   the 3-year average.
• These same above average results were evident in the 2006 scores.
• The 2006 data indicates an improvement in writing assessment scores for Grade
   11, with an observed score of 4.3 above the predicted score of 3.9.

2007 TVAAS Value Added Math 9-12:
Algebra Predicted Score: 538.7
Algebra Observed Score: 547.5

Math Foundations Predicted Score: 524.9
Math Foundations Observed Score; 526.5

 Social Studies Grades 9-12 Value Added scores indicate no discernable difference
 between the predicted and observed scores.
 Gateway / End of Course

 Subject                      Observed    Predicted   Status     Observed   Predicted   Status
                              Score       Score                  3          3      Yr   3 Yr
                                                                 Yr Avg     Avg         Avg
 US History                   517.9       516.2       NDD        516.3      514.1       Above



Part IV:
• K-8 AYP – No elementary, middle or K-8 school in Jefferson County are on target.
   All made AYP meeting NCLB requirements.
• K-8 AYP – No elementary, middle, K-8 or high school school in Jefferson
   County is targeted. All made AYP meeting NCLB requirements and are in
   Good Standing.
Part V:
The 2005 CTE Perkins Report indicated the district scored A’s in the following
Core Indicators:
         1S2: Skill Proficiencies
         3S1: Placement
         4S1: Participation Non-Traditional

Part V:
The 2006 CTE Perkins Report indicated the district scored A’s in the following Core
Indicators:
   • CTE - 1S1 Core Indicator – Academic Attainment had a score of an A on the



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 62 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


       2006 Report Card with an actual performance level of 93.57% which is above
       the state’s average of 91.51%.
   •   CTE - 2S1: Completion –had a score of an A on the 2006 Report Card with an
       actual performance level of 93.57% which is above the state’s average of
       91.51%
   •   CTE - 3S1: Placement –had a score of an A on the 2006 Report Card with an
       actual performance level of 97.98% which is above the state’s average of
       92.14%.
   •   CTE - 4S1: Participation Non-Traditional –had a score of an A on the 2006
       Report Card with an actual performance level of 23.97%.
   •   CTE - 4S2: Completion Non-Traditional –had a score of an A on the 2006
       Report Card with an actual performance level of 25.71%.

2007 Perkins Report Card indicates the district had a score of A in each
indicator: 1S1: Academic Attainment; 1S2: Skill Proficiencies; 2S1: Completion;
3S1: Placement; 4S1: Participation Non-Traditional; and 4S2: Completion Non-
Traditional.
   • CTE Report card indicates the system performed above the state and
       negotiated performance level in Math.




   •   CTE Report card indicates the system performed above the state and
       negotiated performance level in Reading/Language Arts




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 63 of 245
                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Areas of Need

Part I: Non-Academic
2007
• The 9-12 attendance average was 92.2% in 2007, below the state goal of 93%.
• Personnel Issues:
         o The average percentage of “sick” days used by certified teachers in
           the 2007-2008 school year is 8.5%
         o Only 19% of the 6-8 math teachers are endorsed to teach math. 36%
           of the 6-8 science teachers are endorsed to teach science or
           biology.
         o For 2006-2007 school year there were 42 new teachers in our
           district, which means 8.8% of the total teaching population is newly
           hired teachers. There are 43 new teachers in the district for the
           2006-2007 school year, making 9.6% of the teaching population
           newly hired teachers.
         o One ELL teacher must cover 7 schools.
         o One Literacy Coach is covering 2 schools (Talbott and New Market
           Elementary Schools) with a large percentage of their population in
           Tier 2 RTI.

Part II: K-8 Academic
Reading/Language Arts Grades 3-8
The 2 schools which share a literacy coach performed worse than the system in
students performing below proficient. New Market Elementary School had 11%
of all students and 9% of white students performing below proficient, which is
above the state and district averages. Talbott Elementary School had 10% of the
white population performing below proficient, which is above the state and
system average.


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 64 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


AYP sub-groups below state averages:
   • Hispanic 2% below
   • Economically Disadv 4% below
   • Students with Disabilities 1% below
AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008 benchmark:
   • African Amer 2% below
   • Hispanic 9% below
   • SWD 18% below
   • LEP 3% below
Grades 3-5 fell 2 NCE points below the state average and are 3 NCE points away from a letter
grade of an A.
RCPI scores below state
   • Grade 3 fell -2.6 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
   • Grade 4 fell -1.7 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
   • Grade 5 fell -2.3 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
Grade 4 and 7 had the least 3-year value added gains (0 and 2.4 respectively) compared to 4.5+
point gains by grades 5 and 8.

Math Grades 3-8
AYP Sub-groups falling below 86% proficient/advanced 2008 benchmark:
   • African Amer 3% below
   • Hispanic 2% below
   • SWD 14% below
   • LEP 7% below
Grades 3-5 fell 2 NCE points below the state average
RCPI scores below state
   • Grade 3 fell -2 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
   • Grade 4 fell -1 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
   • Grade 5 fell -1 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
   • Grade 7 fell -2 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
Grade 4 and 6 had the least 3-year value added gains (1.9 and 1.7 respectively) compared to a
more than 4.6 gain by grades 3, 5, and 8.
Grades 6-8 currently has only 2 of the 16 math teachers actually endorsed to teach math.
2007 Reading/Language SpEd with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3 and 4

•   The 9-12 attendance average was 93.3% in 2004, but dropped to 92.2% in 2005,
    below the state goal of 93%.
• Per Pupil Expenditures –The system’s Average Daily Attendance expenditure per
    pupil is $6,558, which is below the State expenditure of $7,366 and well below the
    National expenditure of $9,166. The Average Daily Membership expenditure for the
    district is $6,241, again below the state expenditure of $6,970 and also below the
    National expenditure of $8,554.
In a parent survey, Least favorable responses were given to questions pertaining to:
    My child’s school:
    • Has a proper number of students enrolled to enable access to learning
        opportunities and provide each student physical space. (30%)
In a teacher survey, least favorable responses were given to questions pertaining to:
    • We work in teams which assume responsibilities for the same students. (27%)
    • Teachers have significant input into professional growth plans. (29%)
In a survey of first year teachers, the district’s areas of need were as follows:



                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 65 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   • Lack of materials and resources (46%)
   • Intervention strategies (32%)
A student survey revealed least favorable responses were given to questions
pertaining to:
   • Students participate in establishing behavioral standards. (23%)
   • I frequently ask questions during class. (26%)
   • I help to decide rules for our school. (59%)
   • I do a lot of extra reading for my own benefit. (26%)
   • The most important things that happen to me usually happen at school. (38%)
   • My parents/guardians usually go to parents’ nights and other school events.
       (34%)
   • My teachers spend time just talking with me. (35%)

Part II: 9-12 Academic
• Gateways: The Biology Gateways proficient/advanced percentage in 2003 was an
   impressive 99%, but dropped to 95% in 2004. The proficient/advanced increased
   slightly in 2005 to 96%. The 2006 proficient/advanced average rose again to 97.1
   indicating the Gateway Biology.
Grades 9-12
9-12 Reading/Language Arts:
9-12 Reading/Language Arts AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1
year:
        African Amer 14% decrease
        White 1% decrease
        Economically Disadv 2% decrease

9-12 Reading/Language Arts AYP All sub-groups equal or above state averages
except:
      African Amer 4% below
      Hispanic 16% below

9-12 Reading/Language Arts AYP Sub-groups falling below 93% 2008
benchmark:
      African Amer 11% below
      Hispanic 23% below
      Econom Disadv 4% below
      SWD 13% below

High School ACT 3-year average Reading score (20.6) is slightly below the state’ score (20.7).
High School ACT 3-year average English score (20.9) is slightly below the state’ score (21)

9-12 Math AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
      White 3% decrease
      Economically Disadv 7% decrease



                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 66 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


9-12 Math AYP All sub-groups equal or above state averages except:
      Hispanic 9% below
      LEP 7% below

9-12 AYP Sub-groups falling below 83% 2008 benchmark:
      Hispanic 11% below
      LEP 7% below

Math Grades 9-12
AYP sub-groups below state averages:
  • Hispanic 2% below
  • Economically Disadv 4% below
  • Students with Disabilities 1% below

AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008 benchmark:
  • African Amer 2% below
  • Hispanic 9% below
  • SWD 18% below
  • LEP 3% below

High School ACT 3-year average Math score (19.3) is slightly below the state’
score (19.8)


Part III: K-8 Value Added
• Reading/Language Arts: In Grade 7 the growth standard for the 2002-2003
   school year was -.1. In 2003-2004 the growth standard was -1.3 while in 2004-
   2005 it increased again to -.2. The 3 year average was -.5 measured slightly lower
   than the growth standard goal of 0. The 2006 data shows that Grade 7 had a slight
   increase (0.7) over the previous school year, with a 3-year average of -0.3. Grade
   4 had a drop in value added to -2.3 for the 2006 school year.
•
  • Reading/Language Arts The 2007 data indicates the least gains in grades 4
     and 7.

 Grade       2004-05     2005-06      2006-07       3-Year       State       State     3-
                                                    Average      Growth      Year
                                                                 Standard    Gain
 4th         3.5         -2.2         0             0.4          0           1.2
 5th         5.2         3.6          4.7           4.5          0           4.7
 6th         6.3         2.3          4.9           4.5          0           4.9
 7th         -0.2        0.8          2.4           1            0           0.6
 8th         1.5         5.3          4.6           3.8          0           2.8




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 67 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


•    Math: In grade 6 the growth standard was -3.0 for the 2002-2003 school year. The
     growth standard moved to -.8 in 2003-2004 and to 2.2 in 2004-2005. The 3-year
     average was -.5 compared to state standard of 0. The 2006 data shows that in
     2006 Grade 6 had a gain of 1.2 with a 3-year average of 0.9.
    Math 2007 Grades 3-8 Value Added Least Gains: Grades 4 and 6

    Grade       2004-05     2005-06      2006-07       3-Year       State       State     3-
                                                       Average      Growth      Year
                                                                    Standard    Gain
    4th         1.3         2.8          1.6           1.9          0           2
    5th         3.9         3.8          4.2           4            0           2
    6th         2.3         1            1.8           1.7          0           1.9
    7th         3.5         1.5          1.6           2.2          0           1.8
    8th         4.3         3.3          4.3           4            0           1.5



•    Science: The growth standard for Grade 5 in 2002-2003 was -3.5. In 2003-2004 it
     increased to +.6 and showed another positive gain in 2004-2005 to +2.1. The 3
     year average was -.3 compared to state standard of 0. Grade 6’s 2002-2003
     growth standard was -1.3, and rose slightly in 2003-2004 to the state standard of 0,
     yet declined slightly in 2004-2005 to -.1 3. The Science 3-year growth standard
     average was -.5, slightly below the state standard of 0. The 2006 data shows that
     Grade 5 had a 1.1 gain. Grade 6 had a decrease in gain (-2.2).
    Science scores indicate the least gains in grades 6 and 8.

    Grade       2004-05     2005-06      2006-07       3-Year       State       State     3-
                                                       Average      Growth      Year
                                                                    Standard    Gain
    4th         4.6         3.7          2.7           3.6          0           3.7
    5th         2.3         1.1          0.9           1.4          0           1.4
    6th         -0.1        -2.4         1.1           -0.5         0           0.3
    7th         2.5         3.5          2.5           2.8          0           4.2
    8th         4.2         0.2          1.8           2.1          0           1.2


•    Social Studies: The growth standard for grade 8 during the 2002-2003 school
     year was -3.5 yet improved in 2003-2004 to -.1. It increased in 2004-2005 to 3.2 3.
     The 3-year growth standard average -.2 slightly off the state standard of 0. The
     2006 data shows that Grade 8 had a drop in gain of 0.5 with a new 3-year average
     of 1.2. The 2006 data also indicates that Grade 7 went from a gain of 3.7 in 2005 to
     a loss of -0.8 in 2006.

    Social Studies least gains were in grades 8 and 6 (negative loss).



                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 68 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    Grade       2004-05         2005-06         2006-07         3-Year       State         State       3-
                                                                Average      Growth        Year
                                                                             Standard      Gain
    4th         6.3             8.4             7.7             7.5          0             4.7
    5th         1.6             2.2             -0.2            1.2          0             2.4
    6th         5.5             3.1             0               2.9          0             -0.5
    7th         3.5             -0.8            1.6             1.4          0             1.4
    8th         3.1             0.6             -0.7            1            0             -0.7



Part III: 9-12 Value Added
2007 ACT Math Value Added

    Subject             Observed Predicted Status Observed                        Predicted        Status
                        Score    Score            3                               3      Yr        3 Yr
                                                  Yr Avg                          Avg              Avg
    Math                19.1     19.53     Below 19.14                            19.4             Below

•    Gateways: Gateway Biology students scored below the predicted value added
     score. The observed score was 532.2 with a predicted value added score of 537.6.
     The 3-year average observed score was 529.6, which was below the predicted
     value added score of 534.5. The 2006 data indicates Gateway Biology scores were
     above the predicated score of 539.4 with an observed score of 541.0. In 2007 the
     EOC Physical Science score fell below the predicted score by 7 points, while
     there was no discernable difference in the observed and predicted Gateway
     Biology scores.
    Value Added Science Grades 9-12

    Gateway / End of Course

    Subject                            Observed     Predicted    Status    Observed    Predicted   Status
                                       Score        Score                  3           3      Yr   3 Yr
                                                                           Yr Avg      Avg         Avg
    Science (Bio I)                    538.5        535.4        NDD       537.3       537.5       NDD
    Physical Science                   520.5        527.2        Below     515.5       520.5       Below


    ACT Value Added Science scores indicate no discernable difference between the predicted
    and observed scores.
    Subject             Observed        Predicted      Status   Observed   Predicted   Status      3   Yr
                        Score           Score                   3          3      Yr   Avg
                                                                Yr Avg     Avg
    Science/Reasoning   20.12           20.14          NDD      20.2       19.98       NDD



•    The 11th Grade Writing Assessment score was below the predicted value added


                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 69 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   score of 3.9. The 11th graders only scored 3.8 for the 3-year average. The 2006
   data indicates an improvement in writing assessment scores for Grade 11, with an
   observed score of 4.3 above the predicted score of 3.9. This is no longer an area
   of need as the 2007 3-year average increased from a 3.9 to a 4.1.

Part IV:
• 2006 – Maury Middle School is targeted in both math and reading/language arts for
   the special education population. This is no longer an area of need as Maury
   Middle School is now in Good Standing.

Part V:
The district score a B in the following Core Indicators:
   • 1S1 : Academic Attainment
   • 2S1: Completion
   • 4S2: Completion Non-Traditional

Part V:
The 2006 data for CTE indicates that the district scored a B (94.15%) in the area of
1S2: Skill Proficiencies. This was a decrease from the 2005 data of -2.50%. The CTE
program improved their standing by scoring above the negotiated score in both
reading and math.

What evidence/sources support your response? State Report Card, Perkins Report
Card




Evaluation of Disaggregated Data - Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of your system based on the disaggregated data?
Strengths

Part I: Non-Academic
• Based on 2002 data, the Special Education percentage for Jefferson County
   Schools is 18.3%, much higher than the state average of 16.1% and the national
   average of 13.4% .
• In 2005 Jefferson County’s special education population number has been cut to
   15.6% below the state average of 15.9%. The 2006 population is at 13.8%, lower
   than the state average of 14.9%.
• During the 2004-2005 school year, there were 60% of students with IEPs graduated
   from high school with a Regular High School Diploma.
• The 2006 data shows the number of students with disabilities is at 13.8% which is
   below the state average of 14.9%.
• The 2007 data indicates the number of students with disabilities had a slight
   increase at 14.3, but still below the state average of 15.4%.



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 70 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Part II: K-8 Academic
K-8 Achievement Disaggregated:
• Math: The subgroup, “All Students” scored 87% proficient/advanced over a 2 year
   average, slightly above the state’s 86% proficient/advanced 2-year average. The
   subgroup, “All Students” scored 89% proficient/advanced over a 2 year average,
   slightly above the state’s 86% proficient/advanced 2-year average.
2006-2007 AYP Math Grades 3-8 Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
• African Amer. 4% increase.
• Hispanic 13% increase
• Economically disadvantaged 3% increase
• Students with Disabilities 4% increase
• Limited English Proficient 19% increase

2006-2007 AYP Math Grades 3-8 All sub-groups equal or above state averages
except:
• Hispanic 2% below
• White 1% below

Grades 3-8 had a 2 NCE point increase in math for the 2006-2007 school year,
making the score 1 point shy of an A in achievement.

2007 Math Students With Disabilities subgroup that had IEPs Achievement Gains:
Grades 7 and 8

2007 Math Value Added
 Grades K-8 Value Added - Growth Standard                                         ?

                                                                       2007
 (3 year average)*                             2006              2007
                                                                       State
 CRT                                           Status Mean Status Mean Growth
                                                      Gain        Gain Std
 Math                                          A      1.7  A      2.8  0


1.1 growth standard gain over 1 year period

 Math

 Grade       2004-05      2005-06      2006-07      3-Year       State        State     3-
                                                    Average      Growth       Year
                                                                 Standard     Gain
 4th         1.3          2.8          1.6          1.9          0            2
 5th         3.9          3.8          4.2          4            0            2


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 71 of 245
                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    6th        2.3          1            1.8          1.7          0            1.9
    7th        3.5          1.5          1.6          2.2          0            1.8
    8th        4.3          3.3          4.3          4            0            1.5

Largest gains: Grades 5 and 8


•    Reading/Language Arts: The subgroup, “All Students” scoring at the
     proficient/advanced level was at 86% in 2004 and 88% in 2005, which was slightly
     below the state’s average of 89%. The “White” subgroup score was 85%
     proficient/advanced in 2004 increasing to 89% in 2005. The “Africa American”
     subgroup score was 72% proficient/advanced in 2004 which increased to 83% in
     2005. The subgroup, “Economically Disadvantaged,” score was 78%
     proficient/advanced in 2004, which increased to 83% in 2005. The subgroup,
     “Students with Disabilities,” had 47% proficient/advanced in 2004, which increased
     to 55% in 2005.
     The subgroup, “All Students” scoring at the proficient/advanced level was a 2-year
     average of 90% in 2006. The “White” subgroup score increased to 92%
     proficient/advanced i in 2006. The “Africa American” subgroup score was 72%
     proficient/advanced in 2004 which increased to 81% in 2006. The subgroup,
     “Economically Disadvantaged,” score was 82% proficient/advanced in 2006, an
     increase. In 2006 the subgroup, “Students with Disabilities,” had 64%
     proficient/advanced in 2004, which was another increase.
•    The Hispanic student population has more than doubled from 61 in 2002 to 171 in
     2004. The Hispanic student population is 185 in 2006.
•    The Jefferson County School System identified and served 1,116 students in special
     education that were between six to twenty-one years of age.
•    During the 2004-2005 school year, there were 60% of the students with IEPs that
     graduated from high school with a Regular High School Diploma.
•    Students with IEPs who dropped out of high school were at 13%.
•    The 2005-2006Jefferson County School System identified and served 1,034
     students in special education that were between three to twenty-one years of age.
•    During the 2005-2006 school year, there were 43.3% of the students with IEPs that
     graduated from high school with a Regular High School Diploma.
•    In 2006-2007 students with IEPs who dropped out of high school were at
     18.97%.
•    The 2006-2007 Jefferson County School System identified and served 825
     students in special education that were between three to twenty-one years of
     age.
•    During the 2006-2007 school year, there were 53.45% of the students with IEPs
     that graduated from high school with a Regular High School Diploma.


2006-2007Grades 3-8 Reading AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
      African Amer. 8% increase.


                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 72 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



       Asian/Pacific Islander 4% increase
       Hispanic 15% increase
       Economically disadvantaged 4% increase
       Students with Disabilities 9% increase
       Limited English Proficient 23% increase

2007 Reading/Language Students With Disabilities with IEPs Achievement Gains:
Grades5, 6, 7, 8 and 10

Part II: 9-12 Academic
Gateways:
• The 9-12 Math proficient/advanced score for the “All Students” subgroup in 2004
   was 91%, increasing to 92% in 2005, while the state average was 83%. The “White”
   subgroup proficient/advanced score was 92% in 2004 and 2005, while the same
   subgroup at the state level lagged behind at 89% proficient/advanced. The “African-
   American” subgroup in 2004 had 59% proficient/advanced, and in 2005 75% scored
   proficient/advanced, which was ahead of the same subgroup at the state level score
   of 68% proficient/advanced. The “Economically Disadvantaged” subgroup scored
   82% proficient/advanced in 2004, increasing to 89% in 2005, yet the same subgroup
   at the state level trailed at 74% scoring proficient and advanced.
   The 9-12 Math proficient/advanced score for the “All Students” subgroup in 2006
   was 91%, while the state average was 83%. The “White” subgroup
   proficient/advanced score was 93% in 2006, while the same subgroup at the state
   level lagged behind at 90% proficient/advanced. The “African-American” subgroup
   in 2006 had 70% proficient/advanced, which was ahead of the same subgroup at the
   state level score of 67% proficient/advanced. The “Economically Disadvantaged”
   subgroup scored 88% proficient/advanced in 2006, yet the same subgroup at the
   state level trailed at 75% scoring proficient and advanced.
2006-2007 Grades 9-12 Math AYP Improved Sub-Groupsr:
   • African Amer 14% increase
   • Students with Disabilities 13% increase
2006-2007 Grades 9-12 Math AYP All sub-groups equal or above state averages
except:
   • Hispanic 9% below
   • LEP 7% below

•   The English II Gateway proficient/advanced score for the “All Students” subgroup in
    2004 was 94%, increasing slightly to 95% in 2005, while the state’s “All Students”
    subgroup was behind at 93%. The “African-American” subgroup scored 89%
    proficient/advanced in 2004, increasing to 92% in 2005, still ahead of the state’s
    subgroup score of 89% proficient/advanced. The “Economically Disadvantaged”
    subgroup had 93% proficient/advanced in 2004, dropping slightly to 92% in 2005,
    yet still above the state’s score for this same subgroup which was below at 87%
    proficient/advanced. The “Students with Disabilities” subgroup’s proficient/advanced
    score in 2004 was 75%. This score dropped to 73% in 2005, yet it was still above


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 73 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   the state’s 67% proficient/advanced for this same subgroup.
   The 9-12 Reading/Language + Writing proficient/advanced score for the “All
   Students” subgroup in 2006 was 94%, while the state’s “All Students” subgroup was
   behind at 91%. The “African-American” subgroup scored 96% proficient/advanced
   in 2006, still ahead of the state’s subgroup score of 87% proficient/advanced. The
   “Economically Disadvantaged” subgroup had 91% proficient/advanced in 2006, yet
   still above the state’s score for this same subgroup which was below at 85%
   proficient/advanced. The “Students with Disabilities” subgroup’s proficient/advanced
   score in 2006 was 68% still above the state’s 66% proficient/advanced for this same
   subgroup.

2006-2007 Grades 9-12 Reading AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
   • Students with Disabilities 13% increase
2006-2007 Grades 9-12 Reading AYP All sub-groups equal or above state
averages except:
   • African Amer 4% below
   • Hispanic 16% below

Part IV: K-8 AYP
All K-8 subgroups made AYP in Math and Reading with the exception of Maury Middle
School in 2006. The subgroup “Students with Disabilities” were targeted for both Math
and Reading. All subgroups are in “Good Standing.” There was a decrease of
40% in below proficient for the Maury Middle School’s SWD subgroup in reading
in 2006-2007. There was a 44% decrease in the Maury Middle School’s SWD
subgroup performing below proficient in math during the 2006-2007 school year.


Part V: CTE
• The 2005 Perkins Report indicated that the distribution of vocational technical
   education students was fairly even across grade levels, with 21.9% of 9th graders,
   26% of 10th graders, 28% of 11th graders, and 24% of 12th graders enrolled in a
   vocational technical career education course. The percentage of special population
   in vocational technical education courses indicate that 13% are students with
   disabilities, 35% are economically disadvantaged, and less than 1% are English
   Language Learners.
• The 2006 Perkins Report indicated that the distribution of vocational technical
   education students was fairly even across grade levels, although 11th grade had the
   highest percentage. The numbers indicate participation from 23.83% of 9th graders,
   25.14% of 10th graders, 28.99% of 11th graders, and 21.76% of 12th graders enrolled
   in a vocational technical career education course. The percentage of special
   population in vocational technical education courses indicate that 16.98% are
   students with disabilities, 36.20% are economically disadvantaged, and less than
   1.23% are English Language Learners.
• The 2007 Perkins Report card indicates that students outperformed the State
   performance and the negotiated performance level in 4S1: Graduation Rate;
   1S2: Academic Attainment Math; and 1S1: Academic Attainment


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 74 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    Reading/Language Arts. The 2007 Perkins Report indicated that the
    distribution of vocational technical education students ranged from 23% to
    28% across grade levels. Grade 10 had the highest percentage of
    participation, 27.46%. The percentage of special population in vocational
    technical education courses indicate there is a difference of 6.29% of
    students with disabilities participating in CTE courses over the percentage of
    the total secondary SWD population. 4.35% are economically disadvantaged,
    and less than .35% are English Language Learners.


Areas of Need
Part II: K-8 Academic
• Reading/Language Academic Score of a C, compared to the state’s score of a B.
   Reading/Language Academic Score of a B in 2006.
2006-2007 Grades 3-8 Reading AYP sub-groups below state averages:
        Hispanic 2% below
        Economically Disadv 4% below
        Students with Disabilities 1% below

2006-2007 Grades 3-8 Reading AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008
benchmark:
      African Amer 2% below
      Hispanic 9% below
      SWD 18% below
      LEP 3% below

2007 Reading/Language SpEd with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3 and 4
Reading Least Gains: Grades 7 and 4

•  Math: The “Hispanic” subgroup had 51% proficient/advanced in 2004, dropping to
   50% in 2005, far below the state average of 71% proficient and advanced. The
   “Limited English Proficient” subgroup scored 50% at proficient/advanced in 2004,
   dropping to 47% in 2005, far below the state’s 70% scoring proficient and advanced.
   Their score increased to a 71% in 2006, still below the 83% proficient/advanced
   state average.
2006-2007 Grades 3-8 Math AYP All sub-groups equal or above state averages
except:
       Hispanic 2% below
       White 1% below

2006-2007 Grades 3-8 Math AYP Sub-groups falling below 86% 2008 benchmark:
      African Amer 3% below
      Hispanic 2% below
      SWD 14% below
      LEP 7% below



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 75 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


•  In Reading/Language Arts, the “Hispanic” subgroup scored only 56%
   proficient/advanced in 2004, dropping to 52% in 2005, far below the state’s 79%
   scoring proficient and advanced for this same subgroup. Their score increased to a
   71% in 2006, still below the 83% proficient/advanced state average.
Part II: 9-12 Academic
• The “Students with Disabilities” score was 61% proficient/advanced on the Algebra
   Gateway in 2004, dropping to 49% proficient/advanced in 2005.
• 75% of the “Students with Disabilities” subgroup were proficient/advanced on the
   2004 English II Gateways, which dropped to 73% proficient/advanced in 2005 for
   this same subgroup.
Grades 9-12 Reading AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
• African Amer 14% decrease
• White 1% decrease
• Economically Disadv 2% decrease

Grades 9-12 Reading AYP Sub-groups falling below 93% 2008 benchmark:
     African Amer 11% below
     Hispanic 23% below
     Econom Disadv 4% below
     SWD 13% below

Part IV: K-8 AYP
• The Maury Middle School subgroup “Students with Disabilities” were targeted for
   both Math and Reading in 2006.
• 2006-2007 the Maury Middle School subgroup “Students with Disabilities”
   made AYP.

Part IV: 9-12 AYP
• The 9-12 English Gateway/Writing “Students with Disabilities” subgroup failed to
   make AYP. This group made AYP in 2006.
• This group made AYP in 2007.

Part V: CTE
• The 2005 Perkins Report indicates that there is an uneven balance among the
   ethnic population with 96% of students enrolled in vocational technical education
   courses are white, with only 3% African-American, and less than 1% Hispanic or
   Asian.
• The 2006 Perkins Report indicates that there is still an uneven balance among the
   ethnic population, although there is a slight increase in ethnicity. The report
   indicates that 94.38% of students enrolled in vocational technical education courses
   are white, with only 3.42% African-American, and less than 1.71% Hispanic or
   Asian.
• The 2007 Perkins Report card indicates there is a smaller percentage of
   participation in CTE programs by the following subgroups as compared to the
   total secondary population:
 Special Populations       CTE Secondary      Total Secondary     Difference


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 76 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


 Students with Disabilities       37    2.60%        207    8.88%             6.29%
 Economically
 Disadvantaged                    62    4.35%        842   45.84%            41.49%
 Limited English                   5    0.35%          -         -                 -
 Proficiency



2006-2007 Technology
The utilization of technology has increased the number of computers and the
need for increase bandwidth, specifically in grades 6-12. Jefferson County High
School has 675 computers online, Jefferson Middle School has 157 computers
online, Maury Middle School has 157 computers online, Rush Strong School has
245 computers online, and White Pine School has 288 computers.

What evidence/sources support your response? State Report Card, Perkins Report
Card, TESS (Technology In Education Survey System)


Evaluation of Non-Academic Data- Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of your system based on the non-academic data?
Strengths
•  Good standing status NCLB
•  2006-2007 All Schools in “Good Standing”
•  100% SACs accredited schools
•  2006-2007 100% SACs accredited schools
•  79% core courses taught by highly qualified teachers (equal to the state’s
   percentage). The percentage will increase as a monthly highly qualified audit, and
   options to achieve highly qualified status have been dispersed to teachers through
   the district website and through their school administrators. 2006-2007 99.8% of
   Core Courses Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers
• The majority of teachers in our district (65%) have a degree beyond a Bachelor
   degree. (63% in 2006-2007 school year)
• Safe School Status
• K-8 attendance 94.4% better than state’s 93%
• K-8 promotion 97% at state average
• 9-12 cohort dropout 2% better than the state which is 10%
• Graduation rate at 94.6%, above state goal of 90%
Attendance (94.6 %), Promotion (97.6%), and Graduation Rate (89.6 %) are all
above the state averages.

An analysis of parent survey data indicated that parent perceptions were most
favorable (80% or higher in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:
My child’s teachers:
• are friendly and easy to talk to
• make learning interesting and relevant



                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 77 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


• motivate students to learn
• take an interest in students’ educational future
• are knowledgeable and understand their subject matter
• assign meaningful homework that helps students learn
My child’s school is effectively teaching students:
• the basic academic skills in reading
• the basic academic skills in mathematics
• to speak and write correctly in English
At my child's school:
• Staff in the principal’s office treat me with respect when I contact my child’s school
• School staff respond to my needs and concerns in a reasonable period of time
• My child is getting a good education at this school.

An analysis of teacher survey data indicated that teacher perceptions were most
favorable (80% or higher in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:
• Our school day is structured for maximum instructional use.
• Regular monitoring of student performance and demographics occurs.
• Assessment information is used to improve instruction.
• School policies support school goals.
• The school establishes high expectations for students.
• Students understand they are to treat each other respectfully.
• Most special needs students are integrated into other classes.
• Special needs students are given extra support in integrated classes.

An analysis of student survey data indicated that student perceptions were most
favorable (80% or higher in agreement) in their responses to questions concerning:
• I feel safe at school.
• I feel comfortable interacting with students in school.
• I put a lot of energy into my schoolwork.
• I have access to books and equipment that I need at school.
• My schoolwork is helping to prepare me for life after school.
• My parents/guardians always know whether or not I am at school.
• I get along with most of my teachers.
• I am able to understand most of the material covered in my class.
• I feel confident that I will be successful in school.

Needs
   •   The “Student with Disabilities” subgroup population is 15.6% which is above the
       national average of 13.4%, but below the state average of 15.9%. The 2006
       data for this subgroup is at %13.8 percent compared to 14.8% for the state
       average. The 2007 data for this subgroup is at %14.6 percent compared to
       15.4% for the state average.
   •   The “Economically Disadvantaged” subgroup population is 54.1% locally while
       the state’s population is 52.12%. The 2006 data for this subgroup dropped to
       53.4% percent which is still higher than the 52.9% state average. The 2007


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 78 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    data for this subgroup increase to 56.1% percent which is still higher than
    the 54.7% state average.
•   The 9-12 attendance rate is 93.3% in 2004, dropping to 92.2% in 2005, slightly
    below the state goal of 93%. The 2006 data for 9-12 attendance increased
    slightly 92.5% still lower than the 93% state average. The 2007 data for 9-12
    attendance decreased slightly 92.2% still lower than the 92.6% state
    average, which also had a slight decrease..
•   The Average Daily Attendance Per Pupil Expenditure for the district is $6,558
    below the State’s average of $7,366 and the National average of $9166. The
    Average Daily Membership Per Pupil Expenditure for the district is $6,241,
    below the state’s average of $6970, and also below the Nation average of
    $8,554. The 2006 district Per Pupil Expenditure is $6,669 below the state
    average of $7,469. The 2007 district Per Pupil Expenditure is $6,976 below
    the state average of $7,794.
•   The Hispanic student population has more than doubled from 61 in 2002 to 171
    in 2004. Additional resources must be focused on this growing population.
    The 2006 data for this subgroup increased again to 185 or 2.1% of the
    population. The 2007 data for this subgroup increased again to 236 or
    2.9% of the population.
•   The 2005 CTE Perkins Report card indicates the district scored a B in the
    following areas:
          1S1 : Academic Attainment (proficiency in Math, English and Writing Assessment and
          successfully pass exit exams (Gateway Exams) in Algebra I, English II, and Biology)
          2S1: Completion (met requirements to receive a high school diploma)
•   The 2006 data for CTE indicates that the district scored a B (94.15% ) in the
    area of 1S2: Skill Proficiencies. This was a decrease from the 2005 data of -
    2.50%. The 2007 CTE report card indicates improvement in these areas.
•   2006-2007 – The increase technology and Internet usage at the 6-12 grade
    levels indicate a need to expanded bandwidth through fiber optics.

•   The state’s content areas of science, math, and language arts K-12
    curriculum have been revised. Teaching and learning resources to
    support these curriculum changes will be created locally through
    technology integration training sessions and shared through the district
    website. Through these resources the district will address the following
    areas of need:
    EXPLORE – College Ready:
    Math College Ready = 17
    District Math Average = 14.78
    Reading College Ready = 15
    District Reading Average = 14.33
    Science College Read = 20
    District Science Average = 16.13
    Composite College Ready = 16
    District College Ready = 15.23

    Only 38% of 10th grade students would have a projected composite score


             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 79 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


      of a 21 on the ACT based on their 2007 ACT Plan score.


An analysis of parent survey data indicated that there were no areas in which parent
perceptions were least favorable (60% or higher in disagreement).

An analysis of teacher survey data indicated that there were no areas in which teacher
perceptions were least favorable (60% or higher in disagreement).

An analysis of student survey data indicated that there were no areas in which student
perceptions were least favorable (60% or higher in disagreement). Fifty-nine percent
of students did disagree or strongly disagree with the statement, “I help decide the
rules at my school.”

What evidence/sources support your response? State Report Card, Parent Survey,
Teacher Survey, Student Survey



Evaluation of the System’s Current Approach in Meeting the Needs of
All Students - Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of your system in meeting the needs of all students?

Strengths
Progress monitoring in reading/language arts
Establishment of benchmarks for K-8 reading/language arts
Utilization of researched-based best practices
Research-based programs and instructional strategies
Integration of technology used to support curriculum in all core content areas
Ongoing professional development in balanced literacy and technology-based projects
Teacher-created resources hosted on district website
Literacy coaches in all K-5 schools
2006 - Implementation of inclusion language arts and math classes to meet the needs
of middle school Students with Disabilities subgroup, specifically at Maury Middle
School, which was targeted in 2006 for this population in these content areas.

Implementation of Project AIM (Approaching Individual Mastery) at Maury Middle
School to increase proficiency for Students with Disabilities subgroup.
The components of the project are:
- before and after school tutoring
- parental involvement
- professional development
- scientific research-based materials and training (Language ! and Transitional
Mathematics or TransMath)

2006- Provide progress monitoring through ThinkLink for Maury Middle School



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 80 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


2006 CTE- 1S1 Core Indicator; 2S1: Completion; 3S1: Placement; 4S1: Participation
Non-Traditional and 4S2: Completion Non-Traditional all received a score of A on the
2006 Report Card

2007 Stenghts

•  2006-2007 All Schools in “Good Standing”
•  2006-2007 100% SACs accredited schools
•  2006-2007 CTE Report Card Score of an A: 1S1: Academic Attainment, 1S2:
   Skill Proficiencies, 2S1: Completion, 3S1: Placement, 4S1: Participation Non-
   Traditional, 4S2: Completion Non-Traditional
• 2006-2007 99.8% of Core Courses Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers
• The majority of teachers in our district (65%) have a degree beyond a Bachelor
   degree. (63% in 2006-2007 school year)
• Attendance (94.6 %), Promotion (97.6%), and Graduation Rate (89.6 %) are all
   above the state averages.
• The 2007 11th Grade Writing Assessment score(4.16) was above the predicted
   value added score of 3.93.
2007 Elementary Math AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
• African Amer. 4% increase.
• Hispanic 13% increase
• Economically disadvantaged 3% increase
• Students with Disabilities 4% increase
• Limited English Proficient 19% increase

2007 Math SWD with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades 7 and 8

Math Grades 9-12 AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
      African Amer 14% increase
      Students with Disabilities 13% increase

2007 Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts:
Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
      African Amer. 8% increase.
      Asian/Pacific Islander 4% increase
      Hispanic 15% increase
      Economically disadvantaged 4% increase
      Students with Disabilities 9% increase
      Limited English Proficient 23% increase

2007 Reading/Language Arts SWD with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades5, 6, 7, 8
and 10

Grades 9-12 Reading/Language Arts AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 81 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



      Students with Disabilities 13% increase

Parent Survey – 83% indicate their child is learning the basic academic skills in
reading. 65% give the school system an A or B for the quality of their school.
Student Survey – 84% report that they put a lot of energy into my schoolwork and
feel confident that I will be successful in school.
Teacher Survey – 74% indicate results of assessment are used to improve
instruction and 88% feel most special needs students are integrated into other
classes.
Teacher Induction Survey reveals 59% felt their mentor teacher had been their
greatest advocate this year.

Needs
Improve the S-team process
Literacy coach for grades 6-8
Progress monitoring for all students in all core content areas
Writing instruction grades 9-12
Align curriculum and instructional practices
Implement scientifically-based reading/language arts program for grades 6-12
Improving resources for ELL student population
Provide a rigorous math program for PreK-12
Strengthen student performance in subgroups identified as below proficient
Increase pupil expenditure through involvement of all stakeholders
Improve math and reading/language arts achievement for the “Hispanic” subgroup
2006 – Improve proficiency levels for Students with Disabilities subgroup at Maury
Middle School in the areas of reading/language and math
2006- Increase bandwidth at all 6-12 schools
2006 – Improve inclusion class offerings and teacher training at all 6-12 schools to
increase proficiency for Students with Disabilities subgroup
The 2006 data for CTE indicates that the district scored a B (94.15%) in the area of
1S2: Skill Proficiencies. This was a decrease from the 2005 data of -2.50%.

2007 NEEDS
2006-2007 Develop RTI plan to identify at-risk students and provide intervention
strategies, resources, and support personnel for classroom teachers.
• The 2007 data for this subgroup increase to 56.1% percent which is still higher
   than the 54.7% state average.
• The 2007 data for 9-12 attendance decreased slightly 92.2% still lower than the
   92.6% state average, which also had a slight decrease.
• The 2007 district Per Pupil Expenditure is $6,976 below the state average of
   $7,794.
• The 2007 data for the Hispanc subgroup increased again to 236 or 2.9% of the
   population.
• The 2007 CTE report card indicates improvement in these areas.
• 2006-2007 – The increase technology and Internet usage at the 6-12 grade



                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 82 of 245
                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   levels indicate a need to expanded bandwidth through fiber optics.
• 2006-2007 Develop RTI plan to identify at-risk students and provide
   intervention strategies, resources, and support personnel for classroom
   teachers.
• The 2007 Gateway biology 3-year observed score was 538.5, which was again
   below the predicted value added score of 533.6.
• The 2007 Growth Standard dropped slightly for grade 8 Language Arts, but
   was still 4.6.
• The 2007 Growth Standard dropped slightly for Math, grade 4, but was still 1.6.
• The 2007 Growth Standard for Science dropped in grades 4, 5, and 7 but was
   still a positive score.
• The 2007 Growth Standard for Social Studies dropped for grades 5 (-0.2) and 8
   (-0.7).
2007 Elementary Math AYP All sub-groups below state averages:
       Hispanic 2% below
       White 1% below

2007 Elementary Math AYP Sub-groups falling below 86% 2008 benchmark:
      African Amer 3% below
      Hispanic 2% below
      SWD 14% below
      LEP 7% below

2007 Math SWD with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3, 4, 5, and 6

Math Grades 9-12 AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
      White 3% decrease
      Economically Disadv 7% decrease

Math Grades 9-12 AYP sub-groups below state averages:
      Hispanic 9% below
      LEP 7% below

Math Grades 9-12 AYP Sub-groups falling below 83% 2008 benchmark:
      Hispanic 11% below
      LEP 7% below
Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts AYP sub-groups below state averages:
      Hispanic 2% below
      Economically Disadv 4% below
      Students with Disabilities 1% below

Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008
benchmark:
     African Amer 2% below
     Hispanic 9% below
     SWD 18% below


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 83 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


        LEP 3% below

2007 Reading/Language Arts SWD with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3 and 4

AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
     African Amer 14% decrease
     White 1% decrease
     Economically Disadv 2% decrease

AYP All sub-groups below state averages:
     African Amer 4% below
     Hispanic 16% below

AYP Sub-groups falling below 93% 2008 benchmark:
      African Amer 11% below
      Hispanic 23% below
      Econom Disadv 4% below
      SWD 13% below
Parent Survey – 22% did not feel their child was developing good study and work
habits.
Student Survey – 64% do not feel they help to decide rules for our school and
44% report they do not do a lot of extra reading for my own benefit.
Teacher Survey – 39% do not feel that they work in teams assuming
responsibilities for the same students.
Teacher Induction Survey reveals 48% felt the district needed to provide more
intervention strategies

    •   The state’s content areas of science, math, and language arts K-12
        curriculum have been revised. Teaching and learning resources to support
        these curriculum changes will be created locally through technology
        integration training sessions and shared through the district website.
        Through these resources the district will address the following areas of
        need:
        EXPLORE – College Ready:
        Math College Ready = 17
        District Math Average = 14.78
        Reading College Ready = 15
        District Reading Average = 14.33
        Science College Read = 20
        District Science Average = 16.13
        Composite College Ready = 16
        District College Ready = 15.23

        Only 38% of 10th grade students would have a projected composite score of
        a 21 on the ACT based on their 2007 ACT Plan score.
•   In 2007 Jefferson County High School made AYP for Graduation rate by only


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 84 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   0.5 of a percentage point. The 2006 graduation rate fell from 94.1% to 89.2% in
   2007.

What evidence/sources support your response? State Report card, Perkins Report
Card, Stakeholder Survey, Teacher Survey, Student Survey, TESS (Technology
Educational Survey System)

Evaluation of the Prioritized Goals - Narrative Response Required
What are your data driven prioritized goals?
Based on an analysis and synthesis of all of our system’s data:

Ensure individual student achievement toward excellence
Aggregated data indicates:
   The Biology Gateways proficient/advanced percentage in 2003 was an
   impressive 99%, but dropped to 95% in 2004. The score increased to 96.9%
   proficient/advanced in 2006. Gateway Biology students scored below the
   predicted value added score. There was no discernable difference in the
   Gateway Biology value added predicted score for 2006. The observed
   score was 532.2 with a predicted value added score of 537.6. The 3-year
   average observed score was 529.6, which was below the predicted value
   added score of 534.5. The 2006 Gateway biology 3-year observed score
   was 533.3, which was again below the predicted value added score of 536.2.
   The 2007 Gateway biology 3-year observed score was 538.5, which was
   again below the predicted value added score of 533.6.
   Reading/Language Arts: In Grade 7 the growth standard for the 2002-2003
   school year was -.1. In 2003-2004 the growth standard was -1.3 while in
   2004-2005 it increased again to -.2. The 3 year average was -.5 measured
   slightly lower than the growth standard goal of 0. The 2006 growth standard
   for grade 7 increased to 0.7. Grade 4 had a drop in growth standard (from
   3.3 in 05 to -2.3 in 06), however their 3 year gain still averaged above the
   growth standard. The 2007 Growth Standard dropped slightly for grade 8,
   but was still 4.6.
   Math: In grade 6 the growth standard was -3.0 for the 2002-2003 school
   year. The growth standard moved to -.8 in 2003-2004 and to 2.2 in 2004-
   2005. The 3-year average was -.5 compared to state standard of 0. The
   2007 Growth Standard dropped slightly for grade 4, but was still 1.6.
   Science: The growth standard for Grade 5 in 2002-2003 was -3.5. In 2003-
   2004 it increased to +.6 and showed another positive gain in 2004-2005 to
   +2.1. The 3 year average was -.3 compared to state standard of 0. Grade
   6’s 2002-2003 growth standard was -1.3, and rose slightly in 2003-2004 to
   the state standard of 0, yet declined slightly in 2004-2005 to -.1 3. The
   Science 3-year growth standard average was -.5, slightly below the state
   standard of 0. The 2007 Growth Standard dropped in grades 4, 5, and 7 but
   was still a positive score.
   Social Studies: The growth standard for grade 8 during the 2002-2003


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 85 of 245
                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   school year was -3.5 yet improved in 2003-2004 to -.1. It increased in 2004-
   2005 to 3.2 3. The 3-year growth standard average -.2 slightly off the state
   standard of 0. The 2007 Growth Standard dropped for grades 5 (-0.2) and 8
   (-0.7).
   The 11th Grade Writing Assessment score was below the predicted value
   added score of 3.9. The 11th graders only scored 3.8 for the 3-year average.
   The 2007 11th Grade Writing Assessment score(4.16) was above the
   predicted value added score of 3.93.

Disaggregated Data indicates:
• Reading/Language Academic Score of a C, compared to the state’s score of
   a B.
• Math: The “Hispanic” subgroup had 51% proficient/advanced in 2004,
   dropping to 50% in 2005, far below the state average of 71% proficient and
   advanced. The “Limited English Proficient” subgroup scored 50% at
   proficient/advanced in 2004, dropping to 47% in 2005, far below the state’s
   70% scoring proficient and advanced.
• In Reading/Language Arts, the “Hispanic” subgroup scored only 56%
   proficient/advanced in 2004, dropping to 52% in 2005, far below the state’s
   79% scoring proficient and advanced for this same subgroup.
• The “Students with Disabilities” score was 61% proficient/advanced on the
   Algebra Gateway in 2004, dropping to 49% proficient/advanced in 2005.
• 75% of the “Students with Disabilities” subgroup were proficient/advanced
   on the 2004 English II Gateways, which dropped to 73% proficient/advanced
   in 2005 for this same subgroup.
• The 9-12 English Gateway/Writing “Students with Disabilities” subgroup
   failed to make AYP.
• 2006 Maury Middle School’s “Students with Disabilities” subgroup failed to
   make AYP in the area of Reading/Language Arts and Math.

Improve transition between middle and high school in core areas
   The data from the Report Card indicates a need to strengthen the 6-8
   program in the areas of reading and math for the general population. The
   grade 6-8 students countywide funnel into one high school in our district
   thus the need to work together to strengthen the 6-8 program and improve
   this transition.
          o Reading/Language Arts: In Grade 7 the growth standard for the
             2002-2003 school year was -.1. In 2003-2004 the growth standard
             was -1.3 while in 2004-2005 it increased again to -.2. The 3 year
             average was -.5 measured slightly lower than the growth standard
             goal of 0.
          o Math: In grade 6 the growth standard was -3.0 for the 2002-2003
             school year. The growth standard moved to -.8 in 2003-2004 and
             to 2.2 in 2004-2005. The 3-year average was -.5 compared to state
             standard of 0.



               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 86 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



Provide equal educational opportunities for students
The Report Card shows that Jefferson County School district lags behind the
state in per pupil ADM and ADA funding.
             2005                              System    State   National

             Per Pupil Expenditures per Funded
                                               $6,241    $6,970 $8,554
             ADM
             Per Pupil Expenditures per ADA    $6,558    $7,366 $9,102

                         Funding:

                         Local %               26.8%     42.1%
                         Federal %             12.3%     12.1%

                         State %               60.9%     45.7%




The district’ low ADM and ADA prevents students in Jefferson County from
having the same educational opportunities as districts that provide funding at a
higher rate. Students do not have equal access to materials, textbooks, and
the district is not able to attract the best teachers due to low teacher salary.
These factors impact student performance as indicated in the following graph:
Funding                       Maryville Oak          Jefferson
Comparison           STATE City         Ridge Alcoa County
ADA per pupil
expenditure          $6,970 $8,458 $9,943 $8,980 $6,558
TVAAS scores
Funding                       Maryville Oak         Jefferson
Comparison           STATE City         Ridge Alcoa County
Reading/Language B            A         A      A    B
Math                 A        A         A      A    B
Science              A        A         A      A    B
Social Studies       B        A         A      A    A


2007-2008 Prioritized Goals:
         • Goal 1: Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic
            Achievement Score 2 NCE points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of
            economically disadvantaged, African American, Students with
            Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage proficient/advanced by 4%.
         • Goal 2: Increase Math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic
            Achievement Score 2 NCE points and provide collaboration of
            middle and high school core content teachers by 50% over the
            previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill
            acquisition resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 87 of 245
                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


            Gateway tests.
        •   Goal 3: Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2% each
            year for the next 4 years.
        •   Goal 4: Increase Technology integration to support state
            curriculum performance indicators. Integration will be focused on
            increasing student achievement on ACT Explore to College Ready
            status in the math, reading, and science subject areas.

Based on:
2007 Elementary Math AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
      African Amer. 4% increase.
      Hispanic 13% increase
      Economically disadvantaged 3% increase
      Students with Disabilities 4% increase
      Limited English Proficient 19% increase

2007 Elementary Math AYP All sub-groups below state averages:
      Hispanic 2% below
      White 1% below

2007 Elementary Math AYP Sub-groups falling below 86% 2008 benchmark:
      African Amer 3% below
      Hispanic 2% below
      SWD 14% below
      LEP 7% below

MATH 2007 SpEd Report Card

2007 Math SWD with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades 7 and 8
2007 Math SWD with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3, 4, 5, and 6

Math Grades 9-12 AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
      African Amer 14% increase
      Students with Disabilities 13% increase

Math Grades 9-12 AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
      White 3% decrease
      Economically Disadv 7% decrease

Math Grades 9-12 AYP sub-groups below state averages:
      Hispanic 9% below
      LEP 7% below

Math Grades 9-12 AYP Sub-groups falling below 83% 2008 benchmark:



               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 88 of 245
                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


     Hispanic 11% below
     LEP 7% below

2007 Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts:
Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
      African Amer. 8% increase.
      Asian/Pacific Islander 4% increase
      Hispanic 15% increase
      Economically disadvantaged 4% increase
      Students with Disabilities 9% increase
      Limited English Proficient 23% increase

Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts AYP sub-groups below state averages:
     Hispanic 2% below
     Economically Disadv 4% below
     Students with Disabilities 1% below

Grade 3-8 Reading/Language Arts AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008
benchmark:
     African Amer 2% below
     Hispanic 9% below
     SWD 18% below
     LEP 3% below

Reading/Language 2007 SpEd Report Card

2007 Reading/Language Arts SWD with IEPs Achievement Gains: Grades5, 6,
7, 8 and 10
2007 Reading/Language Arts SWD with IEPs Achievement Drop: Grades 3 and
4

Grades 9-12 Reading/Language Arts AYP Improved Sub-Groups over 1 year:
     Students with Disabilities 13% increase

AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
     African Amer 14% decrease
     White 1% decrease
     Economically Disadv 2% decrease

AYP All sub-groups below state averages:
     African Amer 4% below
     Hispanic 16% below

AYP Sub-groups falling below 93% 2008 benchmark:


              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 89 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


        African Amer 11% below
        Hispanic 23% below
        Econom Disadv 4% below
        SWD 13% below

    •   The state’s content areas of science, math, and language arts K-12
        curriculum have been revised. Teaching and learning resources to
        support these curriculum changes will be created locally through
        technology integration training sessions and shared through the district
        website. Through these resources the district will address the following
        areas of need:
        EXPLORE – College Ready:
        Math College Ready = 17
        District Math Average = 14.78
        Reading College Ready = 15
        District Reading Average = 14.33
        Science College Read = 20
        District Science Average = 16.13
        Composite College Ready = 16
        District College Ready = 15.23

        Only 38% of 10th grade students would have a projected composite score
        of a 21 on the ACT based on their 2007 ACT Plan score.
•   In 2007 Jefferson County High School made AYP for Graduation rate by only
    0.5 of a percentage point. The 2006 graduation rate fell from 94.1% to 89.2%
    in 2007.




                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 90 of 245
            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                     COMPONENT 4


          CURRICULAR, INSTRUCTIONAL,
               ASSESSMENT, AND
         ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 91 of 245
                                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1a

                                                                          CURRICULAR PRACTICES
              Use state             Use the TN          Review             Textbook Driven     Balanced PK-5      Character          Spiraled Hands-    Technology              Wellness Program
              curriculum            Department of       established        Instruction used    Literacy           Counts DARE,       On Math            Integration
              standards and         Education state     system-wide        as a resource       Balanced           and Safety         Manipulative
              competency            approved            student            to support the      Literacy PK-12     Curriculum         Program
              profiles for CTE.     standards,          achievement        System’s
                                    BluePrint for       benchmarks         Scope and           Project LEAD                          Hands-on
Current                             Learning and        to guide           Sequence.           with Read 180                         Social Studies
Curricular                          Gateway             curriculum                             for intervention                      programs
Practices                           Objectives          implementatio                          needs
                                    (including SPIs)    n and to be
                                    & provide           used with as                           Reading and
                                    training to staff   formative                              Writing in the
                                    for use             assessment                             CTE and the
                                                                                               content areas

              Teachers are          Give all teachers   Use DIBELS         Instructional       Use 5 core areas   Use in all         Provide            Provide technology      State-mandated
              provided with         a copy of the       and Reading        calendar is         in all PreK-5      schools as a       materials and      training during the     90 minutes of
              curriculum            BluePrint for       End of Unit        based on            grades Added 6-    classroom          use program in     school day and          physical activity
              standards and         Learning and the    Assessments        textbook            8 in Language      supplement and     all K-12 schools   after school            per week
              competency            TN State            for K-5            sequence            Arts               as the base        that support the   through grant           implemented in all
              profiles for each     Curriculum                                                                    program            implementation     funding and Title II,   classrooms PK-12
              of their respective   Standards at        Use Math End       New Scope and       Ensure 2 ½         presented by the   of the state       Part D
              courses.              annual teacher      of Unit            Sequence            hours              guidance           standards in       appropriations          The SPARKS
                                    intake meetings     Assessments        reflects            uninterrupted      department K-5     instruction.                               Curriculum was
              Instructors must      and post both on    for K-5            textbook            language                                                 Develop computer        purchased for all
              report                the school                             resources to        instruction each   Guidance           Classroom          based resources to      K-5 PE teachers.
              competencies          system's website    Use Brigance       support             day                counselors         calculator use     use with current
Evidence of   attained by each                          Assessments        curriculum                             promote our No-    for all high       curriculum, to          Dynamic
Practice      student on-line at    Teach teachers      for entrance       objectives          Literacy coach     Bullying program   school math        include:                curriculum was
              state web site.       how to develop      and exit tests                         model lessons      through the use    classrooms         Math Online             created in
                                    standards-based     in Preschool       Textbook            and collaborate    of Character                          Science Online          collaboration with
              Professional          lessons             and                adoptions are       with PLC’s at K-   Counts program     A needs            Social Studies          the content areas
              Development is                            Kindergarten       current for all     5                  in K-5 schools     assessment         Online Projects         for health
              provided to assist    Provide             classes            grade levels                                              was completed                              education. These
              all teachers with     curriculum                             and are             Training           DARE is offered    of all social      Implement               resources are
                                                                                                                          th
              using technology      training for all    Utilize writing    correlated with     provided by        to all 6 graders   studies            technology into the     available for
              and best              incoming            assessment         the state           Reading                               classrooms to      classroom by            teacher to access
                                                                                                                   th
              practices to          teachers            rubric across      standards.          Specialist in      5 grade            determine need     utilizing web based     online.
              implement all                             all content                            Big Blocks 6-8     students attend    Classrooms         resources identified
              course standards.     Annually            areas; writing                         LA and             a DARE day at      were provided      on the school
                                    implement           samples are                            monitoring         the Smokey’s       maps and           system's website




                                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 92 of 245
                                                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


An interest survey   Research-based     self scored by                   middle school       game to promote    globes to assist
was given to         Professional       teachers in                      teacher             the program for    in                 Use Accelerated
students resulting   Development        every content                    classroom           the next year      implementation     Reader
in the addition of   Projects that      area                             practice                               of the new
new CTE class        integrate state                                     Surveys             SRO officers       social studies     Technology
offerings            standards into     Use                              completed by        offer a positive   adoption           integration takes
                     technology         technology                       teachers            law enforcement                       place in
                                        programs                         regarding           role model                            classrooms
23 Instructors.      Use pacing         Plato for                        implementation      placed in every                       throughout
Students Served      guides with all    grades 9-12                      practices           middle school                         Jefferson County
in 2006-07: 2,284    Gateway            and Orchard                                          and high school                       as evidenced by:
(61% of student      classes.           for grades K-8                   Teachers have       program. The                          utilization of the
body)                Use system-wide    to monitor                       shared and          SRO officer                           computer labs in
                     curriculum teams   student                          given feedback      serves to                             all schools,
Five active          to develop K-5     progress                         to RS in            enhance drug                          classroom
CTSOs.               scope &                                             continued           awareness and                         instruction, and
                     sequence for                                        training blocks     assists                               technology
Growing chapter      language arts,     Updated LA                                           administrators                        training.
of National          science and        benchmarks                       Professional        and counselors
Technical Honor      social studies     to reflect new                   Development         in addressing                         Labs are full (25-
Society.                                adoption                         books for all 6-    behavior and                          30) on a regular
                     Document           materials.                       8 LA teachers       self-esteem                           basis with a
                                                                              th
                     utilization of     Benchmark                        and 5 grade         issues.                               combination of
                     state curriculum   assessments                      teachers.                                                 teacher lead and
                     by using           are                                                  Suicide                               teacher directed
                     Snapshot           distributed                      Provided all        prevention                            activities.
                     Observations       annually and                     teachers K-5        training was
                     and State          are                              with the            provided for all                      Technology in-
                     Evaluations        maintained                       appropriate         teachers in                           service classes
                                        on the                           level               system.                               are offered once a
                     New Teacher        system’s                         professional                                              week during the
                     Induction          website for                      guidelines for                                            school year and
                     program            all                              4-Blocks                                                  there are in-
                     spends two 2-      stakeholders                     framework.                                                service
                     hour sessions      to access.                                                                                 opportunities
                     reviewing the                                       The lowest 10%                                            offered in the
                     state              6-8 middle                       of our students                                           summer. During
                     curriculum and     school math                      identified as                                             the 2007-08
                     local scope and    teachers                         below-                                                    school year, there
                     sequence of        worked with                      proficient in                                             have been 437
                     content areas.     high school                      reading                                                   teacher contact
                     Teachers use       teachers to                      attending our                                             classes for a total
                     the computer       develop a                        middle and                                                of 1098 contact
                                                                                        th
                     lab to access      math scope                       high school 9                                             hours of
                     curriculum and     and                              grade                                                     technology
                     curriculum         sequence                         participate in                                            instruction.
                     resources          with                             the Read 180
                     provided           curricular                       curriculum                                                In addition 43
                     through our        transitions                                                                                classroom
                     technology         and                              Training was                                              teachers have




                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 93 of 245
                                                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                  projects locally.   benchmark                        provided for all                                 each spent three
                                                      assessments                      teachers in                                      days at the
                                  Snapshot walk-                                       Reading in the                                   technology center
                                  though                                               Content Areas                                    engaged in
                                  evaluations are                                      and CTE grades                                   producing
                                  completed                                            9-12                                             classroom
                                  every grading                                                                                         resource for
                                  period by                                            Write away                                       county-wide use.
                                  principals and                                       Days are held
                                  use is                                               every month                                      A Dynamic
                                  documented.                                          district-wide for                                Curriculum was
                                  Snapshots                                            3-12                                             been developed
                                  focus on                                                                                              for all core
                                  utilization of                                                                                        content areas.
                                  the state                                                                                             These resources
                                  standards to                                                                                          were developed
                                  direct                                                                                                by classroom
                                  instruction.                                                                                          teachers and are
                                                                                                                                        made available to
                                  Parents receive                                                                                       all teachers at our
                                  copies of the                                                                                         system website.
                                  state approved
                                  curriculum                                                                                             Teachers also
                                  standards and                                                                                         receive
                                  all are linked at                                                                                     instruction in
                                  the system’s                                                                                          technology skills
                                  website by                                                                                            to produce the
                                  grade level or                                                                                        resources that
                                  content area.                                                                                         engage students
                                                                                                                                        in active learning.

                                                                                                                                        Think Link was
                                                                                                                                        added for 6-8
                                                                                                                                        students as a
                                                                                                                                        benchmark
                                                                                                                                        assessment
                                                                                                                                        program.
                      Yes         Yes                 Yes            Yes               Yes                 Yes         Yes              Yes                   Yes
Is the current
practice research-
based?

Is it a principle &   Yes         Yes                 Yes            No                Yes                 Yes         Yes              Yes                   Yes
practice of high-
performing school                                                    Yes, when used                                                     No -AR
systems?                                                             as a resource.
Has the current       Effective   Effective           Effective      Ineffective       Effective           Effective   The current      Effective             In progress
practice been                                                        In progress of                                    methodology is
effective or                                                         becoming          In progress                     ineffective      Ineffective-AR as
ineffective?                                                         effective as a                                                     implemented




                                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 94 of 245
                                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                               resource               Other schools                         Practices are
                                                                               material.              report great                          effective in
                                                                                                      success                               math, but
                                                                                                                                            improvements
                                                                                                                                            are still needed
                                                                                                                                            for future
                                                                                                                                            initiatives
                    Competency           TCAP                 Writing          TCAP                   TVAAS scores       Report Card        Math                 Number of hits on       Baseline data has
                    attainment           Achievement          assessment       Achievement            on the Report      suspensions        achievement          school system's         been gathered
                    reports; Perkins     and Writing          scores           and Writing            Card                                  scores               website                 from all
                    report card for      Assessment                            Assessment                                Horizon                                                         elementary,
                    local system;        Data; Gateway        Test results     Data; Gateway                             database of        Social Studies       Teacher                 middle and high
What data
                    IEP’s; graduation    scores in English    from all data    scores in English      SRI’s will be      student behavior   achievement          attendance at           wellness students
source(s) do you
                    rate; Follow-up      10, Biology, and     sources          10, Biology, and       administered to    logs               scores               technology training     to record BMI’s.
have that support
                    report each          Algebra I;                            Algebra I;             students                                                                           Middle school
your answer?
                    spring of previous   Graduation Rate;                      Graduation Rate;       participating in   STAR database                           Student surveys         surveys were
(identify all
                    year’s               IEP’s; High                           IEP’s                  the Read 180       of student                                                      given regarding
applicable
                    concentrators.       Quality                                                      program.           behavior logs                           Technology in           risk behaviors.
sources)
                                         Professional                          System-wide                                                                       Education Survey        This baseline data
                                         Development                           Write Away                                                                        System (TESS)           will used to
                                         Annual Surveys                        Days                                                                                                      determine
                                                                                                                                                                                         effectiveness of
                                                                                                                                                                                         our programs.
                    Perkins report       Jefferson County     All grade        Increased math         Increased          Limited number     Math                 End of the Year         Brand new
                    card for local       State Report         levels have      and science            TVAAS score in     of student         achievement          Technology              program. No data
                    system shows an      Card 2004-05         benchmark        scores with the        reading on 2005    suspensions and    scores were          Surveys indicate        at this time.
                    academic             reflects gains in    assessments      implementation         Report Card        disciplinary       below the state      high interest of
                    attainment rate      K-8 criterion                         of curriculum          from D to B        referrals          average on the       teachers and
                    higher than the      referenced           Scores on        mapping and                                                  1999 Report          students.
                    state average.       achievement in       2007             standards based        Reading 3-8        2007               Card, prior to
                                         all content areas.   Report Card      instruction and        AYP Scores         Suspensions        implementation       All subgroups in
                    Academic                                  based on 3-      system-wide            Improved Sub-      decreased from     of this initiative   the schools that are
                    Attainment in        Economically         year CRT         distribution of the    Groups over 1      2006 by 53                              currently using AR
                    Mathematics for      disadvantaged        TCAP were        BluePrint for          year were:         students which     2005 CRT             scored below the
                    the System’s         P/A in math and      B’s in all 4     Learning               African            was a 3.9%         scores for Math      state in P/A for
Evidence of         Career Technical     reading/             content areas                           American           decrease.          are above the        Reading/Language
effectiveness or    area was at a 98%    language was         grades 3-8,      Scores on 2007         showed a 8%        Expulsions         state average        and writing for its 2
ineffectiveness     Performance          higher than the      which            Report Card            increase.          decreased from                          year average
                    Level.               state %.             showed           based on 3-year        Asian/Pacific      2006 to 2007 by
                                                              improvement      CRT TCAP were          Islander           4 which was        Academic grade       In tracking the
                    Academic             Gateway              in science       B’s in all 4           showed a 4%        NDD by             in math              hits on our school
                    Attainment in        Algebra and          and social       content areas          increase           percentage.        increased from a     system’s website
                    Reading/LA for       English II           studies.         grades 3-8,            Hispanic                              C to a B from        from July 1, 2007
                    the System’s         Advanced %           TCAP writing     which showed           showed a 15%                          2004-2005            to date there has
                                                                        th
                    Career Technical     was higher than      in both 5        improvement in         increase                                                   been 508,923 hits
                                                                    th
                    area was at a        the state and %      and 8 and        science and            Economically                          Gateway scores       from the
                                                                 th
                    93.9%                Proficient in        11 were A’s.     social studies.        disadvantaged                         in algebra P/A %     surrounding area.
                    Performance          Biology I and        ACT scores       TCAP writing in        showed a 4%                           is 84.6 which is
                                                                                      th     th
                    Level.               English II was       for 9-12 were    both 5 and 8           increase                              above the state      Increase in the
                                                                                       th
                                         higher than the      slightly         and 11 were            Students with                         %                    number of




                                                                                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 95 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


We exceeded the      state.              below the         A’s. ACT           Disabilities                                    teachers in the
state performance                        Value-added       scores for 9-12    showed a 9%                  Math Value         technology
on every indicator   EOC in Math         scores were       were slightly      increase                     Added              project from 21 to
with the exception   Foundations         all A’s in the    below the          Limited English              Grades K-8         43.
of Completion        Advanced %          4 content         Value-added        Proficient                   Growth: Math in
Non-Traditional      was higher than     areas grade       scores were all    showed a 23%                 2006 was an A      Increase in the
                     the state.          3-8. Gateway      A’s in the 4       increase but                 at a 1.7 gain      integration of
                                         scores were       content areas      AYP sub-                     and in 2007 was    technology for
                     US History %        all equal or      grade 3-8.         groups scoring               an A with a 2.8    lesson plans used
                     Proficient was      above the         Gateway scores     below state                  gain. Math AYP     in the computer
                     higher than the     state’s           were all equal     averages were:               Improved Sub-      labs.
                     state.              predicted         or above the       Hispanic at 2%               Groups over 1
                                         scores with       state’s            below                        year were:         Forty additional
                     AA, ED and          the exception     predicted          Economically                 African            teachers created
                     SWD                 of Physical       scores with the    Disadvat 4%                  Americans          classroom web
                     populations on      Science.          exception of       below                        had a 4%           pages this year.
                     Gateway                               Physical           Students with                increase.
                     Algebra %           ACT scores        Science.           Disabilities at              Hispanic had a     Introduction of
                     Advanced 2 year     were either                          1% below                     13% increase       new integration
                     average             equal or          ACT scores         Reading                      Economically       technologies have
                     outperformed the    above the         were either        Achievement in               disadvantaged      shown a 20%
                     state.              state’s           equal or above     Language Arts                3% increase        increase in class
                                         predicted         the state’s        was: 3 NCE                   Students with      registration over
                     Every subgroup      scores with       predicted          points away                  Disabilities had   commonly used
                     outperformed the    the exception     scores with the    from an A, but               a 4% increase      practices.
                     state in % P/A in   of Math.          exception of       showed a                     Limited English
                     the 2 year          Value-Added       Math. Value-       2 point increase             Proficient
                                                  th
                     average for the     TCAP 11           Added TCAP         over 1 year                  students had a
                                                             th
                     Writing and         grade writing     11 grade                                        19% increase.
                     Gateway English     scores were       writing scores     Value Added                  Math: was 1
                     tests.              also above        were also          Reading/Langu                point away
                                         the state’s       above the          age Arts                     from an A in
                     K-8 TVAAS           predicted         state’s            Grades 3-8                   Achievement
                     scores have had     score.            predicted          (3 year average)             which was a
                     positive gains                        score.             was an A in                  2 NCE point
                     from 2004 to        All AYP                              2006 with a 1.6              increase in
                     2005 school         Benchmarks        All AYP            gain, but in                 math over 1
                     years.              were met or       Benchmarks         2007 our gain                year period
                                         exceeded.         were met or        was 2.8.                     2007
                     Scores on 2007                        exceeded.
                     Report Card                                              Achievement                  Math SpEd with
                     based on 3-year                                          Grades 5 was a               IEPs
                     CRT TCAP were                                            4.1 and for                  Achievement
                     B’s in all 4                                             grade 8 was a                Dropped in
                     content areas                                            4.3 for TCAP                 Grades 3, 4, 5,
                     grades 3-8,                                              Writing which                and 6 but
                     which showed                                             was an A.                    Math SpEd with
                     improvement in                                                                        IEPs
                     science and                                                                           Achievement
                     social studies.                                          Value Added                  showed gains




                                                                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 96 of 245
                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


TCAP writing in                    Reading/Langu               in Grades 7
       th     th
both 5 and 8                       age Arts                    and 8
        th
and 11 were                        Grades 9-12
A’s. ACT                           Gateway / End
                                                               Math 9-12
scores for 9-12                    of Course
                                                               Gateway/EOC
were slightly                      scores were;
                                                               3-year average
below the                          English (Eng II)
                                                               scores: (Alg I)
Value-added                        was 532 which
                                                               was 546.2,
scores were all                    was above the
                                                               which was
A’s in the 4                       predicted
                                                               above the
content areas                      score;
                                                               predicted
grade 3-8.                         English I was
                                                               score.
                                   519.4, which
                                                               Math
Gateway scores                     was also above
                                                               Foundations
were all equal                     the predicted
                                                               was 532.7,
or above the                       score
                                                               which was
state’s
                                                               above the
predicted                          ACT in English
                                                               predicted
scores with the                    was a
                                                               score. Math
exception of                       composite
                                                               Improved Sub-
Physical                           score of 20.4,
                                                               Groups over 1
Science.                           which was
                                                               year: African
                                   above our
                                                               American had a
ACT scores                         predicted
                                                               14% increase
were either                        score.
                                                               Students with
equal or above
                                         th                    Disabilities 13%
the state’s                        The 11 Grade
                                                               increase
predicted                          writing
                                                               AYP
scores with the                    assessment
                                                               Academic ACT
exception of                       score was 4.16,
                                                               Achievement
Math. Value-                       which was also
                                                               Grades 9-12:
Added TCAP                         above our
  th                                                           ACT - 3 - Year
11 grade                           predicted
                                                               Averages has
writing scores                     score.
                                                               shown slight
were also                          AYP Reading
                                                               gains.
above the                          Language Arts
state’s                            Grades 9-12:
                                                               On the ACT
predicted                          AYP Improved
                                                               Plan
score.                             Sub-Groups
                                                               administered in
                                   over 1 year:
                                                               fall of 2007,
All AYP                            Students with
                                                               79% of the total
Benchmarks                         Disabilities had
                                                               population
were met or                        a 13% increase
                                                               scored below
exceeded.                          AYP Sub-
                                                               19 and would
                                                               be required to
                                   Groups that
                                                               take the bridge
                                   decreased %
                                                               math course
                                   Prof/Adv over 1
                                                               based on the
                                   year:
                                                               TN Diploma
                                   African
                                                               project



                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 97 of 245
                                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                               Americans had                           guidelines.
                                                                                               a 14% decrease
                                                                                               White had a 1%                          Achievement –
                                                                                               decrease                                Elementary
                                                                                               Economically                            Social Studies
                                                                                               Disadv had a                            Grades 3-8:
                                                                                               2% decrease                             TCAP
                                                                                               For AYP all                             Academic
                                                                                               sub-groups                              Achievement
                                                                                               were equal or                           was a 54, which
                                                                                               above state                             is a B +
                                                                                               averages                                Social Studies
                                                                                               except:                                 was 6 NCE
                                                                                               African                                 points away
                                                                                               Americans who                           from an A. This
                                                                                               scored 4%                               was a 2 point
                                                                                               below                                   increase in 1
                                                                                               and Hispanics                           year
                                                                                               who scored
                                                                                               16% below                               Value Added
                                                                                                                                       Social Studies
                                                                                                                                       3 year average
                                                                                                                                       In 2006 was a
                                                                                                                                       2.0 (A) in 2007
                                                                                                                                       it increased to
                                                                                                                                       2.8 (A)

                                                                                                                                       9-12 End of
                                                                                                                                       Course US
                                                                                                                                       History our
                                                                                                                                       score was 517.9
                                                                                                                                       which was
                                                                                                                                       above the
                                                                                                                                       predicted
                                                                                                                                       score.
                   Provide equal       Post and make     Provide equal     Provide equal       Provide              Provide            Provide            Provide all            All K-5 PE
                   access to           accessible all    access for all    access to           professional         programs for all   appropriate        teachers a             teachers were
                   appropriate         professional      teachers and      appropriate         development          students in        resources and      computer               provided SPARK
                   resources and       development       students to       instructional       training in 5 core   specific grade     manipulatives to   workstation            curriculum and
                   materials.          through the       assessment        materials and       areas                areas              implement the                             equipment for
                                       school system's   tools             textbooks                                                   program for all    Provide appropriate    implementation.
Evidence of
                   Funding provided    website                                                                      All teachers       Pre-K through 5    training in            All teachers
equitable system
                   for instructional                     Provide           All K-5 received    Differentiate        received           grades             technology and         attended
support for this
                   materials and       Conduct system-   computer lab      materials           instruction          suicide                               Internet use for all   inservice
practice
                   equipment.          wide writing      access at         through new                              prevention         Calculators        teachers               activities.
                                       practice days     each school.      adoption. The       Service of           training           were provided
                   Funding provided                                        Literacy            Literacy                                to all high        Provide computer
                   for teachers to     Provide equal                       Coaches             Coaches for all                         school math        access for students
                   attend meetings     access to                           supported           Pre-K through 5                         classes.           in all grades
                   and conferences     appropriate                         classroom           schools




                                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 98 of 245
                                      Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


to stay abreast of   resources and     teachers                                                      AR currently used
latest trends in     materials         regarding          Provided                                   in only a few
their fields.                          implementation     training to all                            schools
                     All new           All teachers       LA teachers 6-8
                     teachers          were trained in    and review for 5                           Read 180 labs are
                     entering our      utilization of     systemwide                                 available in all
                     system are        materials                                                     middle school
                     provided 2                           All middle                                 programs and our
                                                                                                      th
                     sessions                             schools and                                9 grade.
                     (through our                         high school
                     new teacher                          received a                                 Plato is available
                     induction                            READ 180 lab.                              for all high school
                     program)                                                                        credit recovery
                     regarding                                                                       student needs.
                     utilization of
                     state                                                                           All teachers have
                     curriculum                                                                      a presentation
                     objectives                                                                      center.

                     Every new                                                                       Teacher
                     teacher is                                                                      computers are
                     assigned a                                                                      replaced every
                     mentor teacher                                                                  four years or
                     to assist in                                                                    sooner if
                     curriculum                                                                      possible.
                     implementation
                                                                                                     Every classroom
                                                                                                     has internet
                                                                                                     connectivity.

                                                                                                     All students have
                                                                                                     access to the
                                                                                                     computer labs.

                                                                                                     All computer labs
                                                                                                     are replaced
                                                                                                     every four years.

                                                                                                     Web based
                                                                                                     subscription
                                                                                                     software is
                                                                                                     renewed for all
                                                                                                     schools on a
                                                                                                     yearly basis.

                                                                                                     Software is
                                                                                                     evaluated and
                                                                                                     purchased based
                                                                                                     on need each
                                                                                                     year.




                                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 99 of 245
                                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                 Continue            Continue          Continue         Continue training   Continue            Continue         Align the current   Continue            Purchase Dance
                 implementation of   implementation    implementatio    in state-standard   implementation      implementation   math program        implementation of   Revolution
                 current practice.   of current        n of current     based instruction   of current          of current       with the            current practice    materials for K-8
                                     practice          practice         to address lack     practice and        practice         BluePrint for       and continue to     classrooms
                 Add CTE courses                                        of effectiveness    implement a                          Learning through    update current
                 to address          PD will be        Update                               Reading             DARE has been    a math              programs            Purchase PE
                 student interest    offered for all   benchmark        Continue to         Specialist for      moved to the     curriculum scope                        equipment to
                 and the current     teachers          assessment       provide             Grades 6-12         middle school    & sequence          Use AR only as a    support middle
                 career              regarding         along with       instructional                           curriculum                           supplemental/       school curriculum
                 opportunities       review of new     curriculum       resources           Reading                              Provide             enrichment          implementation
                                     state             requirements     based on the        Specialist PK-                       appropriate         program
                                     curriculum to                      needs of a          12 is                                manipulatives to                        Continue
                                     prepare for its                    diverse student     overseeing                           fully implement     Add bandwidth       wellness
                                     implementation                     population to       implementation                       the program         and fiber to        curriculum and
                                                                        encourage the       of effective                                             address demands     monitor student
                                     Summer school                      use of textbook     literacy                             Provide             for curriculum      progress
                                     curriculum                         as a resource       programming.                         professional        and instructional
                                     teams will be                      rather than the                                          development         resources and       Staff wellness
                                     trained to                         sole curriculum     Continue                                                 access to online    program will be
                                     address new                        source.             training of final                    Provide a Math      subscription        implemented
                                     state                                                  block in                             Specialist for      applications
                                     curriculum                                             framework for                        PK-12 to assist                         Offer Think Link
                                                                                                      th
                                                                                            6-8 and 5 .                          in curricular       Continue to         for all students.
                                                                                                   th
                                                                                            Add 4 grade                          alignment           develop Dynamic
Next Step
                                                                                            teachers in                                              curriculum
(changes or
                                                                                            training this                        Provide             (technology-
continuations)
                                                                                            year.                                manipulatives       based) resources
                                                                                                                                 for middle          that align with
                                                                                            Add additional                       school              new state
                                                                                            Literacy Coach                       inclusion           standards
                                                                                            to support                           classrooms
                                                                                            every
                                                                                            elementary                           Add additional
                                                                                            program.                             math resources
                                                                                                                                 to improve
                                                                                            Add ESL                              math
                                                                                            systemwide to                        proficiency
                                                                                            allow for an
                                                                                                        th
                                                                                            inclusion 9
                                                                                            grade English
                                                                                            class at the
                                                                                            high school.
                                                                                            Continue READ
                                                                                            180 in 6-9 for
                                                                                            at-risk readers.

                                                                                            Implement ACE
                                                                                            (Achieving
                                                                                            Cooperative
                                                                                            Engagement)




                                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 100 of 245
Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                program in
                grades 6-8 to
                address the at-
                risk
                populations
                with lack of
                study skills and
                to improve
                literacy.




             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 101 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                  TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1b

                              CURRICULUM GAP ANALYSIS

The following are related to Curriculum. The process will identify the discrepancy, or the gap,
between the current state – “What Is” – and the desired future state – “What Ought To Be.” The
information for “What Is” should be in Component 1 and will be reviewed at this time.


Curriculum TIME Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: TIME
(How are we currently allocating our time as central office employees in providing
assistance to schools and building capacity around understanding and implementing
high quality curricular practices?)

Research-based professional development is offered on a regular basis to all new teachers
throughout the school year. This training includes curriculum implementation, teacher
evaluation, classroom management and technology integration. After school activities are
scheduled in a timely manner to allow training on state mandated initiatives, curriculum
implementation and system-wide program implementation. System-wide curricular scope and
sequence development in ongoing and changes annually to encompass each of the 4 major
content areas. Professional development is facilitated by curriculum directors, literacy
personnel and technology trainer to develop scope and sequence based on state standards
and associated benchmark assessments.

Through the system website that is constantly updated, teachers can access online curriculum,
the BluePrint for Learning objectives and the Student Performance Indicators for each content
area.

Directors have a limited amount of time to spend helping principals monitor implementation of
curriculum through snapshot observations and assisting in teacher state evaluations.
Curriculum supervisors have limited time to assist in curriculum implementation due to
extensive paperwork requirements and multiple job assignments.

Emphasis on Site-Based curriculum leadership has focused on the development of
Professional Learning Communities (PLCs). All principals were given a copy of Mike
Schmoker’s Results Now. PLCs have been organized by grade levels at the elementary
schools. Literacy coaches are assisting teachers in this curricular process to develop
effective curriculum strategies and materials.

Professional develop is structured around current curricular practices to support
system-wide initiatives. Sessions are scheduled on PD days in the instructional
calendar to ensure that all teachers receive this training.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: TIME

Coordination of our system-wide professional development activities should be driven by
individual teacher needs and planned across all departments. Another supervisory position is
needed to allow the curriculum directors to focus on curricular issues. The director of career



                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 102 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


and technical education programs, which is now combined with an assistant principal position
at the high school, would be better placed as a separate position at the central office level.
This would enable that position to oversee all of the CTE programs, which current trends show
should begin in grades below the ninth grade level.

Focus within individual sites on improvement strategies required by SIPs is more
effective and meaningful for our teachers and principals.



Curriculum MONEY Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: MONEY
(How are we currently allocating our funds in providing assistance to schools and
building capacity around understanding and implementing high quality curriculum
practices?)

The BluePrint for Learning is printed and distributed to each new teacher in K-8. Providing all
staff access to state-mandated curriculum is a practice of Highly Effective Schools. Textbook
purchases are currently limited by funding at the local level. Title II, Part D funds are used to
provide professional development for technology projects. We currently fund the Curriculum
Designer software annually to give teachers online access to the curriculum mapping and
objectives checklist. Money is designated for elementary curriculum development and
professional development. Title I schools have an additional allocation for professional
development to implement the TSIP. We have 4 system-wide literacy support positions that
assist in the implementation of the balanced literacy programs. In grades Pre-K through 4
math manipulatives have been provided. State-of-the-art technological equipment is provided
for teacher and student use.

Principals are allotted Professional Development funds to offer appropriate training to
support SIP goals at their individual schools. Decision-making is made by site
committees regarding expenditures. Instructional resources continue to be provided for
all grade levels.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: MONEY

All students should have the annually adopted text. All schools should receive equal funding
for professional development based on teacher population for appropriate training, not just Title
I schools. At the high school level, funding should be sought for training teachers in practices
of integrating the academic and career & technical education sides to better prepare ALL
students for future careers, as well as current assessments.

We are using our limited funding in an equitable and appropriate manner to ensure
success for all students.




Curriculum PERSONNEL Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required




                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 103 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


“What is” The Current Use of: PERSONNEL
(How are we currently allocating our personnel in providing assistance to schools and
building capacity around understanding and implementing high quality curriculum
practices?)
We currently have a Director of Curriculum and Accountability who serves Pre-K through 6th
grades. We have a Director who serves as the 7-12 Curriculum Supervisor who is also the
Testing Coordinator. We have a Reading Specialist and 3 Literacy Coaches who help to
monitor curriculum implementation of our Pre-K through 5th grades reading program. We have
a system-wide Technology Instructional Specialist position. Title I teachers are provided in
some elementary schools. Not all schools offer a full range of fine arts instruction.

   ▫ A Reading Specialist for K-12 has been hired to assist in implementation of
   balanced literacy in all programs. Two Title I teachers were converted to Literacy
   Coaches to allow some smaller sites to share personnel.
   ▫ A Wellness Coordinator has been added to support the Coordinated School
   Health Program.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: PERSONNEL

All schools should offer a full range of fine arts instruction. We need an additional Reading
Specialist for 7-12. Another supervisory position is needed to allow the curriculum directors
to focus on curricular issues. The director of career and technical education programs, which
is now combined with an assistant principal position at the high school, would be better placed
as a separate position at the central office level. This would enable that position to oversee all
of the CTE programs, which current trends show should begin in grades below the ninth grade
level.

We need to place one literacy coach at every elementary site. This will ensure effective
implementation of reading instruction and the RTI process at every site.

A dedicated Math curriculum specialist is needed to ensure appropriate pacing and
practice for all grade levels. Math, being a spiral curriculum, must be paced
appropriately to ensure foundations are built to support advanced curriculum.

We need additional ELL staff to address the increasing ELL population and to support
the Hispanic population who is scoring below the state averages in both reading and
math. In grades 9-12, our LEP students scored 7% below the state average in math. In
reading our Hispanic population scored 16% below the state average.


Curriculum OTHER RESOURCES Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: OTHER RESOURCES
(How are we currently allocating other resources in providing assistance to schools and
building capacity around understanding and implementing high quality curriculum
practices?)

There is a collaborative relationship between Carson-Newman College and our school system.
This relationship provides our system access to research-based ongoing professional
development for our staff and an opportunity for field experiences for their education students.

Community businesses provide on-site job training experiences through our high school career


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 104 of 245
                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


and technical education department. The cooperative education program has recently been
expanded to allow work-based learning opportunities to students in “academic” classes. The
Chamber of Commerce has developed and currently sponsors a youth leadership class.

   ▫ Appalachian Electric has partnered with our teachers in grades 3,5,7,9, and 11
   grades to provide curriculum support for Conservation; Electrical safety; History &
   development of electricity; Renewable energy sources; Arbor programs; Home
   energy surveys; Environmental health; Citizenship/civics (community partnerships);
   Weather safety; and Leadership.

   ▫ We continue to partner with the 4-H program for our all of our 5th grade students.
   The field agent that implements that program was given a copy of our 5th grade
   BluePrint and asked to incorporate the Science and Social Studies standards into
   the 4-H program, which has been accomplished.

   ▫ Through Walter’s State Community College and Carson Newman College, our
   high schools students are afforded the opportunity for Dual Enrollment credit.

   ▫ The community fire departments provide an annual visit to our schools to
   support the fire safety curriculum.

   ▫ The DARE program is taught in our 6th grade classrooms to support a safe
   school environment.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: OTHER RESOURCES

Financial resources should be allocated to expand our current media services to support the
curriculum. Expand the job training program to include additional sites for all high school
students.




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 105 of 245
                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                  TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1c

                       CURRICULUM REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS

The completed Curriculum gap analysis should enable the System wide Leadership Team to
answer the following reflective questions relative to curriculum practices.
Curriculum Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Are we providing equity and adequacy to all our schools?

The following items are areas that we believe reflect equity and adequacy in our programs.
Our educational support systems:

   •   Post and make accessible all professional development through the school system's
       website
   •   Conduct system-wide writing practice days
   •   Provide equal access to appropriate resources and materials
   •   Provide equal access for all teachers and students to assessment tools
   •   Provide computer lab access at each school.
   •   Provide equal access to appropriate instructional materials and textbooks
   •   Provide professional development training in 5 core areas
   •   Literacy Coaches for all Pre-K through 5 schools
   •   Provide appropriate resources and manipulatives to implement the program for all Pre-
       K through 5 grades
   •   Provide all teachers a computer workstation
   •   Provide appropriate training in technology and Internet use for all teachers
   •   Provide computer access for students in all grades
   •   Provide parental access to their student’s required curriculum
   •   Provide online resources to parents


Curriculum Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Are we targeting funds and resources effectively to meet the needs of our schools?

   •   We are currently doing a very good job under the limited per pupil expenditure annual
       funding appropriations, but this is not adequate. Our current per pupil expenditure
       per funded ADA is $6,976, which is below the state average as well as the
       national average which is still not adequate
   •   All teachers have a copy of the state-mandated curriculum guides and are trained in its
       implementation for classroom instruction.
   •   We apply for grant funding and work diligently to secure monies to fund needs, but
       need another position to assist in grant funding.
   •   Financial resources should be allocated to expand our current media services to
       support the curriculum. Expand the job training program to include additional sites for
       all high school students.
   •   Coordination of our system-wide professional development activities should be driven
       by individual teacher needs and planned across all departments, this method of
       delivery is now being supported by the PLCs at each site. Another supervisory
       position is needed to allow the curriculum directors to focus on curricular issues. A


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 106 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


       human resources position has alleviated some time constraints. There is still a
       need for a math supervisory position.
   •   All students should have the annually adopted text. All schools should receive equal
       funding for professional development based on teacher population for appropriate
       training, not just Title I schools.
   •   All schools should offer a full range of fine arts instruction. We need an additional
       Reading Specialist for 7-12. Another supervisory position is needed to allow the
       curriculum directors to focus on curricular issues. Our smallest schools now share a
       music teacher and an art teacher. A Reading
       Specialist has been assigned K-12 without literacy coaching duties. We
       currently have 6 literacy coaches, but one additional position will allow every
       elementary school to have its own coach. This will support the PLCs and the RTI
       process. Each coach will assist the principal with instructional integrity.
   •   The director of career and technical education programs, which is now combined with
       an assistant principal position at the high school, would be better placed as a separate
       position at the central office level. This would enable that position to oversee all of the
       CTE programs, which current trends show should begin in grades below the ninth
       grade level.


Curriculum Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of students in our schools?

We are currently meeting AYP requirements with the exception of our SWD population in
grades 9-12.

   •   Jefferson County State Report Card 2004-05 reflects gains in K-8 criterion referenced
       achievement in all content areas.
   •   Economically disadvantaged P/A in math and reading/language was higher than the
       state %.
   •   Gateway Algebra and English II Advanced % was higher than the state and %
       Proficient in Biology I and English II was higher than the state.
   •   EOC in Math Foundations Advanced % was higher than the state.
   •   US History % Proficient was higher than the state.
   •   AA, ED and SWD populations on Gateway Algebra % Advanced 2 year average
       outperformed the state.
   •   Every subgroup outperformed the state in % P/A in the 2 year average for the Writing
       and Gateway English tests.
   •   K-8 TVAAS scores have had positive gains from 2004 to 2005 school years.
   •   Teacher, student and parent surveys indicate that all stakeholders believe that our
       system provides a quality educational experience for our students.
   •   Perkins report cards reflect career and technical education students are attaining
       course competencies at a percentage higher than the state average.

The 2006 Report Card for Maury Middle School indicates we are not meeting the AYP
requirements of the SWD subgroup. The percentage of proficient/advanced dropped from
53% in 2005 to 38% in 2006 in the area of math. The percentage of proficient/advanced
dropped from 84% in 2005 to 80% in 2006 in the area of reading.

   •   According to the 2007 Report Card. Math AYP Grades 3-8 All subgroups equal or


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 107 of 245
                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    above state averages except: Hispanic 2% below; White 1% below
•   AYP Grades 9-12 All sub-groups equal or above state averages except:
•   Hispanic 9% below; LEP 7% below
•   Reading AYP Grades 3-8 sub-groups below state averages:
•   Hispanic 2% below; Economically Disadv 4% below; Students with Disabilities
    1% below Reading AYP Grades 9-12 All sub-groups equal or above state
    averages except: African Amer 4% below; Hispanic 16% below
•   Gateway scores were all equal or above the state’s predicted scores with the
    exception of Physical Science.
•   ACT scores were either equal or above the state’s predicted scores with the
    exception of Math.
•   Value-Added TCAP 11th grade writing scores were also above the state’s
    predicted score.
•   All AYP Benchmarks were met or exceeded.
•   Our Perkins report card for CTE reflected all A’s.




            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 108 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                  TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1d

                         CURRICULUM SUMMARY QUESTIONS

The following summary questions are related to Curriculum. They are designed as a
culminating activity for your self-analysis, focus questions discussions, and findings regarding
this area.
Curriculum Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major strengths and how do we know?

After examining all data sources we believe that our system’s strengths are:

   •   All teachers have training in online curriculum access
   •   All elementary schools have scope and sequence for social studies, science, and
       language arts.
   •   All K-8 teachers have a copy of the BluePrint for Learning. All teachers trained in
       balanced literacy.
   •   A strong reading program indicated by test scores that continue to improve.
   •   Increase in Value Added reading on 2005 Report Card from D to B
   •   Jefferson County State Report Card 2004-05 reflects gains in K-8 criterion reference in
       achievement in all content areas
   •   Our K-8 TVASS scores have had positive gains from 2004 to 2005 school years.
   •   CTE 2005 - 1S2: Skill Proficiencies, 3S1: Placement, and 4S1: Participation Non-
       Traditional
   •   CTE 2006 - 1S1 Core Indicator – Academic Attainment had a score of an A on the
       2006 Report Card with an actual performance level of 93.57% which is above the
       state’s average of 91.51%.
   •   CTE 2006 - 2S1: Completion –had a score of an A on the 2006 Report Card with an
       actual performance level of 93.57% which is above the state’s average of 91.51%
   •   CTE 2006 - 3S1: Placement –had a score of an A on the 2006 Report Card with an
       actual performance level of 97.98% which is above the state’s average of 92.14%.
   •   CTE 2006 - 4S1: Participation Non-Traditional –had a score of an A on the 2006
       Report Card with an actual performance level of 23.97%.
   •   CTE - 4S2: Completion Non-Traditional –had a score of an A on the 2006 Report Card
       with an actual performance level of 25.71%.
   •   All 3-8 Value Added scores were A’s.
   •   Achievement scores 3-8 were B’s.
   •   Gateway scores were all equal or above the state’s predicted scores with the
       exception of Physical Science.
   •   All Writing scores were A’s.
   •   ACT scores were either equal or above the state’s predicted scores with the
       exception of Math.
   •   Value-Added TCAP 11th grade writing scores were also above the state’s
       predicted score.
   •   All AYP Benchmarks were met or exceeded.
   •   All CTE scores were A’s.



                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 109 of 245
                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Curriculum Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required

What are our major challenges and how do we know? Place in prioritized order, based
on data from Component 3.

1. Improve student achievement in all subgroups
2. Improve transition between middle and high school in core areas
3. Provide equal educational opportunities for all students by increasing per pupil expenditures
4. Improve the 2005 CTE Perkins Report Card district score of a B in the areas of 1S1 :
Academic Attainment ; 2S1: Completion; 4S2: Completion Non-Traditional
5. Improve the 2006 CTE Perkins Report Card district score of a B (94.15% ) in the area of
1S2: Skill Proficiencies. This was a decrease from the 2005 data of -2.50% for CTE.
2008 Goals
1. Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of economically disadvantaged, African American,
Students with Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage proficient/advanced by 4%.
2. Increase Math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers by
50% over the previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill acquisition
resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.
3. Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2%.
4. Technology: Increase Technology Integration to support state curriculum
performance indicators to increase student achievement on ACT Explore to College
Ready status in math, reading, and science subject areas (and the composite score) and
achieve a composite ACT PLAN score that is equal to a 21 on the ACT.


Curriculum Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
How will we address our challenges?

We will address our challenges by:
  • Enrolling 90% of our ELL students in the summer reading program
  • Implementing a balanced literacy program for grades 6-12
  • Providing a rigorous math program for grades 6-12 for all subgroups
  • Continuing to improve the S-Team process for referral of struggling students
  • Creating curriculum teams between middle and high school in all content areas
  • Continuing to secure needed funds through continual grant opportunities
  • Convening an educational summit with 6-12 administrators to discuss curriculum
       challenges
  • Evaluating professional development budget and securing equitable funding for each
       grade level
  • Add CTE courses to address student interest and the current career
       opportunities
  • PD will be offered for all teachers regarding review of new state curriculum to
       prepare for
       its implementation
  • Summer school curriculum teams will be trained to address new state curriculum
  • Update benchmark assessment along with curriculum requirements
  • Reading Specialist PK-12 is overseeing implementation of effective literacy


                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 110 of 245
                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    programming.
•   Additional literacy coaching position will be added at the 7th elementary school
•   Continue training of final block in framework for 6-8 and 5th. Add 4th grade
    teachers in training this year.
•   Add additional Literacy Coach to support every elementary program.
•   DARE has been moved to the middle school curriculum
•   Provide a Math Specialist for PK-12 to assist in curricular alignment
•   Provide manipulatives for middle school inclusion classrooms
•   Add additional math resources to improve math proficiency
•   Add bandwidth and fiber to address demands for curriculum and instructional
    resources
    and access to online subscription applications
•   Continue to develop Dynamic curriculum (technology-based) resources that align
    with
    new state standards
•   Purchase Dance Revolution materials for K-8 classrooms
•   Purchase PE equipment to support middle school curriculum implementation
•   Continue wellness curriculum and monitor student progress
•   Staff wellness program will be implemented




             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 111 of 245
                                                                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                            TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2a

                                                                       INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES
                       CTE Teachers use      Balanced             Project-Based     Direct           Use of math       Writing Process     Inclusion           Intervention        Professional
                       hands-on, project-    Literacy Program     Learning that     Instruction is   manipulatives     Systemwide                                                  Learning
                       driven instruction     Systematic          supports          provided to                        Modeled is                                                  Communities
                       to teach course       Sequential           individual        students and     Use of            Utilized to allow                                           (PLC’s)
                       competencies          Phonics              student           directed by      calculators       students
                                                                  research and      the TN SDE                         regular practice
Current                                                           inquiry-based     standards                          in application
Instructional                                                     learning          with                               of writing skills
Practices                                                                           opportunities
                                                                                    to apply
                                                                                    knowledge
                                                                                    using higher
                                                                                    order
                                                                                    thinking
                                                                                    skills
                       Each curriculum       Use 4-Block          All schools       Document         Adoption of a     Use 4 square 6      Include students   Response to          Teachers met in
                       area has              framework in         participated in   instructional    math program      traits writing      with special       Intervention (RTI)   systemwide grade
                                                                       th
                       instructional         reading              the 5 grade       practices in     that is based     process system-     needs into         has been             level and content
                       equipment             instruction          county-wide       teachers' plan   on use of         wide                regular classes    implemented for      area meetings 4
                       necessary for                              Science Fair.     books            hands-on                              through the use    Reading through      times throughout
                       teaching course       Provide 2 ½ hour     All middle                         manipulatives     Write-Away          of IEPs            the use of DIBELS    the school year.
                       competencies.         uninterrupted        schools and the   Utilize          for all Pre-K-5   Days are                               assessments to       On a monthly
                                             Language Arts        high school       Snapshot                           observed            Establish pilot    determine the        basis teachers
                       Teachers must         Block for grades     participated in   Observations     Utilization of    monthly 3-12        program for        lowest 10% of        meet in their own
                       attend training for   K-5                  the Science       by               scope and                             implementation     students grades      sites to improve
                       equipment                                  Fair with         administrators   sequence for      Systemwide          of practice        K-2. TCAP below      instruction by
                       specific to their     Utilize a Reading    selected                           K-5 math          use of 4-square                        proficient           sharing best
                       areas.                Specialist and 3     projects          Administrators   curriculum.       writing process     A total of 97      students and         practices.
Evidence of Practice                         Literacy             advancing to      conduct                            is used 3-12        classes county-    teacher referrals
                       23 Instructors.       Coaches for          the Southern      classroom                                              wide are           have been used to    Central Office
                       Students Served       grades Pre-K-5       Appalachian       observations     Provide           Writers’            inclusion          refer students 3-5   Personnel
                       in 2006-07: 2,284                          Science and       using state      classroom         workshop            classes. These     for RTI. Our         attending a
                       (61% of student       Systematic           Engineering       teacher          sets of           training and        classes are co-    model is based on    conference with
                       body)                 Sequential           Fair              evaluation       calculators for   implementation      taught by either   the IRIS model.      focused on
                                             Phonics; stand                         process          students in       in grades 1-8       special            There were 260       PLCS’s.
                       Five active           alone program to                                        grades 3-6                            education          students K-5 in      Administrators
                       CTSOs.                support reading                        Ensure that                                            teachers or        the RTI Tier II      were trained and
                                             acquisition for K-                     95% of our       Additional                            special            process in           met to discuss
                       Growing chapter       First                                  current          classroom                             education          February.            best practices.
                       of National                                                  professional     calculators                           assistants with                         All principals
                       Technical Honor       Include                                staff is HQ.     were                                  the general        READ 180 has         received a copy of
                       Society.              systematic                             98% of our       purchased                             education          been                 Mike Schmoker’s




                                                                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 112 of 245
                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


sequential                paraprofessio   for the high           teachers.     implemented in 6-    Results Now.
phonics in                nal staff is    school                               9 grades for
Balanced                  HQ.             algebra                              students who are
Literacy Program                          classes                              performing at
for other                 99.8 % of our                                        least 2 grades
elementary                instructional                                        below grade level.
grades                    staff is                                             There are
                          currently HQ                                         currently 300
Phonics is                96% of our                                           students enrolled.
included in new           paraprofessi
reading                   onal staff is                                        After school
adoption. No              HQ. (All                                             Tutoring is being
longer using a            those who                                            provided at one
specific stand            are not HQ                                           pilot site through
alone phonics             are                                                  the REACH grant
program.                  scheduled to                                         funds. Summer
Within the                take the                                             reading camp is
literacy                  Parapro                                              also offered at 4
framework,                PRAXIS at                                            sites (all zones
working with              the next                                             served) for
words is an               testing                                              struggling
integral                  session.)                                            readers K-5.
component
which allows              Teachers are                                         Paraprofessionals
student to                provided                                             have been utilized
apply and                 high quality                                         to support
practice                  PD.                                                  classroom
phonics skills.                                                                teachers during
                          Higher order                                         intervention time.
                          thinking
A Reading                 skills are                                           All elementary
Specialist for            encouraged                                           schools have a
PK-12 is                  and all new                                          Pre-K classroom
ensuring that             teachers                                             to serve ED
appropriate               receive a                                            students with an
balanced                  critical                                             early intervention
literacy training         thinking                                             program that is
and strategies            flipchart to                                         focused on en
are                       utilize for                                          environment rich
implemented.              instruction.                                         in literacy and
She no longer                                                                  language
serves as a               The snapshot                                         development.
literacy coach.           evaluation
3 additional              has been
literacy                  edited to
coaches have              reflect all
been added.               evaluation
                          domains.
Middle school             This is to be
LA teachers               used every




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 113 of 245
                                                                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                      th
                                                and 5 grade                            grading
                                                teachers have                          period to
                                                been trained in                        observe
                                                Big Blocks                             teachers.
                                                Literacy
                                                Framework                              Assessment
                                                                                       is frequent
                                                                                       and re-
                                                                                       teaching is
                                                                                       provided for
                                                                                       mastery of
                                                                                       skills.
                           Yes                  Yes                 Yes                Yes             Yes           Yes               Yes                Yes                 Yes
Is the current practice
research-based?

Is it a principle &        Yes                  Yes                 Yes                Yes             Yes           Yes               Yes                Yes                 Yes
practice of high-
performing school
systems?
                           Effective            Effective           Effective          Effective       Effective     Effective         Effective          Limited             Highly Effective
Has the current                                                                                                                        Effective in the   Effectiveness
practice been                                                                                                                          reading/LA area
effective or                                                                                                                           Limited            Pre-K is Highly
ineffective?                                                                                                                           effectiveness in   Effective
                                                                                                                                       math
                           Perkins report       Writing & LA        Projects that      State Report    Math          Examine student   IEP progress       TCAP                Teacher Surveys
                           card; input of CTE   assessment          qualify for        Card            achievement   work in writing   monitoring         Achievement
                           advisory council;    scores              advancement to                     scores        portfolios                           Scores              Principal
                           follow-up report                         next level.        Evaluation                                      Parent surveys                         Snapshots
                           done each spring     Reading                                documentatio                  Writing                              Teacher feedback
                           on previous          benchmark           Science scores     n                             assessment        Achievement        and classroom       Comprehensive
                           school year’s        scores              on TCAP and                                      scores            scores for SWD     performance         Evaluation
                           concentrators.                           Gateway            Teacher                                         K-8                                    Process
                                                Test results from   Assessments        surveys for                   Systemwide 3-                        Survey of
What data source(s)                             all data sources                       TSIP                          12 and CTE        IEP progress       teachers and
do you have that                                                                                                     Write Away        reports            administrators
support your answer?                            DIBELS scores                          HQ is posted                  scores
(Identify all applicable                                                               on the SDE of                                   Report card for    Surveys of Pre-K
sources)                                        Scott Foresman                         TN Teacher                                      SWD                parents
                                                Benchmark                              Certification
                                                assessments                            website                                         EOC scores         Pre-Post Brigance
                                                                                                                                                          Scores show
                                                                                                                                       Think Link data    marked growth
                                                                                                                                                          Kindergarten
                                                                                                                                                          teacher feedback

                                                                                                                                                          Student
                                                                                                                                                          participation in




                                                                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 114 of 245
                                                                      Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                           the REACH
                                                                                                                                                           tutoring program

                                                                                                                                                           APR reports from
                                                                                                                                                           the REACH grant
                                                                                                                                                           regarding
                                                                                                                                                           summer reading
                                                                                                                                                           camp

                                                                                                                                                           Read 180
                                                                                                                                                           Program reports
                                                                                                                                                           (SRIs) are
                                                                                                                                                           generated to
                                                                                                                                                           monitor student
                                                                                                                                                           growth
                   Students perform      Pre- and Post      In 2007, four         Demonstrated      Math            Received an A in   Compliance of       Students have          Teacher Survey
                   well in articulated   DIBELS scores      middle/high           positive gains    achievement     Writing            state-mandated      been moved our         Results
                   post-secondary        indicate           schools               on K-8 TVAAS      scores were                        monitoring of SE    of Tier I              evaluating
                   courses.              academic gains     participated          scores from       below the       Increase in        documentation       interventions          systemwide grade
                                                            with 30               2004 to 2005      state average   assessment                                                    level and content
                   Follow-up reports     Reading            qualifying to         school years      on the 1999     scores in K-8      Increases in both   Students have          area meetings in
                   with graduated        benchmark          compete at the                          Report Card,                       math and            progressed to          the fall were rated
                   concentrators.        assessments        regional              Survey results    prior to        TCAP writing in    reading P/A         Tier II                by 60% as useful.
                                                                                                                          th     th
                                         show value-        Science and                             implementatio   both 5 and 8       scores for SWD      interventions
                                                                                                                           th
                   Academic              added data         Engineering           Conducted a       n of hands-on   and 11 were        sub-group for                              45% of our
                   Attainment in                            Fair with one         HQ Audit at       math program    A’s.               2005 (K-8)          In 2006-2007           teachers asked
                   Mathematics for       State Report       student               every school,                                                            Brigance growth        that PLC’s be
                   the System’s          Card scores for    advancing to          provided          2005 CRT        Value-Added        Decreases in        scores indicated       scheduled during
                                                                                                                            th
                   Career Technical      TVAAS indicate     the                   funding           scores for      TCAP 11            both math and       that only 4 % of       PD days annually.
                   area was at a 98%     an increase from   International         through the       Math are        grade writing      reading P/A         the students           20% requested
                   Performance           a D to B in 2005   Science and           Professional      above the       scores were        scores for SWD      participating in       during common
Evidence of        Level.                                   Engineering           Growth            state average   also above the     sub-group for       the Pre-K              planning time.
effectiveness or                         Reading 3-8        Fair. One             Incentive from                    state’s            2005 (9-12)         program show
ineffectiveness    Academic              AYP Scores         middle school         Title Funds,                      predicted                              less growth than
                   Attainment in         Improved Sub-      student               and monthly       Academic        score.             AYP 3-8 Math        most students.
                   Reading/LA for        Groups over 1      qualified for the     provided          grade in math                       Students with      7% of the Pre-K
                   the System’s          year were:         Discovery             principals an     increased                          Disabilities        students showed
                   Career Technical      African            Education             update on         from a C to a                      showed a 4%         a higher level of
                   area was at a         American           Young Science         their teachers'   B from 2004-                       increase            growth than most.
                   93.9%                 showed a 8%        competition.          HQ status.        2005                                                   This indicated
                   Performance           increase.                                                                                     AYP 3-8             that 89% of the
                   Level.                Asian/Pacific      In 2008, all          Scores on         Gateway                            Reading             initially identified
                                         Islander           middle/high           2007              scores in                          Students with       “at risk” students
                   We exceeded the       showed a 4%        schools               Report Card       algebra P/A %                      Disabilities        showed an
                   state performance     increase           participated          based on 3-       is 84.6 which                      showed a 9%         average growth
                   on every indicator    Hispanic           and had 30 total      year CRT          is above the                       increase, but       rate.
                   with the exception    showed a 15%       students              TCAP were         state %                            were 1% below
                   of Completion         increase           qualify (on the       B’s in all 4                                         the state
                   Non-Traditional       Economically       newly                 content areas     Math Value                         average.
                                         disadvantaged      implemented           grades 3-8,       Added




                                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 115 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


showed a 4%        rubric) and          which            Grades K-8            Grades 9-12 LA
increase           competed in          showed           Growth: Math          and Math
Students with      the middle/high      improvement      in 2006 was           Students with
Disabilities       school regional      in science       an A at a 1.7         Disabilities
showed a 9%        Science and          and social       gain and in           showed a 13%
increase           Engineering          studies.         2007 was an           increase in
Limited English    Fair.                TCAP writing     A with a 2.8          each content
                                                  th
Proficient                              in both 5        gain. Math            area.
                                              th
showed a 23%       Achievement –        and 8 and        AYP
                                           th
increase but       Elementary           11 were A’s.     Improved              Scores on 2007
AYP sub-           Science              ACT scores       Sub-Groups            Report Card
groups scoring     Grades 3-8:          for 9-12 were    over 1 year           based on 3-year
below state        TCAP Criterion       slightly         were: African         CRT TCAP were
averages were:     Referenced           below the        Americans             B’s in all 4
Hispanic at 2%     Academic             Value-added      had a 4%              content areas
below              Achievement          scores were      increase.             grades 3-8,
Economically       (3 year average)     all A’s in the   Hispanic had          which showed
Disadvat 4%        Science scores       4 content        a 13%                 improvement in
below              have increased       areas grade      increase              science and
Students with      yearly               3-8. Gateway     Economically          social studies.
Disabilities at    2005: 50 NCE         scores were      disadvantage          TCAP writing in
                                                                                      th     th
1% below           points earned a      all equal or     d 3%                  both 5 and 8
                                                                                       th
Reading            C                    above the        increase              and 11 were
Achievement in     2006: 52 NCE         state’s          Students              A’s. ACT
Language Arts      points earned a      predicted        with                  scores for 9-12
was: 3 NCE         C                    scores with      Disabilities          were slightly
points away        2007: 54 NCE         the exception    had a 4%              below the
from an A, but     points earned a      of Physical      increase              Value-added
showed a           B+                   Science.         Limited               scores were all
2 point increase                                         English               A’s in the 4
over 1 year        Value Added          ACT scores       Proficient            content areas
                   Scores Grades        were either      students had          grade 3-8.
Value Added        3-8 in science       equal or         a 19%                 Gateway scores
Reading/Langu      increase form a      above the        increase.             were all equal
age Arts           1.0 gain to a1.9     state’s          Math: was 1           or above the
Grades 3-8         gain in 2007.        predicted        point away            state’s
(3 year average)   We maintained        scores with      from an A in          predicted
was an A in        an A.                the exception    Achievement           scores with the
2006 with a 1.6                         of Math.         which was a           exception of
gain, but in       Science              Value-Added      2 NCE point           Physical
                                                 th
2007 our gain      Academic ACT         TCAP 11          increase in           Science.
was 2.8.           Achievement          grade writing    math over 1
                   Grades 9-12:         scores were      year period           ACT scores
Achievement        ACT - 3 - Year       also above       2007                  were either
Grades 5 was a     Composite            the state’s                            equal or above
4.1 and for        scores have          predicted        Math SpEd             the state’s
grade 8 was a      increased:           score.           with IEPs             predicted
4.3 for TCAP       2005: 20.2;                           Achievement           scores with the
Writing which      2006: 20.3;          All AYP          Dropped in            exception of
was an A.          2007: 20.4           Benchmarks       Grades 3, 4,          Math.




                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 116 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                   ACT Value-        were met or   5, and 6 but
                   added scores      exceeded.     Math SpEd                Value-Added
                                                                                   th
Value Added        were 20.52,                     with IEPs               TCAP 11
Reading/Langu      NDD from the                    Achievement             grade writing
age Arts           predicted                       showed                  scores were
Grades 9-12        scores.                         gains in                also above the
Gateway / End                                      Grades 7 and            state’s
of Course          Biology                         8                       predicted
scores were;       Gateway scores                                          score.
English (Eng II)   showed NDD
                                                   Math 9-12
was 532 which      from the                                                All AYP
                                                   Gateway/EO
was above the      predicted score                                         Benchmarks
                                                   C 3-year
predicted          of 537.5.                                               were met or
                                                   average
score;             However,                                                exceeded.
                                                   scores: (Alg
English I was      Physical
                                                   I) was 546.2,
519.4, which       Science EOC
                                                   which was
was also above     showed a
                                                   above the
the predicted      decrease from
                                                   predicted
score              the predicted
                                                   score.
                   score of 527.2
                                                   Math
ACT in English     to 520.5.
                                                   Foundations
was a
                                                   was 532.7,
composite
                                                   which was
score of 20.4,
                                                   above the
which was
                                                   predicted
above our
                                                   score. Math
predicted
                                                   Improved
score.
                                                   Sub-Groups
      th                                           over 1 year:
The 11 Grade
                                                   African
writing
                                                   American
assessment
                                                   had a 14%
score was 4.16,
                                                   increase
which was also
                                                   Students
above our
                                                   with
predicted
                                                   Disabilities
score.
                                                   13% increase
AYP Reading
                                                   AYP
Language Arts
                                                   Academic
Grades 9-12:
                                                   ACT
AYP Improved
                                                   Achievement
Sub-Groups
                                                   Grades 9-12:
over 1 year:
                                                   ACT - 3 -
Students with
                                                   Year
Disabilities had
                                                   Averages has
a 13% increase
                                                   shown slight
AYP Sub-
                                                   gains.
Groups that
                                                   On the ACT
decreased %
                                                   Plan



                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 117 of 245
                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Prof/Adv over 1                      administered
year:                                in fall of
African                              2007, 79% of
Americans had                        the total
a 14% decrease                       population
White had a 1%                       scored below
decrease                             19 and would
Economically                         be required
Disadv had a                         to take the
2% decrease                          bridge math
For AYP all                          course based
sub-groups                           on the TN
were equal or                        Diploma
above state                          project
averages                             guidelines.
except:
African                              Achievement
Americans who                        – Elementary
scored 4%                            Social
below                                Studies
and Hispanics                        Grades 3-8:
who scored                           TCAP
16% below                            Academic
                                     Achievement
                                     was a 54,
                                     which is a B
                                     +
                                     Social
                                     Studies was
                                     6 NCE points
                                     away from an
                                     A. This was
                                     a 2 point
                                     increase in 1
                                     year

                                     Value Added
                                     Social
                                     Studies
                                     3 year
                                     average
                                     In 2006 was a
                                     2.0 (A) in
                                     2007 it
                                     increased to
                                     2.8 (A)

                                     9-12 End of
                                     Course US
                                     History our




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 118 of 245
                                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                       score was
                                                                                                       517.9 which
                                                                                                       was above
                                                                                                       the predicted
                                                                                                       score.

                        Equipment is         Provide            All students         Provide           Ensure all       Provide             Support for         All Literacy           All grade level
                        constantly           professional       can participate.     professional      Pre-K-4          professional        program             Coaches and            and content area
                        updated using        development for    There is a           development       teachers are     development in      implementation      Guidance               teachers were
                        local, state, and    all Pre-K –5       quota for each       to all teachers   provided math    writing process     provided for all    counselors have        provided one half
                        federal funds.       teachers The       school based         for successful    manipulatives    for all high        schools through     been trained in        of four PD days
                                             Reading            on ADM.              implementatio     for math         school teachers     SE Department       the RTI process.       scheduled in the
                        Funding is           Specialist and                          n                 program                                                  Rollout training       annual calendar
                                                                                                                                th   th
                        available for all    Literacy           All teachers                           implementatio    PD for 5 -8         The SE              was held at every      to work in PLC’s
                        teachers to attend   Coaches model      were provided        PLC’s are         n                grade teachers      Department          elementary             with three
                        necessary            for all Pre-K-5    PD by the Math       scheduled in                       was provided in     encourages          school                 inservice days
                        training sessions.   teachers           and Science          every school      Support is       the writing         inclusion                                  provided and four
                                                                                                                                                                                  th
                                                                Projects’            to improve        limited due to   process. PD         services.           All middle and 9       administrative
                                                                                                                             th   th
                                             PD was             Coordinator          instructional     funding;         for 9 -12           However, some       grade students         days provided.
                                             provided for all   related to the       strategies.       available        grade teachers,     schools in the      have a READ 180
                                               th
                                             5 grade            fair guidelines.     System-wide       resources are    including CTE,      district choose     lab in their
                                             teachers and all                        grade level       isolated for     was provided        to participate      schools.
                                             6-8 LA teachers    A website for        meetings are      calculators      on 4-square         on a limited
Evidence of equitable                        in Big Blocks      teachers,            scheduled to                       writing and         basis.
system support for                           training.          parents, and         review hard-      All high         writing
this practice                                                   students is          to-teach          school           prompts. Write
                                             Ensure all K-1     available to         concepts and      algebra          away days are
                                             classrooms have    support the          share best        classes were     held monthly.
                                             needed             Science Fair         practices.        provided
                                             instructional      projects.                              calculators
                                             materials to                            A new             this year.
                                             implement          A local              teacher
                                             program            elementary and       induction
                                                                middle school        program had
                                             All K-5            fair has been        been
                                             classrooms         held the past 2      implemented
                                             were provided      years.               to support
                                             with new                                new staff. All
                                             materials to                            new staff is
                                             implement                               also
                                             Working with                            assigned a
                                             Words.                                  teacher
                                                                                     mentor.
                        Continue             Continue           Continue             Continue          Continue         Continue            Continue            Continue to refine     Schedule one
                        implementation of    implementation     implementation       implementatio     implementatio    implementation      implementation      the RTI process        additional day in
                        current practice.    of current         of current           n of current      n of current     of current          of current          and train              the annual
Next Step (changes
                                             practice and       practice and         practice;         practice         practice;           practice; further   additional             calendar for PD to
or continuations)
                                             implement a        encourage            Provide                            Continue to write   develop K-8         personnel.             provide time for
                                             Reading            more                 additional        Provide          within content      program and re-                            PLC meetings.
                                             Specialist for     participants         professional      additional       areas               evaluate 9-12       Hire additional




                                                                                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 119 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Grades 6-12         specifically at     development       math                                program            TA’s to help with
                    the high school     for               manipulative    PD will be                             implementation
                                                                th                       th
Reading             level.              differentiated    s to 5 grade    provided for 4      Continue to        and progress
Specialist PK-                          instruction to    and math        grade teachers      offer Language!    monitoring of the
12 is                                   continue          inclusion       in the writing      for at-risk        RTI process.
overseeing                              improvement       classrooms      process.            students.
implementation                                                            Continue Write                         Paraprofessional
of effective                            Provide           Increase        Away Days           Continue to        staff will be
literacy                                funding to        math            monthly.            offer PD for       trained to assist
programming                             allow any staff   instructional   Continued           teachers           with the
for all content                         to become HQ      time for        support for         regarding          Intervention
areas including                                           students in     Writing in the      diverse            model
CTE courses..                           Addition of       grades 6-8.     Content and         populations
                                        one PD day        Upgrade one     CTE areas 6-12.     and                Seek additional
Continue                                within the        PT position                         differentiated     funds for after-
training of final                       school            to a FT                             instruction.       school tutoring
block in literacy                       calendar to       position at                                            programs.
framework for                           allow time for    one middle                          Purchase math
          th
6-8 and 5 .                             PLC’s.            school.                             manipulatives      Continue READ
       th
Add 4 grade                                                                                   and technology     180 program and
teachers in                             Continue to                                           for inclusion      purchase new
training this                           organize                                              math classes       instructional
year.                                   curriculum                                                               materials
                                        teams to
Add additional                          revise and                                            Encourage          Purchase leveled
Literacy Coach                          update scope                                          more               readers for middle
to support                              and                                                   participation in   school LA
every                                   sequence                                              inclusionary       classrooms
elementary                              with                                                  practices
program.                                supporting
                                        Benchmark
Continue to                             Assessments
offer PD for
teachers                                Literacy
regarding                               coaches will
diverse                                 continue to
populations.                            work with
This training                           classroom
will include                            teachers to
poverty training                        support the
for new                                 RTI program
elementary                              as well as
teachers and                            advance
for 6-12                                students to
teachers.                               offer
                                        differentiated
Working with                            instruction
words block is                          for the
our phonics                             success of
program found                           all students




                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 120 of 245
             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


within the
balanced           Multi-level
literacy           instruction is
framework          also provided
                   within the
                   literacy
                   framework
                   for all
                   students




                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 121 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2b

                       INSTRUCTIONAL GAP ANALYSIS

The following are related to Instruction. The process will identify the discrepancy, or
the gap, between the current state – “What Is” – and the desired future state – “What
Ought To Be.” The information for “What Is” should be in Component 1 and will be
reviewed at this time.


Instructional TIME Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: TIME
(How are we currently allocating our time as central office employees in
providing assistance to schools and building capacity around understanding
and implementing research-based instructional practices?)

Annual technology training is provided for all newly hired teachers. This is a two-day
training session to help teachers become familiar with online curricular resources and
how to implement technology into classroom instruction. Supervisors schedule and
help facilitate grade level and content area meetings to allow teachers to exchange
lesson ideas and model “exemplary” lesson plans. Supervisors attend multiple
professional development sessions to stay abreast of current research-based
instructional strategies. Reading Specialist and 3 Literacy Coaches provide mentoring
and model instructional practices related to balanced literacy. High school teachers
have been trained in holistic scoring and the writing process by system-wide staff.

Special Education Directors provide annual professional development related to IDEA
Laws and IEP requirements. Evaluations of SE teachers are done cooperatively with
SE Directors.

Snapshot observations are done annually to document instructional methods
demonstrated by teachers in curriculum delivery. This provides feedback to teachers
concerning the use of a variety of instructional strategies.

Career and technical education teachers, especially in the trade & industrial areas,
receive annual training in order to remain certified in their specific content areas.

The Reading Specialist for PK-12 is ensuring that appropriate balanced literacy
training and strategies are implemented. She no longer serves as a literacy
coach. 3 additional literacy coaches have been added.

Middle school LA teachers and 5th grade teachers have been trained in Balanced
Literacy Framework.

The Reading Specialist and Director of Curriculum 6-12 have provided for
extensive training to LA teachers and the READ 180 teachers to support


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 122 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


instruction for this at-risk population.

We have added an additional position to work with Intervention and Inclusion
models at the system level. Training for all teachers related to this process was
provided at the beginning of the academic year.

A needs assessment was administered concerning social studies instructional
resources. Updated maps and globes were provided to 4th and 5th grades and to
the middle and high school teachers.

Directors meet on a regular basis to discuss instructional initiatives and to
assess progress related to our programs. Collaboration has been an integral
component to ensure the success of our site-based leadership and effective
instructional delivery.

Professional Development activities are provided on Differentiated Instruction
and Inclusion Practices.

District Supervisor visits and participates in teacher consultations for inclusion
classes.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: TIME

All directors will develop a system-wide focus for annual professional development
centered on our system needs. Another supervisory position is needed to allow the
curriculum directors to focus on curricular issues.

The position of career and technical education director should be elevated to a central
office position in order to oversee all facets of the CTE program, including the addition
of CTE programs in grades 6-8.



Instructional MONEY Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: MONEY
(How are we currently allocating our funds in providing assistance to schools
and building capacity around understanding and implementing research-based
instructional practices?)

After examining the current allocation of funds in implementation of instructional
techniques the following were identified:

   •   Elementary Title I funds are spent on instructional assistants’ salaries.
       Professional development money is spent on implementation of TSIP in Title I
       schools.
   •   Sets of the Mountain Language program are provided for all K-5 teachers.


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 123 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   •   Math manipulatives, including calculators, are provided for classroom use.
   •   Local, state, and Perkins funds are used to provide career and technical
       instructors with access to research-based instructional practices, both though
       local in-service development and travel to off-campus sites for additional
       training.

          ▫ Additional funds have been allocated for site-based (PLCs)
          instructional teams.
          ▫ Social studies instructional materials have been purchased. Media
          materials, SPARKS equipment (PE), art and music materials have been
          purchased to support our related arts programs.
          ▫ Grant funding through the Niswonger Foundation were secured to
          provide much-needed assistance to our middle and high school at-risk
          readers.
          ▫ REACH grant (21st CCLC) funds were renewed to add an after-
          school tutoring program and to continue the summer reading camps
          for at-risk readers at the elementary school level.
          ▫ An inclusion grant was awarded for initiation of inclusion services
          at Jefferson County High School.
          ▫ Implementation of Language! program at middle school level.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: MONEY

All schools should receive equal funding based on student enrollment or professional
staff numbers. Purchase of additional math manipulatives should be made to ensure
all classrooms have adequate supplies.

Local, state, and Perkins funds should be used to assist CTE instructors in addressing
specific deficiencies in the system’s Perkins report card, specifically in the areas of
academic attainment, completion, and the completion of non-traditional students.

Based on current funding levels, which should be increased, we are currently
utilizing funding sources to benefit the most at-risk students. Additional funds
are greatly needed to support our average and above-level students.


Instructional PERSONNEL Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: PERSONNEL
(How are we currently allocating our personnel in providing assistance to
schools and building capacity around understanding and implementing
research-based instructional practices?)

We currently have a Reading Specialist and 3 Literacy Coaches serving our Pre-K
through grades 5 population of students and teachers. Extensive professional
development has been provided to teachers in the balanced literacy program.
Modeling and ongoing mentoring is available for our teachers in these grades.


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 124 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Training was offered this academic year for our entire high school teacher population in
holistic scoring and the creative writing process.
    ▫ Maintain appropriate BEP classroom pupil-teacher ratios
    ▫ Provide after-school tutoring through extended contracts
    ▫ Provide support to RTI process through Reading Specialist, Director of
    Student Support Services, Literacy Coaches, and Intervention Specialists for
    the Intervention Process
    ▫ Provide certified staff for inclusionary classes
    ▫ We have added a K-12 Reading Specialist and have a total of 6 literacy
    coaches to support our balanced literacy program.
    ▫ We have added a 100-day contract for a mentor coordinator to support our
    new teacher induction program. She coordinates the PD that is provided
    monthly for our new teaching staff and organizes the PD for our teacher
    mentors.
    ▫ A position was reassigned at the district level to coordinate the
    Responsiveness To Intervention initiative as well as regular education
    inclusion practices.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: PERSONNEL

We make very good use of the current personnel. We need to add a reading specialist
position for grades 6-12.

Elevating the position of career and technical education director to a central office
position would better facilitate the integration of CTE and academic skills in grades 9-
12, while allowing for the expansion of CTE programs into grades 6-8 in order to offer
those instructional areas to students within those grades

   ▫ Additional instructional assistants are needed at all elementary schools to
   implement the intervention process with fidelity.
   ▫ An additional literacy coach is also needed to eliminate the shared
   responsibilities of one coach at two sites and to increase the number of at-
   risk students served.
   ▫ An additional ELL and English position must be filled to address the
   ELL/Hispanic and SWD subgroups performance. This will allow our high
   school ELL teacher to stay in one location and assist to implement an ELL 9th
   grade English inclusion class. A 10th grade English inclusion class will also
   be organized through this English position for SWD.
   ▫ Additional instructional assistants are needed at all middle grades to
   implement Achieving Cooperative Engagement (ACE) which will teach study
   skills and literacy for struggling students.
   ▫ A math specialist position to serve as a curriculum coach for grades K-12
   is needed.
   ▫ Increase funding to move a part-time middle school math position to full-
   time.



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 125 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Instructional OTHER RESOURCES Gap Analysis -                          Narrative Response
Required
“What is” The Current Use of: OTHER RESOURCES
(How are we currently allocating other resources in providing assistance to
schools and building capacity around understanding and implementing
research-based instructional practices?)

There is a collaborative relationship between Carson-Newman College and our school
system. This relationship provides ongoing professional development for our staff and
an opportunity for field experiences for their education students. Local community
leaders participate in system-wide events such as Read Across America and enhance
the instructional delivery in the classroom.

Programs at the high school provide students with an opportunity to job shadow in the
system’s elementary and middle schools. These students provide instructional
assistance to classroom teachers through peer tutoring and one-on-one instruction.

Support for the career and technical education areas, especially their correlating
student organizations, allow CTE students to implement and practice research-based
instruction in both laboratory and competitive situations.

   ▫ “Newspapers in the Classroom” is utilized at our elementary schools to
   support all instruction.
   ▫ Online subscriptions for instructional support in literacy, assessment, and
   credit recovery are utilized.
   ▫ Several grant funding organizations support literacy and related arts
   programming.
   ▫ Apples for the Students helps to support our elementary school programs
   ▫ Initiated inclusion services for 9th grade students in English and Math.

    ▫ “What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: OTHER RESOURCES
Pursue additional funding through alternative resources, such as grants and
fellowships. Local funds should support the salaries for instructional assistants and
additional assistants hired. This local support would make funding available for more
math manipulatives and leveled readers in our lower grades.

Programs should be pursued and developed that would allow time and resources for
career and technical education teachers and core curriculum teachers in grades 9-12
to develop integrated programs of study to combine the best elements of each area in
order to better serve our population.
       • Utilize a Discretionary Grant awarded from the
          TDOE to aid in math inclusion classes at the middle school level.

      • Expand the number of inclusion classrooms at the high school level for
        10th grade English and Math.


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 126 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


      • Appalachian Electric assists to sponsor the local science fairs to
        encourage our students to participate.

                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2c

                INSTRUCTIONAL REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS

The completed Instructional gap analysis should enable the Systemwide Leadership
Team to answer the following reflective questions relative to instructional practices.


Instructional Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Are we providing equity and adequacy to all our schools?

After examining all relevant data, the following areas were identified as being equitable
and adequate. The system:
   • Provides professional development for all Pre-K–5 teachers
   • Provides modeling by the Reading Specialist and Literacy Coaches for all Pre-
       K-5 teachers
   • Ensures all K-1 classrooms have needed instructional materials to implement
       program
   • Provides professional development to all teachers for successful implementation
   • Ensures all Pre-K-4 teachers are provided math manipulatives for math program
       implementation
   • Provides professional development in writing process for all high school
       teachers
   • Provides support program implementation for all schools through SE
       Department
   • Ensures all career and technical education programs are competency based
       and following both state and industry guidelines.
   • Provides support and funding for all CTE courses, along with the activities of
       their respective CTSO’s.
   • PD was provided for all 5th grade teachers and all 6-8 LA teachers in Big
       Blocks training.
   • All K-5 classrooms were provided with new materials to implement
       Working with Words
   • PLC’s are scheduled in every school to improve instructional strategies.
       System-wide grade level meetings are scheduled to review hard-to-teach
       concepts and share best practices.
   • A new teacher induction program had been implemented to support new
       staff. All new staff is also assigned a teacher mentor.
   • All high school algebra classes were provided calculators this year.
   • PD for 5th -8th grade teachers was provided in the writing process. PD for
       9th-12th grade teachers, including CTE, was provided on 4-square writing
       and writing prompts. Write away days are held monthly.


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 127 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   •   All Literacy Coaches and Guidance counselors have been trained in the
       RTI process. Rollout training was held at every elementary school
   •   All middle and 9th grade students have a READ 180 lab in their schools.
   •   Implementing inclusion services for SWD.
   •   The SE Department encourages inclusion services. However, some
       schools in the district choose to participate on a limited basis.


Instructional Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Are we targeting funds and resources effectively to meet the needs of our
schools?

   •   We are currently doing a very good job under the limited per pupil expenditure
       annual funding appropriations, but this is not adequate.
   •   All teachers have a copy of the state-mandated curriculum guides and are
       trained in its implementation for classroom instruction.
   •   We apply for grant funding and work diligently to secure monies to fund needs.
   •   Financial resources should be allocated to expand our current media services to
       support the curriculum. Expand the job training program to include additional
       sites for all high school students.
   •   Coordination of our system-wide professional development activities should be
       driven by individual teacher needs and planned across all departments.
       Another supervisory position is needed to allow the curriculum directors to focus
       on curricular issues.
   •   All students should have the annually adopted text. All schools should receive
       equal funding for professional development based on teacher population for
       appropriate training, not just Title I schools.
   •   All schools should offer a full range of fine arts instruction. We need an
       additional Reading Specialist for 7-12. Another supervisory position is needed
       to allow the curriculum directors to focus on curricular issues. The position of
       career and technical education director should be elevated to a central office
       position to oversee all facets of a true system-wide CTE program.
   •   All career and technical education instructors are provided with competency
       profiles for each of their respective courses, and align their programs to same.
   •   Career and technical education programs and services should be expanded into
       grades 6-8 in order to serve students with those needs earlier, which will offer
       them greater incentive to matriculate in those areas.

Currently, we actively pursue additional funding through alternative resources, such as
grants and fellowships. The school system also actively pursues additional local
funding. However, due to budget constraints, additional funding sources are still
needed. The system does an excellent job with the current funding it receives.

We have implemented the action steps to meet our previous TCSPP goals. We
continue to use our funding to support classroom instructional needs.
Teachers’ salaries were increased and additional staff was hired to retain and to


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 128 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


increase the number of highly qualified personnel. State initiatives have been
implemented and are supported by appropriate administration with an emphasis
on direct student services.




Instructional Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of students in our
schools?

We are currently meeting AYP requirements with the exception of our SWD population
in grades 9-12.

   •   Jefferson County State Report Card 2004-05 reflects gains in K-8 criterion
       referenced achievement in all content areas.
   •   Economically disadvantaged P/A in math and reading/language was higher than
       the state %.
   •   Gateway Algebra and English II Advanced % was higher than the state and %
       Proficient in Biology I and English II was higher than the state.
   •   EOC in Math Foundations Advanced % was higher than the state.
   •   US History % Proficient was higher than the state.
   •   AA, ED and SWD populations on Gateway Algebra % Advanced 2 year average
       outperformed the state.
   •   Every subgroup outperformed the state in % P/A in the 2 year average for the
       Writing and Gateway English tests.
   •   K-8 TVAAS scores have had positive gains from 2004 to 2005 school years.
   •   Teacher, student and parent surveys indicate that all stakeholders believe that
       our system provides a quality educational experience for our students.
   •   System performance level on the 2004-2005 Perkins report card was higher
       than the state average in four out of six areas.
   •   According to the 2007 Report Card. Math AYP Grades 3-8 All subgroups
       equal or above state averages except: Hispanic 2% below; White 1% below
   •   AYP Grades 9-12 All sub-groups equal or above state averages except:
   •   Hispanic 9% below; LEP 7% below
   •   Reading AYP Grades 3-8 sub-groups below state averages:
   •   Hispanic 2% below; Economically Disadv 4% below; Students with
       Disabilities 1% below Reading AYP Grades 9-12 All sub-groups equal or
       above state averages except: African Amer 4% below; Hispanic 16% below
   •   ACT scores were either equal or above the state’s predicted scores with
       the exception of Math.
   •   Value-Added TCAP 11th grade writing scores were also above the state’s
       predicted score.


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 129 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


•   All AYP Benchmarks were met or exceeded.
•   Our Perkins report card for CTE reflected all A’s.
•   The 2007 SWD report card indicated gains in the following areas :
        Decreased the dropout rate by 6.45%
        Increased graduation rate by 9.38%
        Proficiency rate for SWD in Language Arts in grades 5,6,7, 8, and 10
        Proficiency rate for SWD in Math in grades 7 and 8
        Achievement – Elementary Science
        Grades 3-8: TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement
    (3 year average)
           • Science scores have increased yearly
           • 2005: 50 NCE points earned a C
           • 2006: 52 NCE points earned a C
           • 2007: 54 NCE points earned a B +

        Value Added Scores Grades 3-8 in science increase form a 1.0 gain to
        a1.9 gain in 2007. We maintained an A.

        Science Academic ACT Achievement Grades 9-12: ACT - 3 - Year
        Composite scores have increased: 2005: 20.2; 2006: 20.3; 2007: 20.4
        ACT Value-added scores were 20.52, NDD from the predicted scores.

•   Biology Gateway scores showed NDD from the predicted score of 537.5.
    However, Physical Science EOC showed a decrease from the predicted
    score of 527.2 to 520.5.




              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 130 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2d


The following summary questions are related to Instruction. They are designed as a
culminating activity for your self-analysis, focus questions discussions, and findings
regarding this area.


Instructional Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major strengths and how do we know?

   •   Pre- and Post DIBELS scores indicate academic gains
   •   Reading benchmark assessments show value-added data
   •   State Report Card scores for TVAAS indicate an increase from a D to B in 2005
       in reading
   •   Demonstrated positive gains in all subjects on K-8 TVAAS scores from 2004 to
       2005 school years
   •   Survey results indicate that parents, teachers, and students are receiving an
       effective education
   •   2005 CRT scores for Math are above the state average
   •   Academic achievement in math increased from a C to a B from 2004-2005
   •   Gateway scores in algebra P/A % is 84.6 which is above the state %
   •   Received an A in Writing
   •   Compliance of state-mandated monitoring of SE documentation
   •   Increases in both math and reading P/A scores for SWD sub-group for 2005 (K-
       8)
   •   Actual performance of career and technical education students in the area of
       skill proficiencies attained was 1.34% higher than the negotiated level for 2004-
       2005 on the system’s Perkins report card, and placement of CTE students was
       15.29% higher.
   •   The 2005 CTE Perkins Report indicated the district scored A’s in the
       following Core Indicators:
          1S2: Skill Proficiencies
          3S1: Placement
          4S1: Participation Non-Traditional

   •   The 2006 CTE Perkins Report indicated the district scored A’s in the following
       Core Indicators:
          1S1 Academic Attainment
          2S1: Completion
          3S1: Placement
          4S1: Participation Non-Traditional
          4S2: Completion Non-Traditional

       The 2007 Report Card Scores were:
          All 3-8 Value Added scores were A’s.


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 131 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


          Achievement scores 3-8 were B’s.
          Gateway scores were all equal or above the state’s predicted scores
          with the exception of Physical Science.
          All Writing scores were A’s.
          ACT scores were either equal or above the state’s predicted scores
          with the exception of Math.
          Value-Added TCAP 11th grade writing scores were also above the
          state’s predicted score.
          All AYP Benchmarks were met or exceeded.
          All CTE scores were A’s.


Instructional Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major challenges and how do we know? Place in prioritized order,
based on data from Component 3.

1. Improve student achievement in all subgroups
2. Improve transition between middle and high school in core areas
3. Provide equal educational opportunities for all students by increasing per pupil
expenditures
4. Increase the core indicator scores from B to A in career and technical education.
2008 Goals
1. Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of economically disadvantaged, African American,
Students with Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage proficient/advanced by 4%.
2. Increase Math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers by
50% over the previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill acquisition
resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.
3. Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2%.
4. Technology: Increase Technology Integration to support state curriculum
performance indicators to increase student achievement on ACT Explore to College
Ready status in math, reading, and science subject areas (and the composite score) and
achieve a composite ACT PLAN score that is equal to a 21 on the ACT.




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 132 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Instructional Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
How will we address our challenges?

We will address our challenges by:
  • Enrolling 90% of our ELL students in the summer reading program
  • Implementing a balanced literacy program for grades 6-12
  • Providing a rigorous math program for grades 6-12 for all subgroups
  • Continuing to improve the S-Team process for referral of struggling students
  • Creating curriculum teams between middle and high school in all content areas
  • Continuing to secure needed funds through continual grant opportunities
  • Convening an educational summit with 6-12 administrators to discuss curriculum
      challenges
  • Evaluating professional development budget and securing equitable funding for
      each grade level
  • Use Perkins funds to build a library of instructional support for career and
      technical education teachers in order that they may increase the academic rigor
      of their programs.
  • Allowing teachers in both the academic and career & technical areas to develop
      programs where the best attributes of both areas are integrated to increase the
      academic attainment of all students in grades 9-12.
CTE 2005 Perkins Report Core Indicators to address:
4S2: Completion Non-Traditional (student participation in Vocational-Technical Education programs)
    •   Increased recruitment for CTE class offerings
    •   Signage at the high school level to increase student awareness of CTE program
    •   Classroom presentations to freshmen English classes by CTE counselor for recruiting
        purposes
    •   Publicity of CTE course offerings to School Commissioners and through local media
        (Standard Banner)
1S1 : Academic Attainment (proficiency in Math, English and Writing Assessment and successfully pass
exit exams (Gateway Exams) in Algebra I, English II, and Biology)
2S1: Completion (met requirements to receive a high school diploma)
   • Professional development aimed at writing assessment and holistic scoring
   • Reading in the content area
CTE 2006 Perkins Report Core Indicator to address:
1S2: Skill Proficiency
   • Teachers identified students who were not proficient in course competencies
   • Teachers analyzed data and determined these at-risk populations were students who lacked
       motivation because they were assigned to the CTE path, but were not interested in the CTE
       path.
   • It was determined to work with the guidance department to screen potential students and identify
       those who do not want to participate in the CTE classes.
   • The guidance department will then find other course offerings for these students in which they
       will be motivated and successful.
   • A reevaluation of the CTE offerings indicated a need to provide courses reflecting current labor
       market offerings, including adding additional higher tech related courses and student interest.
                                                                                   th
   • Additional literacy coaching position will be added at the 7 elementary
        school.
    •   Continue training of final block in literacy framework for 6-8 and 5th. Add


                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 133 of 245
                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    4th grade teachers in training this year.
•   Addition of one PD day within the school calendar to allow time for PLC’s.
•   Continue to organize curriculum teams to revise and update scope and
    sequence with supporting Benchmark Assessments.
•   Literacy coaches will continue to work with classroom teachers to support
    the RTI program as well as advance students to offer differentiated
    instruction for the success of all students.
•   Provide additional math manipulatives to 5th grade and math inclusion
    classrooms.
•   PD will be provided for 4th grade teachers in the writing process.
    Continue Write Away Days monthly. Continued support for Writing in the
    Content and CTE areas 6-12.
•   Purchase math manipulatives and technology for inclusion math classes.
•   Continue to refine the RTI process and train additional personnel.
•   Paraprofessional staff will be trained to assist with the Intervention model.
•   Seek additional funds for after-school tutoring programs.
•   Continue READ 180 program and purchase new instructional materials.
•   Purchase leveled readers for middle school LA classrooms.
•   Encourage more participation in inclusionary practices
•   Teacher training on differentiated instruction.
•   Encourage more participation in the science fair, particularly at the high
    school level.




            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 134 of 245
                                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3a


                                                                        ASSESSMENT PRACTICES
Current       CTE students are       Reading Placement     Progress               Diagnostic             T-CAP             Writing          Gateway and      Portfolio           Progress
Assessment    evaluated according    and Benchmark         Monitoring             Screenings and S-                        Assessment       End of Course    Assessments         Reports Home
Practices     to state competency    Tests aligned with                           Team Referrals         ACT Explore                        Exams                                to Parents
              profiles.              TN SDE standards      Running Records                               and Plan
                                                                                  RTI Referrals                                             ACT Exam
                                                           DIBELS                 made to insure
                                                           Think Link             student progress
              CTE instructors        Require all K-5       Utilize unit tests     Provide SCI-2          Ensure all        Mandated by      Mandated by      Use for students    Progress
              must report            teachers to turn in   and benchmark          TWS-4 School           students in       state annually   state annually   with disabilities   Reports are
              individual student     assessments 3         assessments            Psychologist           grades 3-8 take                                                         sent home to
              competencies           times per year                                                      the state         Utilize Write                     Use for progress    parents every 9
              attained through                             Think Link was         Provide S-Team         mandated          Away Days                         monitoring in the   weeks
              statewide on-line      Reading               provided for           referral process for   assessment        quarterly,                        writing process
              reporting process      Benchmarks were       grades 6-8. This       all schools                              system-wide 3-                    in elementary       Conferences
              (Etiger)               updated to reflect    provided                                      Parents are       12                                school              are held every
                                     the strengthened      formative              The S-Team             given annual                                                            semester an
              Students and           literacy program      assessments for        Process has been       reports           Write Away                                            parents are
              parents are provided                         those students.        revised to reflect                       Days are now                                          given
              with a copy of         K-5 Math                                     the IRIS model of      Teachers          monthly. The                                          scheduled
              course                 Benchmark             DIBELS online          Intervention           utilized Turn     Scoring Rubric                                        times to attend.
              competencies for       assessments           was used to                                   Leaf to           is available                                          Teachers are
              their particular       have been added       record progress        Classroom              determine         online.                                               available for
              course.                                      monitoring for         teachers received      areas of                                                                conferences on
Evidence of                          READ 180 is used      students. This         training in the RTI    curriculum                                                              an as-needed
Practice      Written, oral, and     to provide a          supported the RTI      model. The             need.                                                                   basis.
              demonstration          placement             process.               intervention
              methods are used to    assessment for                               model is posted        Teachers used                                                           Teachers utilize
              assess student         LA at risk                                   on the system          information in                                                          e-mail and
              mastery of course      students and                                 website                PLC’s to adapt                                                          newsletters to
              competencies.          monitors                                                            instructional                                                           communicate
                                     progress for                                                        strategies and                                                          with parents.
                                     students in                                                         implement best
                                     grades 6-9                                                          practices as                                                            Take-Home
                                                                                                         related to                                                              folders are
                                                                                                                                                                                             th
                                     6-8 Math                                                            authentic                                                               used in PK-5
                                     Benchmarks were                                                     assessment.                                                             on a weekly
                                     established with                                                                                                                            basis.
                                     middle school
                                     and high school                                                                                                                             Assignment
                                     math teachers                                                                                                                               Notebooks are
                                                                                                                                                                                 required for




                                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 135 of 245
                                                                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                                                          students in
                                                                                                                                                                                          middle school


                      Yes                    Yes                   Yes                   Yes                   Yes                  Yes               Yes             Yes                 Yes
Is the current
practice
research-based?

Is it a principle &   Yes                    Yes                   Yes                   Yes                   Yes                  Yes               Yes             Yes                 Yes
practice of high
performing
school systems?
Has the current       Effective              Effective             Effective             Effective             Effective            Effective         Effective       Effective           Effective
practice been
effective or
ineffective?
                      Perkins report card;   TVAAS scores on       Individual            Documentation         TCAP                 State Report      State Report    State               Parent and
                      graduation rates.      the 2005 Report       Screenings and        from:                 achievement and      Card              Card            assessments         Student
                                             Card                  support plans         Reading Specialist    assessment data                                                            Surveys
What data
                                                                                         LC/S Psycho                                State             State           Writing Portfolio
source(s) do you
                                             TVASS scores on                             S-Team Referrals      State Report         assessments       assessments     follows student     State Report
have that
                                             the annual Report                           IEPs                  Card                                                   progress and is     Card
support your
                                             Card                                                                                   Write Away Day    ACT Scores      used in
answer? (Identify
                                                                                                               ACT Explore          holistic scores                   conferencing        Progress
all applicable
                                                                                                               and Plan                                               with parents;       Reports
sources)
                                                                                                               scores with                                            follows students
                                                                                                               projections                                            to next grade       Assignment
                                                                                                                                                                      level               Books
                      Perkins report card    Increased TVAAS       94% proficient        Increase number of    Jefferson County     A on Report       Algebra         Teacher and         Our Promotion
                      shows JCHS             score in reading on   K-5                   screenings            State Report         Card in writing   Gateway P/A     parent feedback     Rate in 2007
                      student attainment     2005 Report Card      88 % in MS                                  Card 2004-05         grades 5, 8       increased in                        was 97.9%,
                      of competencies        from D to B                                 RTI Referrals         reflects gains in                      2005, above     A on Report         which was
                      higher than state                            DIBELS                have increased        K-8 criterion        According to      state average   Card in writing     above the state
                      average.               According to the      assessment            tremendously.         referenced           the 2007 Report                   grades 5, 8         goal.
                                             2007 Report Card:     results in elevated   10% of our            achievement in       Card:             English II
                      All A’s on Perkins      Math AYP Grades      scores. It does       students K-3 have     all content areas.    Math AYP         Gateway P/A     2007 Portfolio      Graduation
                      Report Card            3-8 All subgroups     not measure the       been involved in      Economically         Grades 3-8 All    increased in    scores were         Rate was
Evidence of                                  equal or above        comprehension         Tier I                disadvantaged        subgroups         2005, above     100% Proficient     89.2%, just
effectiveness or      Academic               state averages        component of          interventions and     P/A in math and      equal or above    state average   or Advanced.        below the state
ineffectiveness       Attainment in          except: Hispanic      required reading      260 students were     reading/languag      state averages                                        goal
                      Mathematics for the    2% below; White       skills, therefore     involved in Tier II   e was higher         except:           Sub-group
                      System’s Career        1% below              not indicative of     Interventions in      than the state %.    Hispanic 2%       SWD failed to                       Conference
                      Technical area was                           reading fluency.      January.                                   below; White      make AYP on                         attendance in
                      at a 98%               Reading AYP                                                       Gateway              1% below          reading/LA/                         elementary
                      Performance Level.     Grades 3-8 sub-                                                   Algebra and                            writing                             schools
                                             groups below                                                      English II           Reading AYP                                           continues to be
                      Academic               state averages:                                                   Advanced %           Grades 3-8 sub-   AYP Grades                          higher the
                      Attainment in          Hispanic 2%                                                       was higher than      groups below      9-12 All sub-                       lower the
                      Reading/LA for the     below;                                                            the state and %      state averages:   groups equal                        student grade



                                                                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 136 of 245
                                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


System’s Career      Economically                              Proficient in       Hispanic 2%       or above        level. Parent
Technical area was   Disadv 4% below;                          Biology I and       below;            state           attendance is
at a 93.9%           Students with                             English II was      Economically      averages        78% in K and
Performance Level.   Disabilities 1%                           higher than the     Disadv 4%         except:         falls throughout
                     below                                     state.              below;            Hispanic 9%     the elementary
                                                                                   Students with     below; LEP      grades.
                     All AYP                                   EOC in math         Disabilities 1%   7% below
                     Benchmarks were                           Foundations         below                             Conference
                     met or exceeded.                          Advanced %                            Reading AYP     attendance at
                                                               was higher than     TCAP Writing      Grades 9-12     the high school
                                                               the state.          scores were       All sub-        is very limited.
                                                                                   A’s.              groups equal
                                                               US History %                          or above
                                                               Proficient was      Value-Added       state
                                                                                           th
                                                               higher than the     TCAP 11           averages
                                                               state.              grade writing     except:
                                                                                   scores were       African Amer
                                                               AA, ED and          also above the    4% below;
                                                               SWD                 state’s           Hispanic 16%
                                                               populations on      predicted         below
                                                               Gateway             score.
                                                               Algebra %                             Gateway
                                                               Advanced 2 year                       scores were
                                                               average                               all equal or
                                                               outperformed the                      above the
                                                               state.                                state’s
                                                                                                     predicted
                                                               Every subgroup                        scores with
                                                               outperformed the                      the exception
                                                               state in % P/A in                     of Physical
                                                               the 2 year                            Science.
                                                               average for the
                                                               Writing and                           ACT scores
                                                               Gateway English                       were either
                                                               tests.                                equal or
                                                                                                     above the
                                                               K-8 TVAAS                             state’s
                                                               scores have had                       predicted
                                                               positive gains                        scores with
                                                               from 2004 to                          the exception
                                                               2005 school                           of Math.
                                                               years.
                                                                                                     All Our
                                                               All AYP                               Perkins
                                                               Benchmarks                            report card
                                                               were met or                           for CTE
                                                               exceeded                              reflected all
                                                                                                     A’s.




                                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 137 of 245
                                                                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                   Provide equal             Submit test scores   Submit copies of        Services available     Participation of    Conduct county-     System-wide       Provide           All students
                   access to                 at all K-5 schools   monitoring              to all schools and     all students 3-12   wide Write Away     training          professional      receive a
                   appropriate                                    instruments at all      all students                               Day for all         provided to all   development to    progress report
                   resources and             Benchmark            K-5 schools                                    ACT Explore         schools             subject area      all teachers      every 9 weeks.
                                                                                                                               th
                   materials.                assessment                                                          given to all 7                          teachers          implementing
                                             document is          Literacy coaches                               graders. ACT        Implementation                        process
                   Funding provided          available online     collect                                        Plan given to all   of school-wide      All teachers
                                                                                                                   th
                   for instructional         and all teachers     assessment data                                10 Grade.           writing process     receive           The Director of
                   materials and             use to record        and support                                                        and holistic        training in       Exception
                   equipment.                assessments.         teachers’                                      The Director of     scoring for all     test              Student
                                                                  implementation                                 Assessment          courses             administratio     Services
Evidence of
                   Funding provided          Scott Foresman                                                      explains and                            n annually.       explains and
equitable system
                   for teachers to           Baseline and End-                                                   supports            All schools                           supports
support for this
                   attend meetings and       of-Year                                                             administration      observe the         The Director      administration
practice
                   conferences to stay       Assessments are                                                     and teachers in     monthly Write-      of                and teachers in
                   abreast of latest         available to all                                                    assessment          Away Day            Assessment        assessment
                   trends in their fields.   teachers online                                                     analysis.           grades 3-12.        explains and      analysis.
                                                                                                                                                         supports
                                                                                                                                                         administratio
                                                                                                                                                         n and
                                                                                                                                                         teachers in
                                                                                                                                                         assessment
                                                                                                                                                         analysis.


                   Continue                  Continue             Continue                Continue               Continue as         Continue            Continue as       Continue          Continue
                   implementation of         implementation of    implementation of       implementation of      mandated; Need      implementation      mandated;         implementation    implementation
                   current practice.         current practice     current practice;       current practice;      for more timely     of current          Need for more     of current        of current
                                                                  Continue to use         Utilize intervention   feedback            practice; Provide   timely            practice;         practice.
                                             Continue to          data to plan            plans for all                              professional        feedback          Implement
                                             monitor student      instructional reports   students               Continue to         development                           portfolio         Add Think Link
                                                                                                                                                                  th
                                             progress utilizing                                                  provide test        session, “What      Every 11          assessment use    reports to
                                             benchmark            Implement Think         Continue to use        analysis            does proficient     Grader will       systemwide        conference
                                             assessments K-5.     Link as our             the RTI process        through Turn        writing look        take the ACT                        reports.
                                                                  Benchmark               as our referral        Leaf                like?”              exam in
Next Step                                                         Assessment              method.                                                        April. These
(changes or                                                       Grades K-8.                                    ACT scores will     Continue to         scores will
continuations)                                                    Utilize Think Link                             be utilized to      assess Write        be utilized to
                                                                  as our universal                               determine           Away samples        determine
                                                                  screening                                      curricular          to improve          curricular
                                                                  assessment and                                 needs.              student writing     needs.
                                                                  RTI weekly                                                                             Students
                                                                  probes will be                                                                         who fail to
                                                                  used as progress                                                                       meet state
                                                                  monitoring                                                                             benchmarks
                                                                                                                                                         will take a
                                                                                                                                                         remediation
                                                                                                                                                         course.




                                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 138 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3b

                         ASSESSMENT GAP ANALYSIS

The following are related to Assessment. The process will identify the discrepancy, or
the gap, between the current state – “What Is” – and the desired future state – “What
Ought To Be.” The information for “What Is” should be in Component 1 and will be
reviewed at this time.


Assessment TIME Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: TIME
(How are we currently allocating our time as central office employees in
providing assistance to schools and building capacity around understanding
and implementing research-based assessment practices?)

The testing coordinator analyzes all incoming assessment data and prepares a report
for each building level principal. In collaboration with special education directors, a
report is provided that identifies students who are “border line”. These are students
who are close to being in the proficient category. The coordinator also provides
professional development on appropriate use of assessment data with principals and
teachers. Central office staff provides professional development for appropriate use
and implementation of DIBELS and benchmark assessment tools related to balanced
literacy. The writing and holistic scoring processes were presented to all high school
teachers for implementation of a school wide writing focus. Central office staff
oversees the S-Team/pre-referral process for all students who are not currently being
successful in the regular classroom setting.

The Director of Assessment spends time with principals and staff assisting them
to analyze test data and focus on instructional improvement as related to test
performance. PD was provided for administration in utilization of Turn Leaf data.
Director of Student Support, Reading Specialist and Directors of Curriculum met
with each school staff to train in the RTI process. Director of Student Support
met with individual school grade level staff units to offer support for
implementation of the RTI process. The addition of a Human Resources position
has relieved the Director of Assessment to focus on test data and plan for
student improvement.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: TIME

Current practices have proven to be very effective and should be continued. An
additional position should be added to relieve the testing coordinator from unrelated
duties. Also, an additional reading specialist position should be added to serve grades
6-12. Elevating the position of career and technical education director to a central
office position would better facilitate the integration of CTE and academic skills in
grades 9-12, while allowing for the expansion of CTE programs into grades 6-8 in order


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 139 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


to offer those instructional areas to students within those grades.

Additional time must be spent in the RTI process. Individual teachers must
focus on utilization of testing data both formative and summative to focus on
improvement of instructional strategies to ensure student academic success.




Assessment MONEY Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: MONEY
(How are we currently allocating our funds in providing assistance to schools
and building capacity around understanding and implementing research-based
assessment practices?)

Money is spent to allow all high school seniors to take the ACT or SAT assessment.
This is a one-time expenditure. We also provide a yearly subscription for TestMate
Clarity to allow teachers access to a test bank that creates practice assessment tools.
Allocated funds for guidance and psychological departments are used to support S-
Team/pre-referral process. Title V monies fund the Family Resource Center. Local
funding is provided to the Family Resource Center to conduct 4 year old screenings.
We currently fund an annual subscription to an online data base that allows teacher
access to student assessment profiles (related to DIBELS). An online service is
contracted to provide the system a means for conducting surveys of all stakeholders.
The surveys are used to gather information related to the educational process. Funds
are allocated to provide a contracted alternative school setting for students who have
behavioral needs. Funds are allocated for all juniors, along with any other interested
students, to go through the Kuder interest inventory assessment in order for those
students to better assess their possible career choices.

We continue to implement that previous assessment practices with focus on PD
and authentic assessments. Curriculum teams have development benchmark
assessments in reading and math. PD funds are allocated to individual schools
to support training for teachers related to the SIP goals.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: MONEY

All schools should receive equal funding for professional development based on
teacher population for appropriate assessment training, not just Title I schools. An
additional position should be added to relieve the testing coordinator from unrelated
duties. Also, an additional reading specialist position should be added to serve grades
6-12. DIBELS should be provided for every student. Currently, this is only provided as
a pilot program. The position of career and technical education director should be
elevated to a central office position in order to oversee all facets of the CTE program,
including the addition of CTE programs in grades 6-8.
Funding must be allocated for a consistent formative assessment to support


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 140 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


classroom instruction and to give teachers immediate feedback related to
classroom instruction and student mastery of objectives. Think Link is a
program that will offer this immediate feedback.



Assessment PERSONNEL Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: PERSONNEL
(How are we currently allocating personnel in providing assistance to schools
and building capacity around understanding and implementing research-based
assessment practices?)

A Testing Coordinator position is funded in order to provide assistance to principals
and teachers with the testing process. A Reading Specialist and three Literacy
Coaches assist teachers in reading assessments. Guidance counselors assist in the
referral process. School psychologists and the educational diagnostician also
participate in student needs identification. Special education teachers and central
office personnel assess and develop IEPs for identified students. Through the
vocational department, a guidance counselor is provided to oversee and facilitate
student career selection through the use of an electronic assessment tool. We also
provide a guidance counselor that serves as the liaison between the regular
educational program and alternative completion program

The Director of Assessment continues to support the comprehensive
assessment program. The Reading Specialist and 6 Literacy Coaches assist in
reading assessments. Guidance counselors assist in the referral process. Two
Intervention Specialist and two school psychologists work to assist to indentify
students who require additional educational services. The is a guidance
counselor dedicated to the CTE program to assist students participating in those
programs find successful placements to prepare for future vocations.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: PERSONNEL

An additional position should be added to relieve the testing coordinator from unrelated
duties. Also, an additional reading specialist position should be added to serve grades
6-12. Elevating the position of career and technical education director to a central
office position would better facilitate the integration of CTE and academic skills in
grades 9-12, while allowing for the expansion of CTE programs into grades 6-8 in order
to offer those instructional areas to students within those grades.




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 141 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Assessment OTHER RESOURCES Gap Analysis -                             Narrative Response
Required
“What is” The Current Use of: OTHER RESOURCES
(How are we currently allocating other resources in providing assistance to
schools and building capacity around understanding and implementing
research-based assessment practices?)

Due to the high stakes security issues surrounding testing, all assessments are
handled at the local level by school personnel. Behavioral assessments are provided
by a contracted alternative school provider. The State Department of Education
website provides testing information and appropriate resources. Desegregated data
are also provided on this website that allows specific educational interventions for
specific subgroups. School Improvement Plans (SIP) are used as a resource for
assessment through surveys and achievement data. All schools go through an annual
SACS evaluation that provides feedback concerning current programming. Parents
and students receive timely feedback concerning academic progress through the
quarterly report card program. A mid-term report is also provided. All parents of
career and technical education students receive a copy of the competency profile for
any CTE course in which their child is enrolled. Programs should be pursued and
developed that would allow time and resources for career and technical education
teachers and core curriculum teachers in grades 9-12 to develop integrated programs
of study to combine the best elements of each area in order to better serve our
population

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: OTHER RESOURCES

The system should partner with local higher education institutions to ensure current
practices reflect what is considered research-based. This will also ensure that
students who graduate will be appropriately prepared for future vocational
opportunities.




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 142 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3c

                  ASSESSMENT REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS

The completed Assessment gap analysis should enable the Systemwide Leadership
Team to answer the following reflective questions relative to instructional practices.


Assessment Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Are we providing equity and adequacy to all our schools?

After examining all relevant data, the following areas were identified as being equitable
and adequate. The system:
   • Requires all students to participate in standardized testing in grades 3-12
   • Requires monitoring and assessment of the balanced literacy program at all K-5
       schools
   • Provides diagnostic screening services to all students
   • Conducts county-wide Write Away Day for all schools
   • Provides system-wide training in use of assessment to all teachers
   • Requires implementation of a school-wide writing process and holistic scoring
       for all courses
   • Provides professional development to all teachers implementing the portfolio
       assessment process
   • Provides equipment and training which enables all CTE teachers to report
       student competency attainment on the state department of education website.
   • Benchmark assessment documents are available online and all teachers
       use them to record assessments.
   • Scott Foresman Baseline and End-of-Year Assessments are available to
       all elementary teachers online
   • Literacy coaches collect assessment data and support teachers’
       implementation
   • ACT Explore given to all 7th graders. ACT Plan given to all 10th Grade.
   • The Director of Assessment explains and supports administration and
       teachers in assessment analysis.
   • All schools observe the monthly Write-Away Day grades 3-12.
   • All teachers receive training in test administration annually.
   • The Director of Assessment explains and supports administration and
       teachers in assessment analysis.
   • The Director of Exception Student Services explains and supports
       administration and teachers in assessment analysis.
   • Think Link was provided for grades 6-8. This provided formative
       assessments for those students.


Assessment Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required

                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 143 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Are we targeting funds and resources effectively to meet the needs of our
schools?

   •   All teachers have a copy of the state-mandated curriculum guides and are
       trained in its implementation related to student assessment
   •   Work diligently to secure monies to fund additional positions related to
       assessment. Another supervisory position is needed to allow the testing
       coordinator to focus on assessment issues.
   •   All career and technical education instructors have a copy of the state-
       mandated curriculum guides, along with the competency profiles, for each of
       their respective courses.

Currently, we actively pursue additional funding through alternative resources, such as
grants and fellowships. The school system also actively pursues additional local
funding. However, due to budget constraints, additional funding sources are still
needed. The system does an excellent job with the current funding it receives.




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 144 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Assessment Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of students in our
schools?

   •   We are currently meeting AYP requirements with the exception of our SWD
       population in grades 9-12.
   •   Jefferson County State Report Card 2004-05 reflects gains in K-8 criterion
       referenced achievement in all content areas.
   •   Economically disadvantaged P/A in math and reading/language was higher than
       the state %.
   •   Gateway Algebra and English II Advanced % was higher than the state and %
       Proficient in Biology I and English II was higher than the state.
   •   EOC in Math Foundations Advanced % was higher than the state.
   •   US History % Proficient was higher than the state.
   •   AA, ED and SWD populations on Gateway Algebra % Advanced 2 year average
       outperformed the state.
   •   Every subgroup outperformed the state in % P/A in the 2 year average for the
       Writing and Gateway English tests.
   •   K-8 TVAAS scores have had positive gains from 2004 to 2005 school years.
   •   Teacher, student and parent surveys indicate that all stakeholders believe that
       our system provides a quality educational experience for our students.
   •   Actual performance of career and technical education students in the area of
       skill proficiencies attained was 1.34% higher than the negotiated level for 2004-
       2005 on the system’s Perkins report card, and placement of CTE students was
       15.29% higher.
   •   According to the 2007 Report Card. Math AYP Grades 3-8 All subgroups
       equal or above state averages except: Hispanic 2% below; White 1% below
   •   AYP Grades 9-12 All sub-groups equal or above state averages except:
   •   Hispanic 9% below; LEP 7% below
   •   Reading AYP Grades 3-8 sub-groups below state averages:
   •   Hispanic 2% below; Economically Disadv 4% below; Students with
       Disabilities 1% below Reading AYP Grades 9-12 All sub-groups equal or
       above state averages except: African Amer 4% below; Hispanic 16% below
   •   Gateway scores were all equal or above the state’s predicted scores with
       the exception of Physical Science.
   •   ACT scores were either equal or above the state’s predicted scores with
       the exception of Math.
   •   Value-Added TCAP 11th grade writing scores were also above the state’s
       predicted score.
   •   All AYP Benchmarks were met or exceeded.
   •   Our Perkins report card for CTE reflected all A’s.




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 145 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3d

                   ASSESSMENT SUMMARY QUESTIONS

The following summary questions are related to Assessment. They are designed as a
culminating activity for your self-analysis, focus questions discussions and findings
regarding this area.


Assessment Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major strengths and how do we know?

   •   K-8 attendance/promotion rate is 97%
   •   Dropout/graduation rate is 94.6% which is well above the state goal
   •   Special education population has decreased from 18.3% to 15.6%
   •   2005 Perkins Report indicated that the vocational technical education students
       are fairly distributed across grade levels
   •   Pre- and Post DIBELS scores indicate academic gains
   •   Reading benchmark assessments show value-added data
   •   State Report Card scores for TVAAS indicate an increase from a D to B in 2005
       in reading
   •   Demonstrated positive gains in all subjects on K-8 TVAAS scores from 2004 to
       2005 school years
   •   Survey results indicate that parents, teachers, and students are receiving an
       effective education
   •   2005 CRT scores for math are above the state average
   •   Academic achievement in math increased from a C to a B from 2004-2005
   •   Gateway scores in algebra P/A % is 84.6 which is above the state %
   •   Received an A in Writing
   •   Compliance of state-mandated monitoring of SE documentation
   •   Increases in both math and reading P/A scores for SWD sub-group for 2005 (K-
       8)
   •   System performance level on the 2004-2005 Perkins report card was higher
       than the state average in four out of six areas.
       The 2007 Report Card Scores were:
           All 3-8 Value Added scores were A’s.
           Achievement scores 3-8 were B’s.
           Gateway scores were all equal or above the state’s predicted scores
           with the exception of Physical Science.
           All Writing scores were A’s.
           ACT scores were either equal or above the state’s predicted scores
           with the exception of Math.
           Value-Added TCAP 11th grade writing scores were also above the
           state’s predicted score.
           All AYP Benchmarks were met or exceeded.


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 146 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


          All CTE scores were A’s.


Assessment Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major challenges and how do we know? Place in prioritized order,
based on data from Component 3.

1. Improve student achievement in all subgroups
2. Improve transition between middle and high school in core areas
3. Provide equal educational opportunities for all students by increasing per pupil
expenditures
4. Increase the academic attainment of career and technical education students.
2008 Goals
1. Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of economically disadvantaged, African American,
Students with Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage proficient/advanced by 4%.
2. Increase Math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers by
50% over the previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill acquisition
resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.
3. Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2%.
4. Technology: Increase Technology Integration to support state curriculum
performance indicators to increase student achievement on ACT Explore to College
Ready status in math, reading, and science subject areas (and the composite score) and
achieve a composite ACT PLAN score that is equal to a 21 on the ACT.



Assessment Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
How will we address our challenges?

We will address our challenges by:
  • Continuing to use data to plan instructional reports
  • Utilizing intervention plans for all students
  • Providing professional development session, “What does proficient writing look
      like?”
  • Implementing portfolio assessment use systemwide
  • Enrolling 90% of our ELL students in the summer reading program
  • Implementing a balanced literacy program for grades 6-12
  • Providing a rigorous math program for grades 6-12 for all subgroups
  • Continuing to improve the S-Team process for referral of struggling students
  • Creating curriculum teams between middle and high school in all content areas
  • Allowing teachers in both the academic and career & technical areas to develop
      programs where the best attributes of both areas are integrated to increase the
      academic attainment of all students in grades 9-12.



               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 147 of 245
                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


•   Use Perkins funds to build a library of instructional support for career and
    technical education teachers in order that they may increase the academic rigor
    of their programs.
•   Continue to monitor student progress utilizing benchmark assessments K-
    5.
•   Implement Think Link as our Benchmark Assessment Grades K-8. Utilize
    Think Link as our universal screening assessment and RTI weekly probes
    will be used as progress monitoring
•   Continue to use the RTI process as our referral method.
•   Continue to provide test analysis through Turn Leaf
•   ACT scores will be utilized to determine curricular needs.
•   Continue to assess Write Away samples to improve student writing
•   Every 11th Grader will take the ACT exam in April. These scores will be
    utilized to determine curricular needs. Students who fail to meet state
    benchmarks will take a remediation course.




            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 148 of 245
                                                                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                                                            TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4a

                                                                        ORGANIZATIONAL PRACTICES
Current        CTE classroom    CTE lab areas are      Self-Contained      Title I School (7)   Inst.             Common            Team teaching       Transitional      Inclusion         Assertive
Organization   instruction is   available for          Classrooms Pre-                          Assistants        Planning          in 6-8 middle       Programs                            Discipline
al Practices   conducted for    students to apply      K-5                                                                          schools                                                 Techniques
               each class in    knowledge gained                                                                                                                                            are used to
               an adequately    in an environment                                                                                   Departmentaliz                                          support
               equipped area.   simulating the                                                                                      ation by Ability                                        Classroom
                                workplace.                                                                                          Groups                                                  management
                                                                                                                                                                                            along with a
                                                                                                                                                                                            Strict
                                                                                                                                                                                            Attendance
                                                                                                                                                                                            Policy
               All CTE          Trade and              Ensure that         Ensure that all      Ensure that all   Utilize special   Place students in   Provide LINK      Include           Policies for
               teachers are     industrial classes     every K –5          elementary           elementary        area schedules    teacher teams       Program for       students with     Student
                                                                                                                                                          th
               assigned to a    adequately             classroom is        schools receive      schools have                        within the middle   9 grade           special needs     Behavior is
               classroom        equipped for their     taught by a         federal funding      instructional     Utilize block     school grades       transition to     into regular      included in
               designed for     students to apply      single teacher      through Title I      assistants        scheduling by                         high school       classes           all student
               their area.      their skills in                                                 who are           content area      Students are                          through the       handbooks
                                hands-on               Offer Pre-K         An analysis of       trained in the                      placed by           Organize          use of IEPs       and parents
               Necessary        experiential           classrooms for      Title positions      reading           Assign teacher    ability as per      Head-Start                          are all asked
               equipment for    facilities (examples   all at-risk         was done             process           mentors to all    the TCAP            and Pre-K         Establish pilot   to sign a
               classroom        include an             students            according to                           teachers less     Assessments.        visitation days   program for       copy of
               instruction is   automotive garage,                         school               All               than 3 years      Groups are          for               implementatio     policies and
               purchased and    masonry shop           All elementary      population and       instructional     experience        defined as          prospective       n of practice     procedures.
               upgraded on a    area, etc.)            schools offer a     we found it          assistants                          Advanced,           students and
               regular basis.                          Pre-K class for     statistically        are HQ            Schools have      Intermediate,       parents           A total of 97     School
                                Other CTE              at-risk four year   equal in all         except for 3      organized and     and Standard in                       classes           mission and
Evidence of                     curricular areas       old students        elementary           who will take     documented        Math and LA in      Provide Pre-      county-wide       belief
Practice                        have similar labs                          schools.             the PRAXIS        meeting in        all schools.        First programs    are inclusion     statements
                                for their students                                              exam this         PLC’s to          WPS is also         for additional    classes.          are posted
                                own particular skill                                            month             collaborate to    doing this in       readiness         These             throughout
                                set (marketing                                                                    improve           science.            skills            classes are       the buildings
                                classes run a                                                                     classroom                                               co- taught by     for public
                                school store, health                                                              instruction                           Provide 4-        either special    view.
                                occupations has a                                                                                                       Year old          education
                                simulated hospital                                                                                                      screenings        teachers or       Expectations
                                room, etc.)                                                                                                             through           special           for Behavior
                                                                                                                                                        Family            education         are posted in
                                                                                                                                                        Resource          assistants        all
                                                                                                                                                        Center This       with the          classrooms
                                                                                                                                                        also helps        general           in the
                                                                                                                                                        identify          education         elementary
                                                                                                                                                        students that     teachers.         schools.
                                                                                                                                                        need referral



                                                                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 149 of 245
                                                                         Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                      services                         All students
                                                                                                                                                                       are given a
                                                                                                                                      Spring                           written copy
                                                                                                                                      screenings of                    of behavioral
                                                                                                                                      our incoming                     expectations
                                                                                                                                      Kindergarten                     and teacher
                                                                                                                                      students                         review the
                                                                                                                                      compared to                      expectations
                                                                                                                                      the number                       and
                                                                                                                                      who enroll in                    consequence
                                                                                                                                      the fall has                     s orally with
                                                                                                                                      increased by                     students
                                                                                                                                      8.9% from                        annually.
                                                                                                                                      2006.
                                                                                                                                                                       Elementary
                                                                                                                                      Annually all                     parents are
                                                                                                                                      Head Start                       provided
                                                                                                                                      and Pre-K                        weekly
                                                                                                                                      students visit                   feedback of
                                                                                                                                      the                              conduct in
                                                                                                                                      kindergarten                     Take-Home
                                                                                                                                      classrooms                       folders.
                                                                                                                                      in the school
                                                                                                                                      where they                       Telephone
                                                                                                                                      will be                          calls are
                                                                                                                                      attending in                     made to the
                                                                                                                                      the fall.                        home when
                                                                                                                                                                       middle
                                                                                                                                                                       school and
                                                                                                                                                                       high school
                                                                                                                                                                       students are
                                                                                                                                                                       absent.
Is the current      Yes                Yes                   Yes         Yes             Yes         Yes            Yes               Yes              Yes             Yes
practice
research-                                                                                                           No
based?
Is it a principle   Yes                Yes                   Yes         Yes             Yes         Yes            Yes               Yes              Yes             Yes
& practice of
high                                                                                                                No
performing
school
systems?
                    Effective,         Effective, although   Effective   Effective       Effective   Effective      Effective         Effective        Effective       Effective
                    although more      more space is                                                                                                   Effective in
Has the
                    space is           needed to allow                                                              Effective, but                     the
current
                    needed for         students to safely                                                           more so for the                    reading/LA
practice been
                    almost every       work in project                                                              advanced                           area
effective or
                    instructional      teams.                                                                       students.                          Limited
ineffective?
                    area at our high                                                                                                                   effectiveness
                    school.                                                                                                                            in math



                                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 150 of 245
                                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                 Perkins report    Perkins report card;   Report Card         Report Card        Report Card       New Teacher         Achievement           Parent/Teach       Achievement      TN State
                 card; CTE         CTE advisory                                                                    end-of-year         scores K-8            er surveys         scores for       Report Card
                 advisory          council; industry      Achievement         Achievement        Achievement       surveys                                                      SWD K-8          Discipline
What data        council.          best-practices.        scores K-8          scores K-8         and TVAAS                             Parent and            Family                              Report
source(s) do                                                                                     scores            Mentor              student surveys       Resource           IEP progress
you have that                                             Parent Surveys      Parent Surveys                       Assignment                                Center             reports
support your                                                                                                       sheet submitted                           database of 4
answer?                                                                                                            by building-level                         year old           Report card
(Identify all                                                                                                      principal                                 screenings         for SWD
applicable
sources)                                                                                                                                                     State Report       EOC scores
                                                                                                                                                             Card
                                                                                                                                                                                Think Link
                                                                                                                                                                                data
                 Gains on recent   Gains on recent        All subjects C or   % of ED            System wide:      New teachers        Based on current      Increased          Support for      2007
                 Perkins report    Perkins report         above               subgroups in P/A   All 2005          indicate that       organization of       participation in   program          Suspensions
                 cards,            cards.                                     have increased     grades            mentorship          middle school         LINK Program       implementatio    decreased
                 especially in                            Positive parent     from 75 to 79%     increase at       relationships are   programs,                                n provided for   from 2006 by
                 the area of the   Students perform       responses from      in math % of ED    least one         most effective      students who          Gateway and        all schools      53 students
                 percentage of     well in articulated    surveys             students in        letter grade 3-   when there is       participate in this   EOC data           through SE       which was a
                 competencies      classes at the post-                       Language +         8                 common              initiative                               Department       3.9%
                 our students      secondary level.       Achievement         Writing have                         planning            historically score    Increased                           decrease.
                 attain                                   scores 3-8 were     increased from     Reading                               higher on             participation in   AYP 3-8 Math     Expulsions
                                   All classes are        all B’s and         78 to 83%          scores in 3-8     Mentors need        achievement           visitation days     Students        decreased
                 All A’s were      taught using state     Value-added                            had a value-      adequate            assessments           Increased          with             from 2006 to
                 received on the   competency lists       scores were all     In Math student    added gain        training                                  number of          Disabilities     2007 by 4
                 Perkins CTE       which include both     A’s.                in ED subgroup     that                                  Schools               four-year old      showed a 4%      which was
                 Report Card.      academic and lab                           scored a 3%        increased 1.2     45 Mentor           practicing            screenings         increase         NDD by
                                   skills.                Writing scores      increased in       growth            teachers            ability grouping      with Family                         percentage.
                 Academic                                 were an A.          Prof/Adv and       standards         received            must address          Resource           AYP 3-8
Evidence of
                 Attainment in     All A’s were                               were above the                       training this       the needs of          Center             Reading
effectiveness
                 Mathematics       received on the        We met all AYP      state in AYP       Writing           year. Stipends      the lower                                Students
or
                 for the           Perkins CTE            targets.                               scores            were provided       performing            Increased          with
ineffectivenes
                 System’s          Report Card.                               Reading            increase .1       for those who       students.             percentage         Disabilities
s
                 Career                                                       AYP students       growth            met the                                   of 4 year olds     showed a 9%
                 Technical area                                               in the ED          standards         required                                  screened           increase, but
                 was at a 98%                                                 subgroup                             contact hours.                            prior to           were 1%
                 Performance                                                  showed a 4%        Grades 3-8                                                  Kindergarten       below the
                 Level.                                                       increase, but      AYP scores                                                  registration       state
                                                                              still scored       in reading                                                  from 65% to        average.
                 Academic                                                     below state by     increased                                                   89.7% this
                 Attainment in                                                4%                 from 88 to 92                                               year               Grades 9-12
                 Reading/LA for                                                                  % Prof/Adv.                                                                    LA and Math
                 the System’s                                                                                                                                                   Students
                 Career                                                                                                                                                         with
                 Technical area                                                                                                                                                 Disabilities
                 was at a 93.9%                                                                                                                                                 showed a
                 Performance                                                                                                                                                    13% increase
                 Level.                                                                                                                                                         in each
                                                                                                                                                                                content area.




                                                                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 151 of 245
                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


We exceeded
the state                                                                           Scores on
performance on                                                                      2007
every indicator                                                                     Report Card
with the                                                                            based on 3-
exception of                                                                        year CRT
Completion                                                                          TCAP were
Non-Traditional                                                                     B’s in all 4
                                                                                    content areas
                                                                                    grades 3-8,
                                                                                    which
                                                                                    showed
                                                                                    improvement
                                                                                    in science
                                                                                    and social
                                                                                    studies.
                                                                                    TCAP writing
                                                                                              th
                                                                                    in both 5
                                                                                          th
                                                                                    and 8 and
                                                                                       th
                                                                                    11 were A’s.
                                                                                    ACT scores
                                                                                    for 9-12 were
                                                                                    slightly
                                                                                    below the
                                                                                    Value-added
                                                                                    scores were
                                                                                    all A’s in the
                                                                                    4 content
                                                                                    areas grade
                                                                                    3-8. Gateway
                                                                                    scores were
                                                                                    all equal or
                                                                                    above the
                                                                                    state’s
                                                                                    predicted
                                                                                    scores with
                                                                                    the exception
                                                                                    of Physical
                                                                                    Science.

                                                                                    ACT scores
                                                                                    were either
                                                                                    equal or
                                                                                    above the
                                                                                    state’s
                                                                                    predicted
                                                                                    scores with
                                                                                    the exception
                                                                                    of Math.
                                                                                    Value-Added




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 152 of 245
                                                                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                                                       th
                                                                                                                                                                              TCAP 11
                                                                                                                                                                              grade writing
                                                                                                                                                                              scores were
                                                                                                                                                                              also above
                                                                                                                                                                              the state’s
                                                                                                                                                                              predicted
                                                                                                                                                                              score.

                                                                                                                                                                              All AYP
                                                                                                                                                                              Benchmarks
                                                                                                                                                                              were met or
                                                                                                                                                                              exceeded.

                 Provide equal      Provide equal         All content areas    There is not        Distribution of   Due to excess         Site based        Family           Continue         All students
                 access to          access to             are C or above       equity for non-     Instructional     numbers of            management        Resource         implementatio    are bound to
                 appropriate        appropriate           in achievement.      Title schools       Assistant         students within       practice allows   Center serves    n of current     same
                 resources and      resources and                                                  positions is      current facilities,   administrative    all families     practice;        system-wide
                 materials.         materials.            We have 5 Pre-K      Grades 9-12:        based on          meeting this          choice                             further          policies
                                                          programs in our      Math AYP            student           initiative is                           LINK Program     develop K-8
                 CTE director is    CTE director is       system               students in the     eligibility       difficult and does                      is advertised    program and
                 directly           directly accessible                        SD subgroup         ratios; lack of   not occur in all                        in local media   re-evaluate 9-
                 accessible to      to all CTE            In grades 3-8        decreased 7%        local funding     settings                                and during       12 program
                 all CTE            instructors in        All content          for Prof/Adv        causes                                                    student          The SE
                 instructors in     regards to filling    areas scored a                           inequality        Limited number                          registration     Department
                 regards to         their laboratory      B in                 Grade 9-12                            of trained                                               encourages
Evidence of
                 filling their      needs.                achievement on       Reading AYP         Instructional     mentors are                             All students     inclusion
equitable
                 classroom                                the 2007 Report      student in SD       assistants        available                               involved in      services.
system
                 needs.                                   Card.                subgroup            are provided                                              pre-K            However,
support for
                                                                               decreased 2%        in the            JES and DES                             programs         some
this practice
                                                          Writing scores       for Prof/Adv        elementary        because of the                          participate in   schools in
                                                          were an A                                schools at a      size of their                           visitation       the district
                                                          In grades K-8                            ratio of .002     student                                 program          choose to
                                                          All Value-                               per student.      population                                               participate
                                                          Added scores                                               cannot                                                   on a limited
                                                          were A’s.                                                  schedule                                                 basis.
                                                                                                                     common
                                                                                                                     planning within
                                                                                                                     in the school
                                                                                                                     day. They meet
                                                                                                                     in teams or
                                                                                                                     afterschool.
                 Continue           Continue              Continue             Continue            Continue          Continue              Encourage         Continue         Continue         Addition of 4
                 implementation     implementation of     implementation of    implementation      implementatio     implementation        system-wide       implementatio    implementatio    paraprofessi
                 of current         current practices,    current practice     of current          n of current      of current            administrative    n of current     n of current     onal
Next Step        practices, while   while upgrading lab   and extinguish       practice; Make      practice; seek    practice; provide     strategic         practice         practice         positions to
(changes or      advocating for     equipment to          the few              all schools Title   additional        additional            planning                                            implement
continuations)   CTE to be          always reflect        alternatives in K-   schools or          local funds       facilities to                           Plan             Continue to      the ACE
                 included in        trends in related     5                    increase local                        alleviate             Continue          additional       add              program in
                 future growth      career fields.                             funding sources     All               overcrowding          administrative    activities for   additional       our middle
                 plans for our                            Request                                  instructional                           summits to        summer           classrooms       schools.




                                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 153 of 245
                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


high school.   additional Pre-K    Request         assistants     Implement          allow schools     transition to   to support
               grants              additional      will receive   systematic         performing at a   high school     the inclusion
                                   funding for     additional     mentor training    higher level to   within the      model. Add
               See programs        instructional   training in                       assist those      LINK            an additional
               for Pre-K that      resources for   the RTI        Continue to        who are           program.        ESL position
                                                                                                                                   th
               can collaborate     non-Title       process to     offer mentor       struggling in                     to allow a 9
               with the school     schools.        help support   assignments        areas to          Focus on        grade
               system to offer                     teachers and   and support for    exchange best     additional      English class
               alternative sites                   students.      teachers.          practices.        parental        at the high
               in order to                                                           Allow site-       resources on    school. Also
               provide                                            Assist support     based and         the website     add an
               services for                                       for PLCs to        system-wide       for all         additional
               additional at-                                     occur during       PD for teachers   grades.         English
               risk students.                                     the school day     across grade                      teacher at the
                                                                  and/or             levels and                        high school
                                                                  Professional       across the                        to support
                                                                  Development        system to                         the ESL
                                                                  Days. The          exchange ideas                    inclusion
                                                                  addition of        to support                        classroom
                                                                  another PD in      struggling                        and to add an
                                                                  the calendar       students in all                   additional
                                                                                                                          th
                                                                  allows for 1 PD    content and                       10 grade
                                                                  day monthly for    CTE courses.                      English
                                                                  PLCs to occur                                        inclusion
                                                                  in every                                             program.
                                                                  building.                                            Purchase
                                                                                                                       math
                                                                  Allow for cross-                                     manipulative
                                                                  grade level PD                                       s and
                                                                  to ensure                                            technology
                                                                  success for                                          for inclusion
                                                                  students at                                          math classes
                                                                  every grade
                                                                  level.                                               Encourage
                                                                                                                       more
                                                                                                                       participation
                                                                                                                       in
                                                                                                                       inclusionary
                                                                                                                       practices

                                                                                                                       Teacher
                                                                                                                       training on
                                                                                                                       differentiated
                                                                                                                       instruction.




                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 154 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4b

                      ORGANIZATIONAL GAP ANALYSIS

The following are related to Organization. The process will identify the discrepancy, or
the gap, between the current state – “What Is” – and the desired future state – “What
Ought To Be.” The information for “What Is” should be in Component 1 and will be
reviewed at this time.

Organizational TIME Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: TIME
(How are we currently allocating our time as central office employees in
providing assistance to schools and building capacity around understanding
and implementing research-based organizational practices?)

Directors meet weekly to discuss all programs in order to improve delivery of
educational services. Budgeting from central office is determined based on School
Improvement Plans’ action steps. Distribution of funds includes both local and Title I
resources. Central office staff ensures that all elementary schools have instructional
assistants who are trained in the reading process. The Elementary Supervisor and the
Reading Specialist collaborate in oversight of the Head-Start and Pre-K visitation days
for prospective students and parents. They also oversee the Pre-First programs.
Budgeting and monitoring program expenditures, as well as ensuring state-mandated
compliance, requires extensive hours. Special Education Directors oversee support of
the regular education program as it directly relates to inclusion.

Principal meetings have been focused on Professional Learning Communities
(PLC’s). This has been practiced by our administrative staff as well. 3 different
administrative summits were held this year in lieu of the monthly principal
meeting. Principals in elementary grades met separately from middle school
and high school principals to discuss best practices regarding PLC’s and
authentic assessment practices. Principals also met to determine priorities as
they relate to the TCSPP. CO staff provided numerous PD workshops and
organized the Teacher Induction Program and the Teacher Mentoring workshops
to provide appropriate training to support these programs. Multiple training
sessions were held in the area of Literacy for K, 5-12 grade teachers. The
Director of Assessment provided training for principals and then for teachers
related to assessment analysis. The Director of Student Support collaborated
with the Director of PK-5 and the Reading Specialist to offer RTI training for
every school. The Director of PK-5 offered numerous workshops for the Pre-K
teachers. The Director of Accountability offered 1 system-wide workshop
related to the SIP and met with individual schools as requested to support the
SIP process.




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 155 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: TIME

Current allocations of time by the central office staff reflect a valid use of personnel.
Additional positions to include a director and reading specialist should be added to
allow current staff more time to support organizational needs. The position of career
and technical education director should be elevated to a central office position in order
to oversee all facets of the CTE program, including the addition of CTE programs in
grades 6-8. The position of career and technical education director should be elevated
to a central office position in order to oversee all facets of the CTE program, including
the addition of CTE programs in grades 6-8.

A strong support system continues to be offered by the CO staff to our site-
based instructional leaders. Resources and training opportunities abound.
This team has continued to operate effectively with an Interim Director of
Schools since November.


Organizational MONEY Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: MONEY
(How are we currently allocating our funds in providing assistance to schools
and building capacity around understanding and implementing research-based
organizational practices?)

Currently, money is being allocated based on socio-economic needs of students.
Instructional assistants’ salaries are provided by Title I monies. Special education
funds are designated strictly to provide support services for identified students.
Funds are allocated to provide a contracted alternative school setting for students who
have behavioral needs.

Additional local funding was allocated to all schools to support individual needs.
A Human Resource Coordinator was hired in December to help alleviate the
heavy load to the CO Directors. Additional re-alignment promoted one
coordinator to a Director position to support student transition programs and
the RTI process. There is now one position as a Reading Specialist K-12 that
oversees the Literacy program. This person no longer serves and elementary
school as a literacy coach.
“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: MONEY

All schools should receive equal funding for programs, not just Title I schools. An
additional position should be added to relieve the current central office staff that is
overburdened with multiple job assignments. Also, an additional reading specialist
position should be added to serve grades 6-12. The position of career and technical
education director should be elevated to a central office position in order to oversee all
facets of the CTE program, including the addition of CTE programs in grades 6-8.

There is still a need for additional personnel within the CTE program. There is



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 156 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


no programming currently within our middle schools.                A building program
continues to be on hold.


Organizational PERSONNEL Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required
“What is” The Current Use of: PERSONNEL
(How are we currently allocating personnel in providing assistance to schools
and building capacity around understanding and implementing research-based
organizational practices?)

Title I funds are used to pay part of central office staff salaries and all of the
instructional assistants’ salaries. The local budget funds additional positions above the
BEP funding formula due to state-mandated pupil/teacher ratio requirements. Special
area teachers allow for common planning time in some of the schools. This allows for
mentoring relationships to develop. Inclusion is staffed with special education teachers
and instructional assistants who provide support for students and regular education
teachers.

The elementary school instructional assistants’ salaries continue to be
supported by Title I funding.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: PERSONNEL
Additional special area teachers should be employed to ensure common planning time
at all schools. This would also allow delivery of a full range of fine arts curriculum for
all students and provide opportunities for mentoring relationships to develop.
Adequate number of trained mentors should be provided. Additional funding would
allow for pre-K programs for all four-year old students. The position of career and
technical education director should be elevated to a central office position in order to
oversee all facets of the CTE program, including the addition of CTE programs in
grades 6-8.

There is still a need for additional support for the RTI process within the
elementary school grades and additional personnel is needed at the middle
school to support ACE to improve literacy and study skills.


Organizational OTHER RESOURCES Gap Analysis -                          Narrative Response
Required
“What is” The Current Use of: OTHER RESOURCES

We utilize student teachers from Carson Newman College. Our PATT program at the
high school allows for small group instruction and one-on-one interaction with students.
Parent volunteers are regularly encouraged and are welcomed into our elementary
schools. Local community leaders participate in system-wide events such as Read
Across America and enhance the instructional delivery in the classroom. Classroom
inventory lists of instructional supplies are required and used to document available



                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 157 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


resources. The lists will be used to identify areas of need.

The Pre-K Advisory Council has members from Head Start, Carson Newman
College, private childcare programs, a county commissioner, a school board
commissioner and parents to advise and support the Pre-K programs within the
school system.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: OTHER RESOURCES
Additional professional development opportunities should be offered to ensure
understanding of optional organizational practices. An ongoing process should be in
place to evaluate current practices. We should always be looking for ways to improve.




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 158 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4c

               ORGANIZATIONAL REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS

The completed Organizational gap analysis should enable the Systemwide Leadership
Team to answer the following reflective questions relative to instructional practices.


Organizational Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Are we providing equity and adequacy to all our schools?

After examining all relevant data, the following areas were identified as being equitable
and adequate. The system:
   • Earned a C or above in all content areas
   • Allows administrative choice through site-based management
   • Serves all families through the Family Resource Center
   • Advertises the LINK Program in local media and during student registration
   • Provides a visitation program for all students involved in pre-K programs
   • In grades 3-8 All content areas scored a B in achievement on the 2007
       Report Card.
   • Writing scores were an A
   • In grades K-8 All Value-Added scores were A’s.

The following areas were identified as being inequitable and inadequate:
   • There is not equity for non-Title schools
   • Distribution of Instructional Assistant positions is based on student eligibility
       ratios; lack of local funding causes inequality
   • Due to excess numbers of students within current facilities, inclusion is difficult
       and does not occur in all settings
   • Instructional assistants are provided in the elementary schools at a ratio
       of .002 per student which is not adequate
   • Grades 9-12: Math AYP students in the SD subgroup decreased 7% for
       Prof/Adv
   • Grade 9-12 Reading AYP student in SD subgroup decreased 2% for
       Prof/Adv JES and DES because of the size of their student population
       cannot schedule common planning within in the school day. They meet in
       teams or afterschool.
   • Pre-K is provided at all schools for only 20 students who are indentified as
       at-risk. No program is provided for the remaining students. We have only
       7 Pre-K classrooms and have 33 K classrooms



Organizational Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 159 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Are we targeting funds and resources effectively to meet the needs of our
schools?

   •   We are currently doing a very good job under the limited per pupil expenditure
       annual funding appropriations, but this is not adequate. Increasing per pupil
       expenditure will positively affect our value-added scores.
   •   We apply for grant funding and work diligently to secure monies to fund needs
   •   Another supervisory position is needed to allow current directors to focus on
       organizational issues.
   •   All schools should receive equal funding for professional development based on
       teacher population for appropriate training, not just Title I schools.
   •   All schools should offer a full range of fine arts instruction.
   •   We need an additional Reading Specialist for 7-12.
   •   The position of career and technical education director should be elevated to a
       central office position in order to oversee all facets of the CTE program,
       including the addition of CTE programs in grades 6-8.
   •   We continue to use available funds in and adequate manner. The need for
       additional facilities has become a huge burden. We still wait for the local
       funding body to move forward with the building program.
   •   CTE courses should be offered for our middle school students.

Currently, we actively pursue additional funding in order to expand existing facilities
and programs. The system does an excellent job with the current funding it receives.




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 160 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Organizational Reflective Questions - Narrative Response Required
Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of students in our
schools?

We are currently meeting AYP requirements with the exception of our SWD population
in grades 9-12.

   •  Jefferson County State Report Card 2004-05 reflects gains in K-8 criterion
      referenced achievement in all content areas.
   • Economically disadvantaged P/A in math and reading/language was higher than
      the state %.
   • Gateway Algebra and English II Advanced % was higher than the state and %
      Proficient in Biology I and English II was higher than the state.
   • EOC in Math Foundations Advanced % was higher than the state.
   • US History % Proficient was higher than the state.
   • AA, ED and SWD populations on Gateway Algebra % Advanced 2 year average
      outperformed the state.
   • Every subgroup outperformed the state in % P/A in the 2 year average for the
      Writing and Gateway English tests.
   • K-8 TVAAS scores have had positive gains from 2004 to 2005 school years.
   • Teacher, student and parent surveys indicate that all stakeholders believe that
      our system provides a quality educational experience for our students.
   • System performance level on the 2004-2005 Perkins report card was higher
      than the state average in four out of six areas.
   • Achievement scores 3-8 were all B’s and Value-added scores were all A’s.
   • Writing scores were an A.
   • We met all AYP targets.
   • All A’s were received on the Perkins CTE Report Card.
   • In Math student in ED subgroup scored a 3% increased in Prof/Adv and
      were above the state in AYP Reading
   • Reading scores in 3-8 had a value-added gain that increased 1.2 growth
      standards
   • Writing scores increase .1 growth standards
   • Grades 3-8 AYP scores in reading increased from 88 to 92 % Prof/Adv.
   • 45 Mentor teachers received training this year. Stipends were provided for
      those who met the required contact hours.
   • Increased percentage of 4 year olds screened prior to Kindergarten
      registration from 65% to 89.7% this year
   But,
   • AYP students in the ED subgroup showed a 4% increase, but still scored
      below state by 4%
   • Grades 9-12: Math AYP students in the SD subgroup decreased 7% for
      Prof/Adv


               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 161 of 245
                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   •   Grade 9-12 Reading AYP student in SD subgroup decreased 2% for
       Prof/Adv
   •   Reading 3-8 AYP Scores Sub-Groups over 1 year below state averages
       were:
   •   Hispanic at 2% below
   •   Economically Disadvat 4% below
   •   Students with Disabilities at 1% below
   •   Math SpEd with IEPs Achievement Dropped in Grades 3, 4, 5, and 6 but
   •   Math AYP Grades 9-12 sub-groups below the state were:
       Hispanic 9% below and LEP 7% below


                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4d

                 ORGANIZATIONAL SUMMARY QUESTIONS

The following summary questions are related to Organization. They are designed as a
culminating activity for your self-analysis, focus questions discussions, and findings
regarding this area.


Organizational Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major strengths and how do we know?

After examining all data sources, the following strengths were identified:
    • All subjects earned a C or above on State Report Card
    • Positive parent response
    • % of ED subgroups in P/A increased from 75 to 79% in math; % of ED students
       in Language + Writing increased from 78 to 83%
    • System wide: All 2005 grades increased at least one letter grade K-8
    • New teachers indicated that mentorship relationships are most effective when
       there is common planning
    • Based on current organization of middle school programs, students who
       participate in team teaching historically score higher on achievement
       assessments
    • Increased participation in LINK Program
    • Gateway and EOC data
    • Increased participation in pre-K visitation days
    • Increased number of four-year old screenings with Family Resource Center
    • Actual performance of career and technical education students in the area of
       skill proficiencies attained was 1.34% higher than the negotiated level for 2004-
       2005 on the system’s Perkins report card, and placement of CTE students was
       15.29% higher.
    • Achievement scores 3-8 were all B’s and Value-added scores were all A’s.
    • Writing scores were an A.


                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 162 of 245
                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   •   We met all AYP targets.
   •   All A’s were received on the Perkins CTE Report Card.
   •   In Math student in ED subgroup scored a 3% increased in Prof/Adv and
       were above the state in AYP Reading
   •   Reading scores in 3-8 had a value-added gain that increased 1.2 growth
       standards
   •   Writing scores increase .1 growth standards
   •   Grades 3-8 AYP scores in reading increased from 88 to 92 % Prof/Adv.
   •   45 Mentor teachers received training this year. Stipends were provided for
       those who met the required contact hours.
   •   Increased percentage of 4 year olds screened prior to Kindergarten
       registration from 65% to 89.7% this year


Organizational Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
What are our major challenges and how do we know? Place in prioritized order,
based on data from Component 3.

1. Improve student achievement in all subgroups
2. Improve transition between middle and high school in core areas
3. Provide equal educational opportunities for all students by increasing per pupil
expenditures
4. Increase the academic attainment of career and technical education students.
2008 Goals
1. Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2
NCE points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of economically disadvantaged, African
American, Students with Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage proficient/advanced
by 4%.
2. Increase Math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers
by 50% over the previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill
acquisition resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.
3. Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2%.
4. Technology: Increase Technology Integration to support state curriculum
performance indicators to increase student achievement on ACT Explore to
College Ready status in math, reading, and science subject areas (and the
composite score) and achieve a composite ACT PLAN score that is equal to a 21
on the ACT.




               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 163 of 245
                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



Organizational Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required
How will we address our challenges?

We will address our challenges by:
  • Enrolling 90% of our ELL students in the summer reading program
  • Implementing a balanced literacy program for grades 6-12
  • Providing a rigorous math program for grades 6-12 for all subgroups
  • Continuing to improve the S-Team process for referral of struggling students
  • Creating curriculum teams between middle and high school in all content areas
  • Continuing to secure needed funds through continual grant opportunities
  • Convening an educational summit with 6-12 administrators to discuss curriculum
      challenges
  • Evaluating professional development budget and securing equitable funding for
      each grade level
  • Use Perkins funds to build a library of instructional support for career and
      technical education teachers in order that they may increase the academic
      rigor of their programs.
  • Allowing teachers in both the academic and career & technical areas to
      develop programs where the best attributes of both areas are integrated to
      increase the academic attainment of all students in grades 9-12.
  • Incorporate inclusive classrooms in the area of reading/language arts and math
      to increase proficiency percentages of students with disabilities and provide
      professional development in inclusion strategies for classroom teachers.
  • Seek programs for Pre-K that can collaborate with the school system to
      offer alternative sites in order to provide services for additional at-risk
      students
  • Request additional funding for instructional resources for non-Title
      schools.
  • All instructional assistants will receive additional training in the RTI
      process to help support teachers and students.
  • Continue to offer mentor assignments and support for teachers.
  • Assist support for PLCs to occur during the school day and/or
      Professional Development Days. The addition of another PD in the
      calendar allows for 1 PD day monthly for PLCs to occur in every building.
  • Allow for cross-grade level PD to ensure success for students at every
      grade level.
  • Continue administrative summits to allow schools performing at a higher
      level to assist those who are struggling in areas to exchange best
      practices. Allow site-based and system-wide PD for teachers across
      grade levels and across the system to exchange ideas to support
      struggling students in all content and CTE courses.
  • Plan additional activities for summer transition to high school within the
      LINK program.
  • Focus on additional parental resources on the website for all grades.



              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 164 of 245
                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


    Continue to add additional classrooms to support the inclusion model.
    Add an additional ESL position to allow a 9th grade English class at the
    high school. Also add an additional English teacher at the high school to
    support the ESL inclusion classroom and to add an additional 10th grade
    English inclusion program.
•   Addition of 4 paraprofessional positions to implement the ACE program in
    our middle schools.




           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 165 of 245
                                                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                            GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                               Revised DATE:
__________________________
Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)
                                                        Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score from 50 to 52 (state average). Improve
                                                        9-12 Reading/Language AYP standing.
                                                        Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2
                                                 Goal   NCE points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of economically disadvantaged, African
                                                        American,     Students   with  Disabilities, and    Hispanic   percentage
                                                        proficient/advanced by 4%.

                                                        Grades 3-8
                                                        AYP sub-groups below state averages:
                                                           • Hispanic 2% below
                                                           • Economically Disadv 4% below
                                                           • Students with Disabilities 1% below
                                                        AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008 benchmark:
                                                           • African Amer 2% below
                                                           • Hispanic 9% below
                                                           • SWD 18% below
                                                           • LEP 3% below
                Which need(s) does this Goal address?   Grades 3-5 fell 2 NCE points below the state average and are 3 NCE points away from a letter
                                                        grade of an A.
                                                        RCPI scores below state
                                                           • Grade 3 fell -2.6 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                                                           • Grade 4 fell -1.7 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                                                           • Grade 5 fell -2.3 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                                                        Grade 4 and 7 had the least 3-year value added gains (0 and 2.4 respectively) compared to 4.5+
                                                        point gains by grades 5 and 8.

                                                        Grades 9-12
                                                        AYP Sub-Groups that decreased % Prof/Adv over 1 year:
                                                           • African Amer 14% decrease



                                                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 166 of 245
                                                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                  • White 1% decrease
                                                                  • Economically Disadv 2% decrease
                                                               AYP Sub-groups falling below 93% 2008 benchmark:
                                                                  • African Amer 11% below
                                                                  • Hispanic 23% below
                                                                  • Econom Disadv 4% below
                                                                  • SWD 13% below

                                                               High School ACT 3-year average Reading score (20.6) is slightly below the state’ score (20.7).
                                                               High School ACT 3-year average English score (20.9) is slightly below the state’ score (21)



How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?

ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator 5.2)                                    IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – Template 5.3 – (Rubric Indicator 5.3)
Section B – Descriptively list the action you plan to take     Section C – For each of the Action Steps you list, give timeline, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/required resources, funding
to ensure you will be able to progress toward your goal.       sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
                                                               step.)
Action steps are strategies and interventions which
should be scientifically based where possible and
include    professional     development,      technology,                                                               Projected Cost(s)
                                                                               Person(s)             Required                                                               Performance Results
communication,       and    parent      and    community        Timeline                                                   & Funding            Evaluation Strategy
                                                                              Responsible           Resources                                                                   / Outcomes
involvement initiatives within the action steps of each                                                                     Sources
goal.
                                                               August         Curriculum        Reading                 BEP, GP, IDEA,         Sign in forms from PD
             Implement a variety of strategies to assist K-8   2006           Instructional     Specialist              Perkins                sessions, and Online
             students’ understanding of vocabulary, based      through        Supervisors,      (grades 6-12)                                  evaluation of PD by
             on Marzano’s 6 steps. Communicate the             May 2007       Reading           salary                                         Curriculum and              43 teachers participated
             vocabulary to involve parents through the                        Specialists,      $1,000 for                                     Instruction                 in 2006
 2006-       district website. Provide PD to teacher in the                   Literacy          materials and                                  Supervisors                 128 teachers appeared
                                                                                                                                                                           on the sign in forms
 2007        use of strategies that integrate technology                      Coaches,          supplies per K-5
                                                                                                                                                                           participated in the
 Action      through the coordination of Regular Ed, Special                  Special           and 6-12                                                                   training on 11-09-07
 Step 1      Ed, CTE, and LEP programs.                                       Education         program                                                                    88% of the teachers
                                                                              Director &        $500 Reading                                                               evaluated this training
                                                                              Assistant         supplementary                                                              as Useful or Very Useful
                                                                              Director,         materials for CTE
                                                                              ELL               students
                                                                              coordinator
                                                               Summer         ELL               $64,000 Stipend         21st Century           Daily roster of             Camp Read Along (31
             90% involvement of K-5 LEP students in            2006                                                     Learning               attendance to site           LEP students
  2006-                                                                       coordinator,      for Camp                                                                    participated which was
  2007       summer reading program. Communicate                              Reading           Instructors & Site      Community              administrator to by
                                                                                                                                                                            44% of the population)




                                                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 167 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Action   reading program through district website.                        Specialists,    Administrators       Grant           Curriculum and
Step 2   Involve parents in closure activities. Provide                   Literacy        $22,800                              Instruction
         PD through teacher mentoring of camp                             Coaches,        Materials &                          Supervisors
         instructors.                                                     Site            Supplies,                            Pre/Post reading
                                                                          administrator   Contracted                           testing by camp site
                                                                          s, Camp         Services                             instructors
                                                                          Instructors
                                                             Summer       Special         $13,000 ESY          IDEA            Summer program
                                                             2006         education       Teachers                             enrollment,
                                                                          administrator   $3,000 Computer                      Performance reports
         Through extended school year program provide
                                                                          s and           Program &                            to be shared with
         a variety of language arts/reading strategies
                                                                          teachers        Materials                            parents and special
         and technology integration activities to increase                                                                                              31 Special Education
2006-                                                                                                                          education
         achievement of students with disabilities. A                                                                                                   students      participated
                                                                                                                               administrators,
2007     summary of performance will be shared with
                                                                                                                               Software purchasing
                                                                                                                                                        and a summary of
Action   parents. Special emphasis will be directed                                                                                                     performance was shared
                                                                                                                               invoice, Teacher         with parents,
Step 3   toward high priority schools.
                                                                                                                               summer timesheets
                                                                                                                               all evaluations
                                                                                                                               submitted to Special
                                                                                                                               Education
                                                                                                                               Administrators
                                                             August       Curriculum &    Reading              BEP, GP, IDEA   Sign in form from                  The following
         As a result of providing inclusive professional     2006         Instructional   Specialists                          professional                       professional
         development with technology integration,            through      Supervisors,    (grades PreK-5 &                     development, End of                development sessions
                                                                                                                                                                  that integrated
         reading comprehension strategies will be            May 2009     Reading         Grades 6-12)                         year online evaluation
                                                                                                                                                                  technology and reading
         implemented for grades PreK-5 and Grades 6-                      Specialists,    salaries                             of professional                    comprehension
         12.                                                              and Literacy    $500 Materials (1                    development and                    strategies were offered:
                                                                          Coaches         per specialist, K-                   effectiveness of                   2006-2007
                                                                                          5, 6-12)                             reading strategies by                        July 28, New
                                                                                                                               Curriculum and             Teacher Balanced
                                                                                                                               Instruction                Literacy workshop
                                                                                                                               Supervisors                                  August 4,
2006-                                                                                                                                                       2006, Session 4 Grades
2007                                                                                                                                                        1-5 Teachers:
Action                                                                                                                                                      Introduction of
                                                                                                                                                            Marzano’s 9 Strategies
Step 4                                                                                                                                                      for Reading Instruction
                                                                                                                                                                            August 4,
                                                                                                                                                              2006, Session 5 Grades
                                                                                                                                                              K-5 New Teachers:
                                                                                                                                                              Reading Assessment
                                                                                                                                                                            August 4,
                                                                                                                                                                2006, Destination
                                                                                                                                                                Success, PreK-12
                                                                                                                                                                special education
                                                                                                                                                                teachers
                                                                                                                                                                            August 4,



                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 168 of 245
Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                          2006, Session 8 Grades
                                                                          6-8 Language Arts
                                                                          Teachers: Introduction
                                                                          to Penguin Literature
                                                                          Program Resources
                                                                                                      August 24,
                                                                            Grades PreK-3:
                                                                            Storytime and Beyond,
                                                                                                      August 29,
                                                                              Grade 4 Teachers: Scott
                                                                              Foresman Reading
                                                                              PowerPoint Collection
                                                                                                       October 17,
                                                                              2006 Grade 3: "Share
                                                                              the Treasures" enrich
                                                                              your Third Grade
                                                                              Reading Curriculum
                                                                                                      October 19,
                                                                                Literacy Workshop for
                                                                                New Teachers, K-12
                                                                                                      November 7,
                                                                                  2006, K-2 Teachers:
                                                                                  Vocabulary, New Market
                                                                                  Elementary Media
                                                                                  Center, 8:30-11:30 a.m.
                                                                                                      November 7,
                                                                                    2006, 3-5 Teachers:
                                                                                    Vocabulary, Dandridge
                                                                                    Elementary Media
                                                                                    Center, 8:30-11:30 a.m.
                                                                                                      November 7,
                                                                                      2006, 6-8 Language Arts
                                                                                      Teachers: Prentice Hall
                                                                                      Technology Resources,
                                                                                      Stacy Hilliard, Tech
                                                                                      Center
                                                                                                      January 2,
                                                                                        2007, Reading
                                                                                        Strategies for 9th
                                                                                        Graders, Betty Suttles,
                                                                                        Reading Specialist
                                                                                                      January 15th,
                                                                                          Betty Suttles, Reading in
                                                                                          the Content Area
                                                                                                      February 19th,
                                                                                            Betty Suttles, Reading in
                                                                                            the Content Area

                                                                          2007-2008
                                                                                   August 9




        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 169 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                             Grades 6-8 Language
                                                                                                                                                             Arts, Science, Social
                                                                                                                                                             Studies, Media
                                                                                                                                                             Specialist (Librarians),
                                                                                                                                                             Technology Facilitators--
                                                                                                                                                             -Reading in the Content
                                                                                                                                                             Area & 4 Square Writing
                                                                                                                                                                          August 10
                                                                                                                                                             Grades 9-12, Academic
                                                                                                                                                             Vocabulary
                                                                                                                                                                          November 5
                                                                                                                                                             Grades 6-8 Language
                                                                                                                                                             Arts, Science, Social
                                                                                                                                                             Studies, Media
                                                                                                                                                             Specialist (Librarians),
                                                                                                                                                             Technology Facilitators--
                                                                                                                                                             -Reading in the Content
                                                                                                                                                             Area
                                                                                                                                                             Balanced Literacy: Oct.
                                                                                                                                                             17, 2007, Nov. 14, 2007,
                                                                                                                                                             Jan. 16, 2008, and Feb.
                                                                                                                                                             12th, 2008


                                                                                                                                Sign in form from            2006-2007
                                                             August       6-12            Reading              BEP, GP, IDEA,   professional                           January 2,
                                                             2006         Curriculum &    Specialists          Perkins          development, End of      2007, Reading
                                                                                                                                                         Strategies for 9th
                                                             through      Instructional   (grades PreK-5 &                      year online evaluation
                                                                                                                                                         Graders, Betty Suttles,
                                                             May 2009     Supervisor,     Grades 6-12)                          of professional          Reading Specialist
                                                                          6-12            salaries                              development and                        January 15th,
2006-    Inclusive professional development with
                                                                          Reading         $500 Materials (1                     effectiveness of           Betty Suttles, Reading in
         technology integration addressing reading
2007                                                                      Specialists,    per specialist, K-                    reading strategies by      the Content Area
         across the curriculum strategies will be                                                                                                                      February 19th,
Action   provided for Career Technical Educators to
                                                                          and Career      5, 6-12)                              Curriculum and
                                                                          Technical       $500 Reading                          Instruction                  Betty Suttles, Reading in
Step 5   improve core indicators from a B to an A.
                                                                          Education       supplementary                         Supervisors                  the Content Area
                                                                          Administrato    materials for CTE
                                                                                                                                                         August 10 2007
                                                                          r               students                                                       Grades 9-12, Academic
                                                                                                                                                         Vocabulary


                                                             August       Mentoring       Mentoring            GP               Sign in form from            Monthly sessions were
         A variety of reading intervention strategies will   2006         Coordinator     Coordinator                           Professional                 provided       to    new
2006-                                                                                                                                                        teachers and sign in is
         be implemented through a year long                  through                      Salary                                Development
2007                                                         May 2009                                                           Evaluation of teacher        online                 at
         professional development induction and                                                                                                              http://classroom.jc-
Action   mentoring program for 100% participation of                                                                            induction program            schools.net/finchums/PD
Step 6   teachers new to Jefferson County.                                                                                      and measurement of           2006_07/newteachers_2
                                                                                                                                student achievement          0062007.xls




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 170 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                   by new teacher         Participants evaluated
                                                                                                                   coordinator            the sessions as:
                                                                                                                                          Not Useful: 9%
                                                                                                                                          Useful: 25%
                                                                                                                                          Very Useful: 34%
                                                                                                                                          A random sampling of
                                                                                                                                          students in novice
                                                                                                                                          teachers’ classrooms
                                                                                                                                          indicated the following:

                                                                                                                                          3-8 NCE average
                                                                                                                                          gains:
                                                                                                                                          Math – 4.3
                                                                                                                                          Reading 8.9
                                                                                                                                          Science 8.4
                                                                                                                                          Social Studies 9.3

                                                                                                                                          Secondary Average
                                                                                                                                          Percentile Gains:
                                                                                                                                          English 18.1
                                                                                                                                          Science 14.3
                                                                                                                                          Social Studies 4.5
                                                                                                                                          There was a loss in
                                                                                                                                          Math of -11.3 percentiles

2006-                                                     October      Reading         4 Extended   Extended       Pre and Post testing
         Provide tutoring for struggling middle school    2006         Specialist,     Contracts    Contract       of participants
2007                                                                                                                                      A tutor was supplied at
         readers and that involve technology resources    through      K-5 and 6-12                                                       each grade 6-8 school.
Action   and parental involvement.
Step 7                                                    May 2009
                                                          August       Reading              -$0-    N/A            Comparison of          Grade 5 2005 %
                                                          2005         Specialists,                                Writing Assessment     6=0%
                                                          through      9-12                                        Scores 2005 to 2006    5=22%
                                                                                                                                          4=53.6%
                                                          May 2009     Instructional
                                                                                                                                          Grade 5 2006 %
                                                                       Supervisor                                                         6=42%
                                                                                                                                          5=22.5%
         Provide a K-12 writing assessment professional                                                                                   4=54%
2006-
         development (4-Block writing strategy) for
2007                                                                                                                                      Grade 8 2005 %
         regular ed, special ed, CTE, and ELL teachers                                                                                    6=6%
Action   aimed at sharing strategies to improve Writing                                                                                   5=31%
Step 8   Assessment Scores.                                                                                                               4=53%
                                                                                                                                          Grade 8 2006 %
                                                                                                                                          6=6.4%
                                                                                                                                          5=32.4%
                                                                                                                                          4=50.6%

                                                                                                                                          Grade 11 2005 %
                                                                                                                                          6=2%




                                                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 171 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                               5=15%
                                                                                                                                               4=49%
                                                                                                                                               Grade 11 2006 %
                                                                                                                                               6=6%
                                                                                                                                               5=30%
                                                                                                                                               4=52%



                                                          July 2007     K-12           Niswonger      Niswonger         ThinkLink progress     Jefferson Middle
                                                          through       Reading      Foundation 3-    Foundation & GP   monitoring, Read 180   School
                                                          school        Specialist   year estimate:                     reports, TCAP          There has been a
                                                                                                                                               decrease in the number
                                                          year 2010                    $752,300                         results, and
                                                                                                                                               of students performing
                                                                                                                        professional           below proficient from
                                                                                       GP 3-year                        development            Test 1 to Test 3 in
                                                                                        estimate:                       evaluation             Language Arts in all
         Initiation of Project LEAD (Literacy Education                                $1,249,763                                              grade levels with the
         for Adolescent Development) whose 5                                                                                                   exception of
         components:                                                                                                                           “Techniques and Skills”
               Implementation of a Struggling Reading                                                                                          in Grade 8.
               Intervention Program;                                                                                                           Maury Middle School
                                                                                                                                               There has been a
               Literacy Framework Three-Year Plan;                                                                                             decrease in the number
               District-Wide Teacher and Administrator                                                                                         of students performing
               Professional Development                                                                                                        below proficient from
2006-                    o Year 1 Professional                                                                                                 Test 1 to Test 3 in
2007                         Development - Fluency and                                                                                         Language Arts in all
                             Comprehension                                                                                                     grade levels with the
Action
                         o Year 2 Professional                                                                                                 exception of
 Step                                                                                                                                          Grammar, Grade 6;
  9                          Development - Reading in
                                                                                                                                               vocabulary Grade 7;
                             the Content Area                                                                                                  Techniques & skills,
                         o Year 3 Professional                                                                                                 Grade 8.
                             Development - Writing &                                                                                           Rush Strong School
                             Vocabulary                                                                                                        There has been a
             Infusion of Appropriate and Interesting                                                                                           decrease in the number
                                                                                                                                               of students performing
             Texts for Classrooms and Library                                                                                                  below proficient from
             Student Management Achievement                                                                                                    Test 1 to Test 3 in
             Program (To be implemented in year                                                                                                Language Arts in all
             2)                                                                                                                                grade levels with the
                                                                                                                                               exception of Grade 6
                                                                                                                                               vocabulary (Test 3
                                                                                                                                               comparison not
                                                                                                                                               available); Grade 7
                                                                                                                                               Grammar (Test 3
                                                                                                                                               comparison not
                                                                                                                                               available); Grade 8
                                                                                                                                               Techniques and Skills




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 172 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                        White Pine School
                                                                                                                                                        There has been a
                                                                                                                                                        decrease in the number
                                                                                                                                                        of students performing
                                                                                                                                                        below proficient from
                                                                                                                                                        Test 1 to Test 3 in
                                                                                                                                                        Language Arts in all
                                                                                                                                                        grade levels with the
                                                                                                                                                        exception of Grade 6
                                                                                                                                                        Vocabulary; Grade 7
                                                                                                                                                        Grammar & Meaning;
                                                                                                                                                        Grade 8 Grammar,
                                                                                                                                                        Techniques & Skills,
                                                                                                                                                        Writing Process



                                                          July 2007     Regular ed                                            Survey evaluation of
2006-    Implementation of reading inclusion classrooms   through       and Special                                           educators involved to     The 2007 Special
2007     with professional development for both special   May 2009      ed                                                          determine           Education Report Card
         education and regular education teachers,                      department                                                effectiveness;        indicated a proficiency
Action
         within the guidelines developed by both                        supervisors                                             Analysis of TCAP        increase in in
 Step    departments aimed at improving proficiency                                                                             Reading/language        reading/language arts
  10     percentage of students with disabilities                                                                             arts proficiency levels   for grades 5, 6, 7, 8, and
         population                                                                                                              by students with       10.
                                                                                                                                    disabilities
                                                                                                           •Niswonger
         Utilize Read 180 pre-test to identify                                                             Foundation
         struggling readers in grades 6-12 and            August                       Niswonger           Read        180
                                                                        District                                              Pre/Post Tests
Action                                                    2008                         Foundation & LEA    ($200,000 )
         provide Read 180 and Language! as                through
                                                                        Reading        Special Education   •Special
                                                                                                                              Think Link Data
Step 1   intervention programs for at-risk                              Specialist     Budget
                                                                                                                              RTI referrals
                                                          May 2010                                         Education
         population.                                                                                       Budget
                                                                                                           Language!
         Provide professional development with            August                                           •Niswonger         Sign in forms from PD
                                                                        District
Action   instructional strategies for diverse             2008
                                                                        Reading
                                                                                       Niswonger           Foundation (see    sessions, online
Step 2   populations and to address new                   through                      Foundation & LEA    Action Step 1) &   evaluations of PD by C
                                                                        Specialist                                            & I Supervisors
         curriculum implementation.                       May 2010                                         LEA
         Continue the Reading in the Content              August                                                              Sign in forms from PD
                                                                        District                           •Niswonger
Action   Area professional development and                2008
                                                                        Reading
                                                                                       Niswonger
                                                                                                           Foundation (see
                                                                                                                              sessions, online
Step 3   literacy training for teachers in grades         through                      Foundation                             evaluations of PD by C
                                                                        Specialist                         Step 1)            & I Supervisors
         4-12 and CTE teachers.                           May 2010
         Provide content area and CTE writing             August        Directors of                       (No additional     Evidence  of    writing
Action                                                                                                                        prompts available on
         prompts for monthly school-wide Write            2008          Curriculum,    LEA                 funds
Step 4   Away Days.                                       through       Grades K-5                         required)          website




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 173 of 245
                                                    Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                    May 2010     and 6-12,
                                                                 District
                                                                 Reading
                                                                 Specialist
          Provide an additional ELL/ESL position                                                    •LEA    - ELL
                                                    August       Director of                        teacher
          (1 teacher is currently covering 7                                                                             Evaluate           students
Action                                              2008         Schools                            ($49,000)
                                                                                                                         progress      in       ELL
          schools) to address ELL/Hispanic          through      and ESL
                                                                                LEA
                                                                                                    •LEA - English
Step 5    subgroup performance and an ELL                                                                                subgroup
                                                    May 2010     Coordinator                        teacher
          inclusion 9th English class                                                               ($49,000)
          Establish PLC sessions on a regular       August       Principals
Action                                                                                                                   Sign in sheets for PD
          professional development sessions         2008         and District
                                                                                LEA
                                                                                                    (No additional
                                                                                                                         sessions, meeting
Step 6    based at grade, content, school and       through      Level                              funds required)      minutes at school level
          district levels.                          May 2010     Directors
                                                                 Director of
                                                                 Schools
          Add an additional literacy coach (2                    and
                                                    August                                          •LEA     for 1
                                                                 Reading
Action    schools currently share a coach) to       2008
                                                                 Specialist,    LEA
                                                                                                    literacy coach       Analysis of effectiveness
Step 7    address tier 2 implementation and         through                                         position             of Tier 2 Interventions
                                                                 Director of
          professional development.                 May 2010                                        ($58,000)
                                                                 Student
                                                                 Transitional
                                                                 Services
                                                                 Reading
          Literacy coaches to train                 August       Specialist,
Action                                              2008         Director of                        (No additional       Documentation of
          paraprofessionals to to support the RTI   through      Student
                                                                                LEA
                                                                                                    funds required)      school trainings
Step 8    process.                                  May 2010     Transitional
                                                                 Services
                                                                                                    7 Positions @
                                                                 Director of                        $22,000 each =
                                                                 Schools        Special Education   $154,000
                                                    August
                                                                 and            5
Action    Support implementation of RTI process     2008
                                                                 Director of    paraprofessional
                                                                                                    •IDEA Special        Data          Tracking,
                                                    through                                         Education (5         Documentation Logs
Step 9    through addition of paraprofessionals.                 Student        LEA 2               paraprofessional)
                                                    May 2010                    paraprofessionals
                                                                 Transitional                       •LEA           (2
                                                                 Services                           paraprofessionals
                                                                                                    )

                                                    August                                          •LEA – included in
                                                                 District                                                Sign in sheets from PD
Action    Provide poverty training for language     2008
                                                                 Level          LEA
                                                                                                    professional
                                                                                                                         sessions, online
Step 10   arts teachers in grades 6-12.             through                                         development
                                                                 Directors                                               surveys
                                                    May 2010                                        funds




                                                               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 174 of 245
                                                     Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



          Present a variety of reading                                                                 Mentoring
                                                     August
                                                                  District                             budget-
Action    intervention strategies to novice          2008
                                                                  Mentoring       LEA                  professional
                                                                                                                          Sign in sheets from
Step 11   teachers through the district’s Teacher    through                                                              monthly meetings
                                                                  Coordinator                          development
          Induction Program.                         May 2010
                                                                                                       funds
          Implementation of ACE (Achieving                        Director of                          •LEA    for   4
          Cooperative Engagement) program in         August       Schools,                             paraprofessiona    Documentation          of
Action                                                                            LEA      for     4
          grades 6-8 as intervention for at-risk     2008         Principals,
                                                                                  paraprofessional
                                                                                                       l positions (4     decreased          office
Step 12   populations addressing study skills        through      District 6-8                         positions    @     referrals and increased
                                                                                  positions
                                                     May 2010     C     &     I                        $22,000=$88,00     classroom performance
          and literacy (require a paraprofessional
          serving grades 6-8 per school).                         Supervisor                           0)
                                                                  Director of
                                                                  Schools,
                                                                  Human
          Provide a special ed and regular ed                                                          •LEA additional
                                                                  Resource,
                                                     August                                            secondary
          inclusive 10th grade class at the high                  &    Special    LEA     additional
Action                                               2008                         secondary            English
                                                                                                                          EOC Tests
          school to continue the progress made       through
                                                                  Education       teaching position    teaching
Step 13   by the special ed and regular ed 9th                    Director,       (English)
                                                     May 2010                                          position    (see
          grade inclusion class.                                  Director of
                                                                                                       Goal 1, Step 5)
                                                                  Student
                                                                  Transitional
                                                                  Services




                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 175 of 245
                                                                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                               GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                                  Revised DATE: __________________________

                    Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)
                                                                        Increase collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers by 50% over the previous school year to
                                                                        insure progression of sequential skill acquisition resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway
                                                               Goal     tests.
                                                                        Note: This goal is not a part of 2008 TCSPP as we have successfully completed all action steps.

                   Which need(s) does this Goal address?                Transition between middle and high school

                                                                        EXCELLENCE IN ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE
                                                                        Objective 5:        The Jefferson County Schools will make every effort to align curriculum content within,
How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?                                     and across all grades K-12, to insure a continuous progression of sequential skill
                                                                                            acquisition and mastery of content based learning.

                        ACTION STEPS                                                                                     IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                                                                        Section C – For each of the Action Steps you list, give timeline, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/required resources, funding
 Section B – Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure
                                                                                     sources, and evaluation strategy. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action step.)
  you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are
  strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based                                         Projected
 where possible and include professional development, technology,                      Person(s)
                                                                                                             Cost(s) /               Funding                                         Performance Results
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives as      Timeline       Responsibl                                                       Evaluation Strategy
                              applicable.                                                                   Required                 Sources                                             / Outcomes
                                                                                           e
                                                                                                            Resources
                                                                        Summer         Curriculum        $100 per day           Title                   Sign in form to record      Sign in forms completed
                                                                        2006- May      Supervisor,       Stipend paid to                                attendance, payment         and stipends paid to
                                                                        2008           High School       each                                           of stipend, Evaluation      100% of participants.
               Establish a summer math professional                                                                                                                                 Impact on achievement
               development session for middle school pre-               sessions       lead math         participating                                  by Curriculum and
                                                                                                                                                                                    determined by ThinkLink
               algebra teachers, led by a team of high school           during         teaching          teacher (6) for 2                              Instruction                 proficiency levels.
 2006-                                                                  designate      team, middle      days = $1200                                   Supervisors the
               algebra teachers. Communicate strategies and
 2007                                                                   d              school pre-                                                      impact on student
               curriculum developed through district website                                                                                                                        Jefferson Middle
 Action        for curriculum implementation in classroom               profession     algebra                                                          achievement                 School
 Step 1        aimed at increasing student achievement.                 al             teachers                                                         resulting from the          There has been a
                                                                        developm                                                                        curriculum produced         decrease in the number
                                                                        ent days                                                                        by teacher teams to         of students performing
                                                                                                                                                                                    below proficient from
                                                                        throughout                                                                      be implemented in
                                                                                                                                                                                    Test 1 to Test 3 in Math
                                                                        the year                                                                        schools                     in all grade levels with




                                                                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 176 of 245
Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                          the exception of
                                                                          Measurement and
                                                                          Geometry in Grade6;
                                                                          Algebra, Problem
                                                                          Solving, Data and
                                                                          Probability in Grade 7;
                                                                          and Data & Probability
                                                                          Grade 8.
                                                                          Maury Middle School
                                                                          There has been a
                                                                          decrease in the number
                                                                          of students performing
                                                                          below proficient from
                                                                          Test 1 to Test 3 in Math
                                                                          in all grade levels with
                                                                          the exception of Algebra
                                                                          in Grade 6; Algebra,
                                                                          Problem Solving, and
                                                                          graphs in Grade 7; and
                                                                          Problem Solving, Data &
                                                                          Probability, and Graphs
                                                                          in Grade 8.
                                                                          Rush Strong School
                                                                          There has been a
                                                                          decrease in the number
                                                                          of students performing
                                                                          below proficient from
                                                                          Test 1 to Test 3 in Math
                                                                          in all grade levels with
                                                                          the exception of
                                                                          Problem Solvingt and
                                                                          Geometry in Grade 6
                                                                          (Comparison to Test 2);
                                                                          Algebra, Graphs in
                                                                          Grade 7; and Data &
                                                                          Probability and Graphs
                                                                          in Grade 8.

                                                                          White Pine School
                                                                          There has been a
                                                                          decrease in the number
                                                                          of students performing
                                                                          below proficient from
                                                                          Test 1 to Test 3 in Math
                                                                          in all grade levels with
                                                                          the exception of
                                                                          Numbers & Operations,
                                                                          Algebra, Problem
                                                                          Solving in Grade 6;
                                                                          Number & Operation,




        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 177 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                  Problem Solving,
                                                                                                                                                  Algebra, and Geometry
                                                                                                                                                  in Grade 7; and Number
                                                                                                                                                  & Operation, Algebra in
                                                                                                                                                  Grade 8.




                                                            August       Curriculum &    Reading              GP, IDEA,   Sign in form from       100% of Participants
         As a result of providing inclusive professional    2006         Instructional   Specialist           Perkins     professional            signed Sign In forms
         development with technology integration,           through      Supervisors,    (grades 6-12)                    development, Online     Literacy Based
                                                                                                                                                  Technology Resources
         strategies for reading comprehension in the        May 2010     Grade 6-12      salary                           evaluation of PD and
                                                                                                                                                  for CTE (Feb. 16, 2007)
         content area for grades 6-12 will be                            Reading         $700                             the impact of reading   18% reported this
         implemented for regular ed, special ed, CTE,                    Specialist      supplementary                    strategies on student   session as somewhat
         and ELL teachers. Communicate strategies                                        reading across                   achievement by          useful and 88%
2006-    through district website for parents and                                        the curriculum                   Curriculum and          indicated it was very
2007     teachers.                                                                       materials to build               Instruction             useful in the online
Action                                                                                   a library for CTE.               Supervisors             evaluation.
                                                                                                                                                  2006-07 CTE Report
Step 2
                                                                                                                                                  card indicates a gain of
                                                                                                                                                  9.4% above the
                                                                                                                                                  negotiated performance
                                                                                                                                                  level for
                                                                                                                                                  Reading/Language Arts
                                                                                                                                                  and a 6.03% increase
                                                                                                                                                  above the State
                                                                                                                                                  average.
         Provide professional development to address        August       Curriculum      Additional copies    Title, GP   Sign in forms
         Blueprint & SPI in relation to middle and high     2006         Supervisors,    of Blueprint for                 Online Evaluation of    100% of Participants
         school curriculum standards. Share the             through      Content area    Learning @ $10                   Professional            signed Sign In forms
2006-    curriculum through district website for            May 2007     middle &        each (50 copies)                 Development and         And curriculum was
2007     implementation in classroom to increase                         high school     = $500                           curriculum              implemented and is
Action   student mastery of performance indicators.                      teachers.                                        implementation by       available online
                                                                                                                          Curriculum and          (http://jc-
Step 3
                                                                                                                          Instruction             schools.net/curricuoum.
                                                                                                                                                  htm)
                                                                                                                          Supervisors

2006-                                                       August       Special         $1,500 Computer      IDEA        Sign in forms
         Provide professional development for special       2006         education       Software                         Online Evaluation of
2007
         education teacher for implementation of            through      administrator                                    Professional
Action   Destination of math, a technology-based            May 2010     s and                                            Development
Step 4   program for students with disabilities in grades                teachers                                         sessions, Student



                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 178 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


         6-12.                                                                                                             progress reports. All
                                                                                                                           used by special
                                                                                                                           education
                                                                                                                           administrator
                                                             August        JCHS High       $5,000 Materials   GP           Sign in forms            100% sign in form
                                                             2006          School          Fee                8 Extended   Student progress         participation
                                                             through       Administratio   8 Teacher          Contracts    monitoring reported to   Academic Success:
                                                                                                                                                    26% maintained a 93
                                                             May 2010      n and           Stipends                        mentors, guidance
                                                                                                                                                    average or better.
                                                                           Teachers                                        counselors, and          5% were below a 70
                                                                                                                           school administrators    average or failing.

                                                                                                                                                    76% passed all their
                                                                                                                                                    classes
                                                                                                                                                    Less than 4% did not
                                                                                                                                                    have enough credits to
                                                                                                                                                    be classified as True
                                                                                                                                                    Sophomores

         Establishment of LINK, a transition/orientation                                                                                            Discipline Issues:
         program designed to inform, motivate, and                                                                                                  The percentage of 9th
         encourage incoming freshmen providing the                                                                                                  graders with at least one
         freshmen with a variety of activities designed to                                                                                          discipline      infraction
2006-    inform, establish behavior/conduct                                                                                                         including warnings was
                                                                                                                                                    36%. These infractions
2007     expectations, and establish positive
                                                                                                                                                    also include tardies.
Action   relationships. Each LINK student will have an
Step 5   adult mentor throughout the year. LINK                                                                                                     Algebra Gateway:
         activities will be held during the year to enrich                                                                                          280 freshmen took the
         the learning experience thus increasing student                                                                                            Algebra Gateway. Of
         achievement.                                                                                                                               that number, 1% was
                                                                                                                                                    below proficient.

                                                                                                                                                        Future LINK reports
                                                                                                                                                    will include a true
                                                                                                                                                    comparison      between
                                                                                                                                                    freshmen who attended
                                                                                                                                                    our LINK Camp and who
                                                                                                                                                    were invited, but did not
                                                                                                                                                    attend. We will be
                                                                                                                                                    collecting           data
                                                                                                                                                    concerning            the
                                                                                                                                                    academic        success,
                                                                                                                                                    discipline,     gateway
                                                                                                                                                    scores, etc. from this
                                                                                                                                                    target group through out
                                                                                                                                                    the upcoming year.
2006-    Conduct an educational summit for 6-12 and          July 2006     Director of           -$0-               N/A    Sign in forms            Sign up forms were
                                                             through       Schools and                                     Evaluation of summit     completed by 100% of
2007     CTE administrators to share best practices                                                                                                 participants



                                                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 179 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Action   aimed at aligning curriculum and improving       May 2010      Central                                     by school                The online evaluation
         student achievement in core content areas.                     Office                                      administrators           reported that 95% of
Step 6
                                                                        Supervisors                                 Comparison of 2006       participants found the
                                                                                                                                             sessions useful or very
                                                                                                                    (pre-summit) to 2007
                                                                                                                                             useful.
                                                                                                                    (post-summit student
                                                                                                                    achievement using
                                                                                                                    Report Card data to
                                                                                                                    be shared with 6-12
                                                                                                                    Administrators,
                                                                                                                    Central Office
                                                                                                                    Supervisors, and
                                                                                                                    Director Of Schools
2007-                                                     July 2007      Grade 6-12     $7,250            GP        Participant evaluation
2008     The creation and implementation of curriculum    through       Instructional                               of project, through
Action   maps, pacing guides and a dynamic curriculum     May 2008       Supervisor,                                survey of math           To be conducted in May
 Step    by the Middle School and High School Math                      High School                                 teachers, & TCAP         2008
         Curriculum Team                                                   Team                                     math scores
  7                                                                       Leaders
                                                          July 2007     Regular ed                                  Survey evaluation of
2007-    Implementation of math inclusion classrooms
                                                          through       and Special                                 educators involved to
2008     with professional development for both special
                                                          May 2008      ed                                          determine
         education and regular education teachers,
Action                                                                  department                                  effectiveness;           To be conducted in May
         within the guidelines developed by both                                                                                             2008
 Step    departments aimed at improving proficiency
                                                                        supervisors                                 Analysis of TCAP
  10                                                                                                                math arts proficiency
         percentage of students with disabilities
                                                                                                                    levels by students
         population
                                                                                                                    with disabilities




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 180 of 245
                                                                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                               GOAL 3 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                                  Revised DATE: __________________________

                    Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)
                                                                        To improve the district’s per pupil ADM expenditure of $6,241 by meeting or exceeding the state’s ADM expenditure
                                                                        of $6,970 allowing students equal access to all educational resources in order to increase student proficiency by 2%
                                                                        on TCAP and Gateway tests and to eliminate the achievement gap that separates low-income and minority students
                                                               Goal     from other students.
                                                                        NOTE: This goal is no longer a part of our 2008 TCSPP. The district did increase local funding ,however the
                                                                        new BEP funding formula has still left the district below the state ADM.

                   Which need(s) does this Goal address?                Provide equal educational opportunities for students

                                                                        ACHIEVE EXCELLENCE IN COMMUNITY RELATIONS
                                                                        Objective 1: Improve communication and relations with the County
                                                                                     Commission
How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?                 Objective 2: Enhance communications between the schools and community
                                                                        Objective 3: Build partnerships with the business community and the
                                                                                     Chamber of Commerce
                        ACTION STEPS                                                                                     IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                                                                        Section C – For each of the Action Steps you list, give timeline, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/required resources, funding
 Section B – Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure
                                                                                     sources, and evaluation strategy. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action step.)
  you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are
  strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based                                         Projected
 where possible and include professional development, technology,                      Person(s)
                                                                                                             Cost(s) /               Funding                                         Performance Results
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives as      Timeline       Responsibl                                                       Evaluation Strategy
                              applicable.                                                                   Required                 Sources                                             / Outcomes
                                                                                           e
                                                                                                            Resources
                                                                                                                                                                                    Annual Report was
                                                                                                                                                                                    published and
               The Director of Schools will improve public                                                                                                                          distributed to county
               awareness through a quarterly Director’s                                Director of                                                                                  commissioners and
 2005-                                                                  August                                                                          Director’s review of        school board
               Report to members of the County Commission                              Schools,
 2006                                                                   2006                             $3000 for printing                             County Commission’s         commissioners and also
               and an annual report, which includes student                            Human                                             GP                                         available through
 Action        performance, to School Board Commissioners
                                                                        through
                                                                                       Resources
                                                                                                         costs                                          feedback,
                                                                        June 2007                                                                       Print publication           website:
 Step 1        through email correspondence.                                           Director                                                                                     http://jc-
                                                                                                                                                                                    schools.net/annual-
                                                                                                                                                                                    report2007.pdf




                                                                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 181 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                                                                http://jc-schools.net/
                                                                                                                                                annual/2005-
                                                                                                                                                06Report.pdf


         An Education Advisory Committee to serve a                         Director of
                                                                                                                        Evaluation from
2005-    dual function of providing quarterly feedback to                   Schools,
                                                              August                                                    Education Advisory      Education Advisory
         the Board and participating as a steering                          Education
2006                                                          2006                          $500 for printing           Committee,              Committee established
         committee for long-range planning activities,                      Advisory                            GP                              and sign in forms
Action   using performance data, which will be
                                                              through
                                                                            Committee,
                                                                                            costs                       Sign in forms from
                                                              June 2007                                                 Advisory committee      completed
Step 2   communicated to stakeholders through the                           District
                                                                                                                        meetings
         district website and print publications.                           Webmaster

                                                                            Director of
2005-    Develop and implement a public relations
                                                              August        Schools,                                    Stakeholders’ Survey,
         awareness initiative, address equal student                                                                                            Survey conducted Sept.
2006                                                          2006          Education                                   District Website
         access and student perform data, to assist                                                -$0-         N/A                             16, 2005. Completed by
Action   administrators in efforts to enhance
                                                              through       Advisory                                    Utilization through     459 stakeholders
Step 3                                                        June 2007     Committee,                                  counter
         communications with stakeholders.
                                                                            Webmaster
                                                                            Director of
2005-    Utilization of the district website to Improve and                 Schools,
                                                              August                                                    Newsletter              Quarterly    newsletters
         enhance communications with parents through                        School
2006                                                          2006                                                      publication,            provided to Board
         a newsletter from the Board, which will share                      Board                  -$0-         N/A                             District website logged
Action   student performance data and detail student
                                                              through
                                                                            Commission
                                                                                                                        District Website,
                                                              June 2007                                                 Stakeholders’ Survey    1,445,194 visitors
Step 4   equal access.                                                      ers, District
                                                                            Webmaster
2005-                                                                                                                   Analysis of parental    Feedback from “We’d
                                                              August
         Provide parental involvement through a “We’d                                                                   feedback collected by   Like to Hear from You”
2006                                                          2006
         Like to Hear from You,” link accessible from the                   Webmaster              -$0-         N/A     district webmaster      collected and shared
Action   district website.
                                                              through
                                                                                                                        and Director of         with     Director    and
Step 5                                                        June 2007                                                                         appropriate supervisors.
                                                                                                                        Schools




                                                                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 182 of 245
                                                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                     TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1
                                                         GOAL 4 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                         Revised DATE: __________________________

                Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)

                                                              Increase Math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score 2 NCE
                                                              points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers
                                                         Goal
                                                              by 50% over the previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill
                                                              acquisition resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.
                                                              Grades 3-8
                                                                  AYP Sub-groups falling below 86% proficient/advanced 2008 benchmark:
                                                                     • African Amer 3% below
                                                                     • Hispanic 2% below
                                                                     • SWD 14% below
                                                                     • LEP 7% below
                                                                  Grades 3-5 fell 2 NCE points below the state average
                                                                  RCPI scores below state
                                                                     • Grade 3 fell -2 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                                                                     • Grade 4 fell -1 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                                                                     • Grade 5 fell -1 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                                                                     • Grade 7 fell -2 points below state overall RCPI average for that grade level
                Which need(s) does this Goal address?             Grade 4 and 6 had the least 3-year value added gains (1.9 and 1.7 respectively) compared to a
                                                                  more than 4.6 gain by grades 3, 5, and 8.
                                                                  Grades 6-8 currently has only 2 of the 16 math teachers actually endorsed to teach math.

                                                                  Grades 9-12
                                                                  AYP sub-groups below state averages:
                                                                     • Hispanic 2% below
                                                                     • Economically Disadv 4% below
                                                                     • Students with Disabilities 1% below

                                                                  AYP Sub-groups falling below 89% 2008 benchmark:
                                                                     • African Amer 2% below
                                                                     • Hispanic 9% below
                                                                     • SWD 18% below



                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 183 of 245
                                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                            •    LEP 3% below

                                                                       High School ACT 3-year average Math score (19.3) is slightly below the state’ score (19.8)
                                                                       79% of 10 graders taking the ACT Plan scored below 19 in math (TN has designated that any
                                                                       student scoring below 19 or lower must take Bridge Math.


                                                                       EXCELLENCE IN ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE
How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?                Objective 5:   The Jefferson County Schools will make every effort to align curriculum content
                                                                       within, and across all grades K-12, to insure a continuous progression of sequential skill
                                                                       acquisition and mastery of content based learning.
ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator 5.2)                                     IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – Template 5.3 – (Rubric Indicator 5.3)
Section B – Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure   Section C – For each of the Action Steps you list, give timeline, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/required resources, funding
you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are        sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based      step.)
where possible and include professional development, technology,                                                                Projected Cost(s)
                                                                                       Person(s)             Required                                                               Performance Results
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives         Timeline                                                    & Funding           Evaluation Strategy
                                                                                      Responsible           Resources                                                                   / Outcomes
within the action steps of each goal.                                                                                                Sources
                                                                                                                                •Niswonger
                                                                                                                                Foundation      =
                                                                                                                                $32,280 Grades
                                                                                                                                4-8 ThinkLink
               Utilize   ThinkLink    for    progress                  Sept.          District
                                                                                                                                •LEA Gateway
 Action        monitoring for grades K-8 and for all 9th               2007           Level             Niswonger
                                                                                                                                Algebra         =
                                                                                                                                                       Benchmark
 Step 1        grade algebra classes                                   through        Supervisors       Foundation & LEA                               Assessments
                                                                                                                                $1,725 (1/2 price
                                                                       May 2009       , Principals
                                                                                                                                discount)
                                                                                                                                •LEA ThinkLink
                                                                                                                                Grades K-3 =
                                                                                                                                $38,920
               Provide professional development for
               teachers to begin implementation of the                                District
                                                                                                                                •LEA
                                                                       July 2008      Level                                                            Sign in sheets for PD
 Action        new math curriculum through the
                                                                       through        Supervisors       LEA
                                                                                                                                professional
                                                                                                                                                       activities, online
 Step 2        development of a scope and sequence,                                                                             development
                                                                       May 2009       , Math                                                           survey
               pacing guide and essential math skill                                                                            budget
                                                                                      Specialist
               checklist.
                                                                                      Director of
                                                                                      Schools,
               Acquire a district level math specialist                August
                                                                                      Human                                                            Increased performance
 Action                                                                2009
               to serve as a curriculum coach for                      through
                                                                                      Resource,         LEA                     •LEA $75,000           in Math, Sign in sheets
 Step 3        grades K-12                                                            Directors of                                                     for PD activities
                                                                       May 2009
                                                                                      Curriculum
                                                                                      K-5 & 6-12



                                                                                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 184 of 245
                                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                                                   •Extended
                                                                                                   Contract      for
                                                                                                   teachers       as
                                                  August
                                                               Director of   Extended              tutors         (4
Action   Provide after-school math tutoring for   2008
                                                               Curriculum,   Contract        for   contracts       =   Attendance rosters
Step 4   at-risk population                       through                    teachers as tutors
                                                               K-5 & 6-12                          $8,000        no
                                                  May 2009
                                                                                                   additional
                                                                                                   funding
                                                                                                   required)
                                                                                                   •LEA to change
                                                                             LEA to change         half time math
                                                  August                     half time math
                                                               Director of                         teacher to full
Action   Increase math instructional time for     2008
                                                               Curriculum,
                                                                             teacher to full
                                                                                                   time position at    School schedules
Step 5   students in grades 6-8.                  through                    time position at
                                                               6-12                                Maury     Middle
                                                  May 2009                   Maury      Middle
                                                                             School                School          -
                                                                                                   $22,000
         Implementation of ACE (Achieving                                                          •LEA (funding
                                                  August       Director of   LEA (funding for      for             4
Action   Cooperative Engagement) program in       2008         Curriculum,   4
                                                                                                   paraprofessiona
                                                                                                                       Refer to Goal 2, Action
Step 6   grades 6-8 as intervention for at-risk   through      6-12, 6-8     paraprofessional                          Step 12
                                                                                                   l positions see
         population                               May 2009     Principals    positions)
                                                                                                   Goal 1, Step 12)
                                                                                                   Extended
                                                                                                   Contract      for
                                                                                                   credit recovery
                                                                                                   teachers
                                                                             Extended              $10,000 LEA for
                                                               Director of   Contract for credit   costs of credit
                                                  August
                                                               Curriculum,   recovery              recovery
Action   Provide credit recovery for grade 9-12   2008
                                                               6-12, High    teachers, LEA for     program, Plato      Attendance rosters
Step 7   math                                     through                    costs of credit
                                                               School                              Total: $16,075
                                                  May 2009                   recovery
                                                               Principal                           •$7,075
                                                                             program, Plato        Technology
                                                                                                   Budget
                                                                                                   •$8,000 Perkins
                                                                                                   $1,000     Adult
                                                                                                   Education




                                                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 185 of 245
                                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                         TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                              GOAL 5 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                                  Revised DATE: __________________________

                    Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)

                                                              Goal     Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2% each year for the next 4 years.

                                                                       In 2007 Jefferson County High School made AYP for Graduation rate by only .5 of a percentage point. The 2006
                   Which need(s) does this Goal address?               graduation rate fell from 94.1% to 89.2% in 2007.

How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?

ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator 5.2)                                            IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – Template 5.3 – (Rubric Indicator 5.3)
Section B – Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure   Section C – For each of the Action Steps you list, give timeline, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/required resources, funding
you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are        sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based      step.)
where possible and include professional development, technology,                                                                Projected Cost(s)
                                                                                       Person(s)             Required                                                               Performance Results
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives         Timeline                                                   & Funding            Evaluation Strategy
                                                                                      Responsible           Resources                                                                   / Outcomes
within the action steps of each goal.                                                                                               Sources
               Continue to provide Read 180 as an                      Sept.          Director of
 Action                                                                2007           Curriculum,                               See     Goal      1,   Pre/Post Tests of
               intervention program for grade 9                        through        6-12,
                                                                                                        Nieswongerr, LEA
                                                                                                                                Action Step 1          participants
 Step 1        struggling readers                                      May 2009       Principal
               Collaborative professional development                  August                                                   •LEA – included in
                                                                                      District                                                         Sign in sheets of PD
 Action                                                                2008                                                     professional
               between transitional grades (PreK-K, K-                 through
                                                                                      Level             LEA
                                                                                                                                development
                                                                                                                                                       activities, online
 Step 2        1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4,, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7, 7-8, 8-9)                            Supervisors                                                      survey
                                                                       May 2009                                                 funds
                                                                       August
               Develop intervention strategies to                                     Director of
 Action                                                                2008                                                     •See Goal 4,
               improve student performance on                          through
                                                                                      Curriculum,       LEA
                                                                                                                                Action Step 1
                                                                                                                                                       Gateway scores
 Step 3        Gateway tests                                                          6-12
                                                                       May 2009
                                                                                      Directors of
                                                                       August         Curriculum,
                                                                       2008           K-5 & 6-12 ,                                                     Analysis of student
 Action        Track at-risk students starting in grade
                                                                       through        Director of       LEA
                                                                                                                                •See Goal 4,
                                                                                                                                                       progress utilizing think
 Step 4        4                                                                                                                Action Step 1
                                                                       May 2009       Student                                                          Link, TVAAS data
                                                                                      Transitional
                                                                                      Services




                                                                                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 186 of 245
                                                   Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                               Extended
                                                   August       Director of    Contract for credit
Action                                                                         recovery
         Offer credit recovery programs for        2008         Curriculum,                          See Goal 4,
                                                                               teachers, LEA for                           Attendance roster
Step 5   grade 9-12 students                       through      6-12,          costs of credit
                                                                                                     Action Step 7
                                                   May 2009     Principal      recovery
                                                                               program, Plato
                                                                Director of
                                                                Curriculum,
         Focus utilization of counselors for       August
                                                                6-12,                                                      Development of
Action                                             2008                                              (no additional
         student tracking assuring that students   through
                                                                Supervisor     LEA
                                                                                                     funding required)
                                                                                                                           student tracking
Step 6   not on track for graduation.                           for                                                        documentation
                                                   May 2009
                                                                Counselor,
                                                                Principal
                                                                Director of
         Ensure Student Placement is aimed at                   Assessment,
         student success through the utilization   August
                                                                Supervisor                           State Department
Action                                             2008
                                                                for
         of data: TCAP, Explore, TVAAS, teacher    through
                                                                               SDE                   of Education
Step 7   recommendation                                         Counselor,                           Reimbursement
                                                   May 2009
                                                                and
                                                                Principals
                                                                                                     Extended
                                                                Director of                          Contract for LINK
                                                                Curriculum,                          teachers:
                                                   August       6-12,                                •5 High School
         Continue LINK Program to meet                                                               Teachers         (4
Action                                             2008         Supervisor     Extended
         transitional needs of incoming            through      for            Contract
                                                                                                     weeks)      $10,000   LINK participation data
Step 8   freshmen                                                                                    (currently funded)
                                                   May 2009     Counselor,                           •6 High School
                                                                and                                  Teachers         (2
                                                                Principals                           weeks)     $ 5,000
                                                                                                     (currently funded)
                                                                Director of
                                                                Exceptional
         Provide inclusionary classes in grades    August       Children,                                                  Master school
Action   9-12 ELL and Students with Disabilities   2008         Director of
                                                                               LEA
                                                                                                     See Goal 1,           schedule, EOC and
Step 9   for Gateway and EOC courses (requires     through      Student                              Action Step 5         Gateway scores for
         an additional English teacher).           May 2009     Transitional                                               ELL and SWD
                                                                Services,
                                                                Principal




                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 187 of 245
                                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                                         TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                              GOAL 6 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                                 Revised DATE: __________________________

                    Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)

                                                                   Increase Technology integration to support state curriculum performance
                                                                   indicators. Integration will be focused on increasing student achievement on
                                                              Goal
                                                                   ACT Explore to College Ready status in the math, reading, and science subject
                                                                   areas.
                                                                       The state’s science, math, and language arts K-12 curriculum has been revised and teaching and learning resources
                                                                       to support these curriculum changes will be created locally through technology integration training sessions and
                                                                       shared through the district website. Through these resources the district will address the following areas of need:
                                                                       EXPLORE – College Ready:
                                                                       Math College Ready = 17
                                                                       District Math Average = 14.78
                                                                       Reading College Ready = 15
                   Which need(s) does this Goal address?               District Reading Average = 14.33
                                                                       Science College Read = 20
                                                                       District Science Average = 16.13
                                                                       Composite College Ready = 16
                                                                       District College Ready = 15.23
                                                                                     th
                                                                       Only 38% of 10 grade students would have a projected composite score of a 21 on the ACT based on their 2007
                                                                       ACT Plan score.

How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?

ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator 5.2)                                            IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – Template 5.3 – (Rubric Indicator 5.3)
Section B – Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure   Section C – For each of the Action Steps you list, give timeline, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/required resources, funding
you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are        sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based      step.)
where possible and include professional development, technology,                                                                Projected Cost(s)
                                                                                       Person(s)             Required                                                               Performance Results
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives         Timeline                                                   & Funding            Evaluation Strategy
                                                                                      Responsible           Resources                                                                   / Outcomes
within the action steps of each goal.                                                                                               Sources
               Provide    increased Bandwidth  to                      August                                                                          Evidence that
 Action                                                                                                                         •E-Rate $212,040       bandwidth was
               address the needs of the following                      2008           Director of
                                                                                                        E-Rate, LEA             • LEA Technology       increased enough to
 Step1         applications that are provided to                       through        Technology                                Budget $66,960         support utilization of
               schools:                                                May 2009                                                                        applications by



                                                                                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 188 of 245
                                                     Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                o Brainpop – multimedia                                                                                    teachers/students
                                                                                                                           through monitoring by
                    program                                                                                                ENA
                o StarData - student
                    information system
                o United Streaming –
                    multimedia programs
                o Nettrekker – online
                    reference resource
                o Success Net – online
                    assessment through Scott
                    Foresman
                o   ThinkLink – online formative
                    assessment with practice
                    probes, grades K-8
                o   PowerMedia - multimedia
                    programs
                o   Tumble Books – online
                    literacy resources
                o   Textbooks – online
                    resources to support
                    curriculum
                o   Online Gradebooks
                    http://www.thinkwave.com
                    http://www.gradeconnect.com/fr
                    ont/press_5-15-04.php
                o   Leveled Readers –
                    downloaded from Internet
                o   Dibels – formative
                    assessment
                o   Turnleaf – online student
                    assessment data resource
                o   Online testing applications

         Increase bandwidth to all sites through     August                                          •2 Lab Facilitators
Action                                                                                               @ JMS & WPS           Installation of fiber by
         installation of fiber in all schools to     2008         Director of
                                                                                  E-Rate, LEA        $44,000               AT&T monitoring
Step2    provide access to curriculum and            through      Technology                         •See Goal 6,          bandwidth
         instructional resources                     May 2009                                        Action Step 1
                                                     August       Instructional   Niswonger                                Think Link Data
Action   Utilization of ThinkLink progress
                                                     2008         Technology      Foundation Grant
                                                                                                     •See Goal 2,
                                                                                                                           Reports, and RTI
Step3    monitoring.                                                                                 Action Step 1
                                                     through      Specialist      LEA                                      Tracking



                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 189 of 245
                                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                  May 2009


                                                                                                                     Sign in forms from PD
         Offer technology-based professional      August                                                             sessions, and Online
                                                               Instructional   Federal Funds
Action   development including eTc, data          2008
                                                               Technology      Title II Part D
                                                                                                 •Title II, Part D   evaluation of PD by
Step 4   collection, and pod casting to support   through                                        $15,786             Curriculum and
                                                                Specialist
         curriculum.                              May 2009                                                           Instruction
                                                                                                                     Supervisors
                                                                                                                     Documentation         of
         Offer online teacher-created resources   August                                                             scheduled       training
                                                               Instructional   Federal Funds
Action                                            2008
                                                               Technology                        (see Goal 6,        days by technology
         through Dynamic Curriculum to align      through
                                                                               Title II Part D
                                                                                                 Action Step 4)      Specialist.     Created
Step 5   with new state standards.                              Specialist
                                                  May 2009                                                           tutorials available on
                                                                                                                     website.
                                                  August
         Expand ThinkLink progress monitoring                  Instructional
Action                                            2008
                                                               Technology                        •See Goal 2,        Think Link Data
         to all algebra classes at Jefferson      through
                                                                               LEA
                                                                                                 Action Step 1       Tracking
Step 6   County High School                                     Specialist
                                                  May 2009
Action   Offer professional development           August       Instructional   Extended          •Extended           Sign in forms from PD
         sessions aimed at teacher-created        2008         Technology      Contracts         Contract (4 four    sessions, and Online
Step 7                                            through       Specialist                       week contracts =    evaluation of PD by
         webpages                                                                                $8,000, currently   Curriculum        and
                                                  May 2009
                                                                                                 funded)             Instruction
                                                                                                                     Supervisors
Action   Encourage teacher utilization of email   August       Instructional   LEA               (no additional      On Line Survey of
         and teacher-created websites as          2008         Technology                        funding required)   parental
Step 8                                            through       Specialist                                           communication
         communication tools for professional                                                                        frequency
         assistance and parental support.         May 2009




                                                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 190 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                                              TCSPP Compliance Matrix


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract    SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                       Systemwide
                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)         (T)

In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
Establish annual measurable objectives for each school
that – a) include an annual increase in the percentage of
highly qualified teachers at each local school, to ensure
that all teachers teaching in core academic subjects in
each public elementary school and secondary school are         TCSPP Component 3, Template 3.1, Pages 47-90
highly qualified not later than the end of the 2005-06
school year; and b) include an annual increase in the
percentage of teachers who are receiving high-quality
professional development?

Include a description of the applicant’s specific goals for
using advanced technology to improve student academic          Technology Plan (T): Section 4. Timeline, Technology Implementation - 2005-
achievement, aligned with challenging State academic           2008
content and student academic achievement standards?            TCSPP Component 3, Template 3.1, Pages 47-90
(Title II D, Sec 2414 & Erate)                                 TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
                                                               TCSPP Component 4, Template 4.1a, Pages 91-100


Include a description of the steps the applicant will take
to ensure that all students and teachers in schools
served by the LEA involved have increased access to            Federal Programs, Title II Part D, Technology Plan (T), Page 23: Section 9. Equity
educational technology, especially students in high            TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
poverty, high need, or high priority schools?                  TCSPP Component 4, Template 4.1a, Pages 91-100
(Title II D, Sec 2414)




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 191 of 245
                                                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                 Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                                Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                       Systemwide
                                                                   (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)         (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
Include a description of how the applicant will identify and
promote curricula and teaching strategies that integrate        Federal Programs, Title II Part D, Technology Plan (T), Page 17: Section
technology effectively into curricula and instruction,          7.Promotion of Curricula and Teaching Strategies that Integrate Technology, CTE
based on a review of relevant research, leading to              Perkins
improvements in student academic achievement, as                TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
measured by challenging State academic content and              TCSPP Component 4, Template 4.1a, Page 47-90
student academic achievement standards?
(Title II D, Sec 2414)



Include a description of how the applicant will provide         Federal Programs, Title II Part D, Technology Plan (T) Student Goals and
ongoing, sustained professional development for                 Strategies Part J: Provide year-long technology
teachers, principals, administrators, and school library            based professional development projects aimed at integrating technology
media personnel serving the local educational agency, to        into the
further the effective use of technology in the classroom or         curriculum and creating online technology resources. Page 8
library media center? (Title II D, Sec 2414 & Erate)            TCSPP Component 4, Template 4.1a pages 47-90
                                                                TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
                                                                TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179

Include a description of how the applicant will integrate       Federal Programs, Title II Part D,Technology Plan (T) Section 4. Timeline,
technology (including software and other electronically         Technology Implementation - 2005-2008
delivered learning material) into curricula and instruction,      Page 12
and a timeline for such integration? (Title II D)               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174




                                                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 192 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract    SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                       Systemwide
                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)         (A)         (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
Describe how the applicant will encourage the
development and utilization of innovative strategies for
the delivery of specialized or rigorous academic courses
and curricula through the use of technology, including         Federal Program, Federal Programs, Title II Part D,Technology Plan (T) Section 8,
distance learning technologies, particularly for those            Student Goals and Strategies, Page 7
areas that would not otherwise have access to such             TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179
courses and curricula due to geographical isolation or
insufficient resources? (Title II D)


Describe how the applicant will ensure the effective use
of technology to promote parental involvement and
increase communication with parents, including a               Technology Plan (T) Section 11, Community and Family Involvement, Page 22
description of how parents will be informed of the             TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179
technology being applied in their child’s education so that    TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 3 – Action Plan Development, Pages 180-181
the parents are able to reinforce at home the instruction      Systemwide Parent and Community Engagement Plan
their child receives at school? (Title II D)


Describe how programs will be developed, where
applicable, in collaboration with adult literacy service       Federal Programs, Federal Programs, Title II Part D,Technology Plan (T) Section
providers, to maximize the use of technology? (Title II D)     6,
                                                                  Collaboration, Page 16

Describe the process and accountability measures that
the applicant will use to evaluate the extent to which
activities funded are effective in integrating technology      Federal Programs, Title II Part D, Technology Plan (T) Section 16, Evaluation,
into curricula and instruction, increasing the ability of      Page 25
teachers to teach, and enabling students to meet               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
challenging State academic content and student                 TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, 175-179
academic achievement standards? (Title II D)




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 193 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                               Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                              Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                    Systemwide
                                                                 (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
Describe the actions the LEA will take to assist high
priority schools? (Title I, Sec 1112)
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
TCSPP includes the LEA’s responsibilities for                 SACS Component 5
improvement.


Describe how the eligible entity will hold elementary
schools and secondary schools receiving funds
accountable for:
• annually measuring the English proficiency of LEP
  students (by use of the CELLA.)
• meeting Title III English proficiency annual measurable
  objectives; and making AYP for LEP students. (Title         TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
  III, Sec 3116)
Title III Accountability LEA Requirement—The LEA
will develop Title III “improvement” strategies to address
the Title III benchmark(s) not met.

Describe how the LEA will provide additional educational
assistance to individual students assessed as needing
help in meeting the State’s challenging student academic
achievement standards for students classified as LEP,         Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan
IDEA, Migrant, Neglected and Delinquent, Indian children      Special Education 7 Goal 2
served under Title VII, Homeless, and Immigrant children      TCSPP Template 4.1 d, pages 108-110
in order to increase program effectiveness, eliminate         TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
duplication, and reduce fragmentation of services?
(Title I, Sec 1112)
Describe the strategy the LEA will use to coordinate




                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 194 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                               Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                              Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                    Systemwide
                                                                 (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)          (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
programs with programs under Title II to provide
professional development for teachers and principals,         Federal Programs, Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Page 18
and, if appropriate, pupil services personnel,                Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan
administrators, parents and other staff, including LEA        TCSPP Template 4.1a, pages 91-100
level staff in accordance with sections 1118 and 1119?        TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
(Title I, Sec 1112)
Describe how the LEA will coordinate and integrate
services provided with other educational services at the
LEA or individual school level such as: Even Start, Head
Start, Reading First, Early Reading First, and other          Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Application, Page 11
preschool programs, as well as, services for children with    TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
limited English proficiency, children with disabilities,      TCSPP Template 4.1a, pages 91-100
migratory children, neglected or delinquent youth,            TCSPP Template 4.2a, pages 111-120
homeless children, and immigrant children?                    TCSPP Template 4.4a, pages 148-153
(Title I, Sec 1112)
Describe how the LEA will ensure that all
paraprofessionals and all teachers of core academic
courses are highly qualified by the end of 2005-06?
(Title I, Sec 1119)                                           Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Application, Page 10
Title IIA Accountability LEA Requirement—The LEA              TSCPP, Template 3.1, Pages 47-90
has developed Title IIA “improvement” strategies to           TCSPP Template 4.2a, pages 111-120
increase the percentage of core academic courses
taught by highly qualified teachers.

Describe the services the LEA will provide homeless
children? (Title I, Sec 1112)                                 Federal Programs, Title X, Part C, Statement of Assurances


Describe the strategy the LEA will use to implement
effective parental and community involvement, including       Federal Programs, Family and Community Engagement Plan
parents of LEP students? (Title I, Sec 1112)                  2006 01 Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Pages 18
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
TCSPP includes strategies to promote effective parental       Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan
involvement in the schools.


                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 195 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract     SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                        Systemwide
                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)         (A)          (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)

Describe the professional development activities and
how these activities will be aligned with challenging State
academic content standards and the curricula and
programs tied to the standards? (NCLB)
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised                TCSPP Template 4.1a, pages 90-100 ; 4.1b, Pages 101-104
TCSPP provides for high-quality staff development for          TCSPP Template 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
instructional staff that focuses primarily on improved         TCSPP Template 5.1 GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179
instruction (includes the results of the district’s
professional development survey and an explanation of
how the district used the required 10% set aside in Title I
for professional development as required by NCLB.)

Describe how the activities will be based on a review of
scientifically based research and an explanation of why        Federal Programs, Title II, Part D, Technology Plan (T), Page 17: Section
the activities are expected to improve student academic        7.Promotion
achievement? (NCLB)                                               of Curricula and Teaching Strategies that Integrate Technology (Title II, Part
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised                D)
TCSPP incorporates strategies grounded in scientifically       TCSPP Template 4.1a, Pages 90-110; 4.1b, pages 101-104
based research (SBR) that will strengthen instruction in       TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1 GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
core academic subjects.


Describe how the activities will have a substantial,
measurable, and positive impact on student academic
achievement and how the activities will be used as part
of a broader strategy to eliminate the achievement gap         TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 3 – Action Plan Development, Pages 180-181
that separates low-income and minority students from
other students? (NCLB)




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 196 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                     Systemwide
                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)

Describe how the LEA will coordinate professional
                                                               TCSPP, Template 4.2b, Pages 121-125
development activities provided through Federal, State,
                                                               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
and local programs? (NCLB)
                                                               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179



Describe the professional development activities that will
be made available to teachers and principals and how
the LEA will ensure that the PD (which may include
teacher mentoring) needs of teachers and principals will       Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Page 18
be met? (Title II A, Sec 2122)                                 TCSPP, Template 4.2b, pages 121-125
Title IIA Accountability LEA Requirement—The LEA               TCSPP, Template 4.1a, pages 91-100
has developed Title IIA “improvement” strategies to            TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
increase the percentage of teachers reporting high
quality professional development.


Describe how the LEA will train teachers to integrate
technology into curricula and instruction to improve           Federal Programs, Title II Part D, Technology Plan (T), Page 17: Section
teaching, learning, and technology literacy? (Title II A,      7.Promotion
Sec 2122 & Title II D, Sec 2414)                                  of Curricula and Teaching Strategies that Integrate Technology
                                                               TCSPP, Template 4.1a, Pages 91-100; Template 4.1b, Pages 101-104


Describe how the LEA will provide training to enable
teachers to teach and address the needs of students with
different learning styles, particularly students with          Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Pages 16-18
disabilities, students with special learning needs             TCSPP, Template 4.1a, page 35
(including students who are gifted and talented), and          TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
students with limited English proficiency? (Title II A, Sec    TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179
2122)

Describe how the LEA will provide training to enable



                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 197 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                     Systemwide
                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
teachers to improve student behavior in the classroom          Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Pages 17
and identify early and appropriate interventions to help       TCSPP Template 4.2b, Pages 121-125
students? (Title II A, Sec 2122)                               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179


Describe how the LEA will provide training to enable           Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Page18
teachers to involve parents in their child’s education?        TCSPP, Template 4.1a, Pages 91-100
(Title II A, Sec 2122)                                         Classroom Level Standards, Systemwide Family and Community Engagement
                                                               Plan
                                                               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
Describe how the LEA will provide training to enable
teachers to understand and use data and assessments            Federal Programs, 2006 01 Consolidated Plan, Action Plan 1, Pages 15 and 19
to improve classroom practice and student learning?            TCSPP, Template 4.1a, Pages 91-100
(Title II A, Sec 2122)                                         TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3b, ASSESSMENT GAP ANALYSIS, Pages 138-141

Conduct a needs assessment with the involvement of
teachers and did it take into account the activities that
need to be conducted in order to give teachers the             TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
means, including subject matter knowledge and teaching         TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1, Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for
skills, and to give principals the instructional leadership      Improving Schools, Pages 47-90
skills to help teachers, to provide students the               TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3b, ASSESSMENT GAP ANALYSIS, Pages 138-141
opportunity to meet challenging State and local student        SACS, Component 4 surveys
academic achievement standards? (Title II A, Sec 2122)


Include on your planning committee, parents and others
with relevant and demonstrated expertise in drug and
violence prevention activities (such as medical, mental
health, and law enforcement professionals)?                    Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
(Title IV A, Sec 4114)

                                                                                                                                                  F




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 198 of 245
                                                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                 Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                                Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                      Systemwide
                                                                   (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
Collect relevant objective data which also includes
participating private schools and community data so you
can determine the prevalence of factors that put students
                                                                Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
at risk of using illegal drugs or engaging in undesirable
behaviors? (Title IV A, Sec 4114)


Collect relevant objective data which also reflects
protective factors, assets, or buffers that promote positive
youth development? (Title IV A, Sec 4114)                       Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
                                                                TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179


In the selected programs or activities, address the risk
and protective factors based on scientific research that
provides evidence that the program to be used will              Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
reduce violence and illegal drug use?
(Title IV A, Sec 4114)


Include measurable indicators for risk and protective
factors that the system will address and target services to
schools and students with the greatest need?                    Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
(Title IV A, Sec 4114)                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179


Include a plan to have meaningful and ongoing
consultation with the planning committee to seek advice
regarding how best to coordinate the LEA’s activities with
other related strategies, program, and activities being         TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 3 – Action Plan Development, Pages 180-181
conducted in the community? (Title IV A)

Develop your application through timely and meaningful




                                                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 199 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                               Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                              Programs     Education   Technical   Contract     SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                       Systemwide
                                                                 (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)          (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
consultation with State and local government
representatives, representatives of schools to be served
(including private schools), teachers and other staff,
parents, students, community-based organizations, and
                                                              Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
others with relevant and demonstrated expertise in drug
and violence prevention activities (such as medical,
mental health, and law enforcement professionals)?
(Title IV A)

On an ongoing basis, consult with such representatives
and organizations in order to seek advice regarding how
best to coordinate such agency’s activities under this
subpart with other related strategies, programs, and          Federal Programs, Title IV, Part A, Page 8
activities being conducted in the community? (Title IV A)

Include an assessment of the telecommunication
services, hardware, software, and other services that will    Federal Programs, Title II, Part D, Technology Plan (T) Section 13, Other
be needed to improve education or library services?           Services,
(Title II D & Erate)                                             Page 22
Provide for a sufficient budget to acquire and support the
non-discounted elements of the plan: the hardware,
software, professional development, and other services
that will be needed to implement the strategy?                Federal Programs, Title II, Part D, Technology Plan (T), Appendix A
(Title II D & Erate)
Include an evaluation process that enables the school or
library to monitor progress toward the specified goals and
make mid-course corrections in response to new                Title II, Part D, Technology Plan (T) Section 16, Page 25
developments and opportunities as they arise? (Erate)

Provide a complete description of the extended learning
program content, grade level, subject area, and               Extended Contract (E), EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, EXTENDED
timeframe (summer and school year)?                             LEARNING PROGRAM ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION, Page 9 – 22
                                                              TCSPP Template 4.3 d, Pages 145-147; Template 4.2 d, pages 130-133



                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 200 of 245
                                                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                 Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                                Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                      Systemwide
                                                                   (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)

Include at least one concrete, quantifiable measure             Extended Contract (E), EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, EXTENDED
related to the SBE Master Plan and any other                      CONTRACT ACTIVITY DESRIPTION, Curriculum Evaluation and Improvement,
appropriate measures related to how well the objective            Page 20 & Section J: DATA SOURCE: Master Plan for Tennessee
has been met?                                                   Schools/Goal
                                                                  4/Technology, Page 5


Describe the process for evaluating the work you have           Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Evaluation Results from
done?                                                             previous Year, Pages 8-22
                                                                TCSPP Rubric, All Components



Include an extended contracts employment summary?
                                                                Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Analysis Report



Define your leadership team?                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                                SACS Component 1-Demographic Information

Include on your leadership team – teachers, principals,
administrators, other appropriate school personnel,
parents (including a parent with a child with disabilities),    TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages Pages 5-45
and students?                                                   SACS Component 1- Demographic Information


Define your subcommittees?                                      TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                                SACS Component 1
                                                                TSCPP All Components
Define significant system and common factors?




                                                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 201 of 245
                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                         Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                        Programs     Education   Technical   Contract    SACS       Technology
                                                                                                                                 Systemwide
                                                           (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)          (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1, Pages 47-90
                                                        SACS Component 1


                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
Profile your system and community?                      Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section 4: Primary
                                                          Sources of Data and Relevant Finding(s), Pages 2-6
                                                        SACS Component 1


                                                        TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
Use a collaborative process to develop your program     TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1d, Pages 108-110; 4.3d, Pages 145-147
goals/objectives?                                       SACS Components (All)
                                                        TCSPP All Components
                                                        Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Page 1
                                                        Technology Plan, Section 6, Collaboration, Page 16


Define your beliefs?                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 2.1, Pages 46
                                                        SACS Component 2
                                                        Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan


                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 2.1, Page 46
Define your mission?                                    Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section E Curriculum,
                                                        Evaluation and Improvement, Page 7
                                                        SACS Component 2


                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 2.1, Page 46
Define your vision?                                     Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section E Curriculum,
                                                        Page
                                                           7
                                                        SACS Component 2
Identify academic and non-academic assessment



                                                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 202 of 245
                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                         Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                        Programs     Education   Technical   Contract    SACS       Technology
                                                                                                                                 Systemwide
                                                           (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)          (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
measures?                                               TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                        TCSPP Template 3.1, Pages 47-90
                                                        TCSPP Template 4.3a, Pages 134-137
                                                        Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2
                                                        Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section F, F.
                                                               Intensified Student Incentive Programs, Page 7
                                                        SACS Components 3 and 4


                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
Define data collection and analysis processes?          Career Technical Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2
                                                        Extended Contract Verification Report & Analysis Report
                                                        SACS Component 3


                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                        TCSPP Component 4
Include report card results?                            Career Technical Perkins Plan, Evaluation, Section 5
                                                        Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Primary Sources of
                                                        Data,
                                                          Pages 2-6
                                                        SACS Component 3


                                                        TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                        TCSPP Template 3.1, Pages 47-90
                                                        Career Technical Perkins Plan, Evaluation, Section 5
Explain what you learned from all of the data?          Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Relevant Findings,
                                                        Pages 2-6
                                                        SACS Components 3 and 4
                                                        TCSPP Component Gap Analyses, Templates 4.1b Pages 101-104; 4.2b, Pages
                                                        121-125; 4.3b, Pages 138-141; 4.4b, Pages 154-157
Prioritize your goals?




                                                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 203 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                            Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                           Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                 Systemwide
                                                              (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)         (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1, Pages 47-90
                                                           Career Technical Perkins Plan, Section 7
                                                           Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section 5, Page 6
                                                           SACS Component 5
                                                           Technology Plan, Section 2: Vision, Goals, Strategies, Page 5

Indicate that procedures are in place to identify and      Federal Program, yearly self-monitoring, Comprehensive State Monitoring,
correct non-compliance issues in a timely manner? (i.e.    County
through monitoring, complaints, mediations, and               Audit
hearings.)                                                 Career Technical, 3-year monitoring, and yearly review by Advisory Council
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State          Special Education, CYCLICAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW, March 2006
Performance Plan (2005-2010) at:                           System-wide Policies, available online at
http://www.state.tn.us/education/speced/sereports.php,     http://policy.tsba.net/TOP/JeffersonCo_Online/index.html
SPP/APR Indicators # 15-19.

Indicate that system procedures and practices ensure
collection and reporting of accurate and timely data?      Federal Program, yearly Comprehensive Monitoring Instrument ESEA – No child
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State          Left
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 20.          Behind, Comprehensive State Monitoring, County Audit
                                                           SACS Component 3


                                                           Federal Programs, Comprehensive Monitoring Instrument ESEA – No Child Left
                                                              Behind, Pages 6-20
                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1, Pages 47-90
Identify strengths and weaknesses based on the data?       Career Technical Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 1
                                                           Special Education, CYCLICAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW, March 2006,
                                                           Performance Indicators listed for Improvement areas (PIP’s)
                                                           SACS Component 4
                                                           TCSPP Component Gap Analyses, Templates 4.1b Pages 101-104; 4.2b, Pages
                                                           121-125; 4.3b, Pages 138-141; 4.4b, Pages 154-157




                                                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 204 of 245
                                                          Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                            Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                           Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                 Systemwide
                                                              (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
Compare the graduation rate for 12th grade career-
technical concentrators to the graduation rate of 12th
grade academic graduates?                                  TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45



Compare the performance results for special population,
12th grade career-technical concentrators with non-
special population, 12th grade career-technical            TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
concentrators?


Determine the percentage of 12th grade career-technical
concentrators achieving academic attainment for
graduation?                                                TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45


Determine the percentage of 12th grade career-technical
concentrators attaining 75% of career-technical
competencies?                                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45

Determine the percentage of 12th grade concentrators
graduated from the previous year, employed in the
program area or related field; enrolled in a post-         TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45
secondary institution; or a member of the military?


Determine the percentage of non-traditional students
enrolled in a career-technical program?                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45

Determine the percentage of non-traditional students




                                                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 205 of 245
                                                           Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                             Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                            Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                  Systemwide
                                                               (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
classified as concentrators in a career-technical
program?
                                                            TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45



Describe the results derived from analyzing the state
assessment by student subgroup?
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised
TCSPP defines specific measurable achievement goals
and targets for each of the student subgroups whose         SACS Components 3 and 4 (measurable goals in Component 5)
disaggregated results are included in the AYP
determination.


Identify and describe additional types of academic          Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Evaluation Results from
assessments, beyond the state assessment, used by the         previous Year, Pages 8, 11, 13, 14-15, 17, 19, and 22
system?                                                     SACS Components 3 and 4
                                                            TCSPP Template 4.1a, pages 91-100

Analyze disaggregated high school graduation rates and
define what was determined?                                 TCSPP Pages 36, 44
                                                            SACS Component 3


Analyze disaggregated elementary/middle attendance
rates and define what was determined?                       TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                            SACS Component 4

Indicate that Parent Notification of assessment data has
been disseminated to parents in a uniform format and        Career Technical – 5 week progress reports, nine week grades, parent teacher
provided in a language understood by all parents?             conferences
                                                            Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan
Define the current reality of student learning?



                                                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 206 of 245
                                                       Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                         Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                        Programs     Education   Technical   Contract    SACS       Technology
                                                                                                                                 Systemwide
                                                           (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)          (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
                                                        Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section 4, Performance
                                                          Competency, Page 2
                                                        SACS Component 3 and 4
                                                        TSCPP Component 4, Pages 91-164


                                                        TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
Analyze faculty perception of your system?              Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Page 6 Section 4, Part A
                                                        Remediation Needs Survey (conducted by Principals), Page 22 Performance
                                                        Measure,
                                                        SACS Component 3


                                                        TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                        Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Page 22 Performance
Analyze parent perception of your system?               Measure
                                                        SACS Component 3
                                                        Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan
                                                        Special Education, CPR Surveys


                                                        TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                        Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section L:
Analyze community perception of your system?            Student/Parent/Community Response to Incentive Program, Page 6
                                                        Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review Surveys
                                                        SACS Component 3
                                                        Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan


                                                        TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45                                                        S
Analyze student perception of your system? (if          Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section L:
applicable)                                                                                                                                   E
                                                        Student/Parent/Community Response to Incentive Program, Page 6                        A
                                                        Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review Surveys
                                                        SACS Component 3
Identify your Component 3 priorities of need?                                                                                                 F




                                                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 207 of 245
                                                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                  Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                                 Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                       Systemwide
                                                                    (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
                                                                 SACS Components 3 and 5
                                                                 TCSPP, Template 3.1, Pages 47-90



Identify the strengths and weaknesses of your decision-          TCSPP, Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
making process?                                                  Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section 4: Primary
                                                                   Sources of Data and Relevant Finding, Pages 2-6



Define how material, human services, and funding                 Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Budget, Section 7
sources are used to ensure school improvement?                   Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Pages 20-21
                                                                 SACS Component 5
                                                                 TCSPP Component Gap Analyses, Templates 4.1b Page 101-104; 4.2b, Pages
                                                                 121-125; 4.3b, Pages 138-141; 4.4b, Pages 154-157

Identify what programs and processes are in place for            Career Technical – Advisory Council
curriculum analysis and support?                                 Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Pages 21-22
                                                                 SACS Component 4
                                                                 TCSPP Component 4.1 b, c, d Pages 101-110

Identify what programs and processes are in place for            Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Professional Development, Section 3
analyzing and supporting the instructional process?              Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section J, Pages 5-6
                                                                 SACS Component 4
                                                                 TCSPP Template 4.2 b, c, d Pages 121-133

Indicate that the system reviews data to determine if            Special Education, CPR, March 2006, (Not required by JCS to complete because
significant disproportionality in identification, eligibility    we
category or placement is occurring, and if significant              had no disporportionality)
disproportionality is identified, does the LEA review and        Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Annual review of report card and Perkins Data,
as appropriate revise policies, procedures and practices?           Program Improvement, Section 2




                                                                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 208 of 245
                                                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                   Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                                  Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                         Systemwide
                                                                     (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)

Determine the needs of children with disabilities based
on information from an appropriate evaluation?                    Special Education, END OF YEAR, page 16 and END OF YEAR Table 8, Page 9
                                                                  Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Pages 12-13

Indicate that the provision of a free appropriate public
education to children with disabilities is facilitated through
parent involvement, i.e. through parent training,                 Systemwide Parent and Community Engagement Plan
dissemination of information (newsletters, pamphlets,             Child Count Report
surveys, number of parents reached/trained, etc.)?                TCSPP Pages 36-39


Define how you will assist career-technical students in
meeting or exceeding academic graduation                          Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Annual Review of Perkins Report Card, Program
requirements?                                                       Improvement, Section 2


Define how you will assist career-technical students in
mastering occupational skill competencies?                        Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2


Determine how to ensure programs are of sufficient size,
scope, sequence to improve career-technical education
students’ performance in a coherent sequence of
subjects (both academic and career-technical) leading to          Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Evaluation, Section 5
higher learning and/or placement in a high skill, high
wage occupation?

Define how you will meet the needs of special population
students preventing discrimination and assisting in their
attainment of academic and career-technical skills?               Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Special Populations, Section 4

Determine how you will promote non-traditional



                                                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 209 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS      Technology
                                                                                                                                    Systemwide
                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)         (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
enrollment in career-technical programs?
                                                             Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Special Populations, Section 4


Determine how you will ensure the annual developing
and updating of 4 & 6 year plans as required by the high
school policy? (Initial 8th grade student and parent         Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review Indicator 13, March 2006
meetings to develop 4 & 6 year plans and process for         Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Evaluation, Section 5
making revisions to 9-12th grade plans.)

Determine how the system will provide additional
educational assistance to low-achieving students?            Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Special Populations, Section 4
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised              Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Pages 12-17
TCSPP addresses the fundamental teaching and                 SACS Component 5 Goals
learning needs of schools in the district, especially the    TCSPP Templates 4.1 a Pages 91-100, 4.2 a Pages 111-120, 4.3 a Pages 134-137,
needs of low-achieving students.                             4.4 a 148-153 (last row in each template)
                                                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174

Describe the actions the system will take to assist low-
achieving schools identified as in need of improvement?      Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Page 21
                                                             SACS Component 5


Provide the system plan of action to offer school choice
and supplemental services for those schools that qualify?    Federal Programs, Annual Parent Notice



If applicable, in Targeted Assisted Schools identify
eligible children most in need of services?                  TCSPP, Template 3.1, Pages 47-90

Describe how the system will coordinate and integrate




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 210 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                     Systemwide
                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)
services to include:                                           Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review Indicator 12/TEIS, END OF
- transition from Head Start, or other similar program, to     YEAR Table 8
elementary school?                                             TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                               TSCPP Template 4.1a, Page 47-90


                                                               Federal Programs, 21 Century Community Learning Grant, REACH Program
                                                               Special Education, END OF YEAR Table 8
If applicable, describe the activities funded by the system    Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section C Identifying
which support preschool programs?                              At-Risk Students/Transition At-Risk Students, Page 7, Page 12
                                                               TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
                                                               TCSPP Template 4.3 b, Pages 138-141
                                                               TCSPP Template 4.4 a, Pages 148-153


Describe the system strategy to implement the Parent           Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Extended Contract,
Involvement Policy found in NCLB 1118?                         EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section C Identifying At-Risk
                                                               Students/Transition At-Risk Students, Page 7, Page 12
                                                               Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan

If applicable, describe the system’s extended learning
time programs (after or before school, or extended
school year)?                                                  Special Education, Census Report
High Priority LEA Requirement—The LEA’s revised                Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Pages 9, 10, 14, 16
TCSPP includes, as appropriate, student learning               TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development, Pages 165-174
activities before school, after school, during the summer,     TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development, Pages 175-179
and during any extensions of the school year.



                                                               Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2 A
Determine the effectiveness of your curriculum,                SACS Component 4
instruction, assessment, and organizational structure?         TCSPP Templates 4.1 a Pages 91-100, 4.2 a Pages 111-120, 4.3 a Pages 134-137,
                                                               4.4 a Pages 148-153 (last row in each template)




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 211 of 245
                                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                               Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                              Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                    Systemwide
                                                                 (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)


Determine to what degree you meet SACS standards?
                                                              SACS Visiting Team and Evaluation Results


Determine to what degree the stakeholder perception
matches your current reality?                                 SACS Component 3 surveys
                                                              Systemwide Family and Community Engagement Plan


Identify your Component 4 priority of needs?                  SACS Component 4
                                                              TCSPP 4.1 d Pages 108-110, 4.2 d Pages 130-133, 4.3 d Pages 145-147, 4.4 d
                                                              Pages 161-164,

Define your goals? (including professional development
needs, responsibility assignment, resources needed,           Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Pages 2-6; Optimum
estimated timeline, community involvement, means of           Resources Needed Pages 8-22
evaluation)                                                   SACS Component 5
                                                              Technology Plan, Pages 5 -11, 20
Define your action steps? (including professional
development needs, responsibility assignment, resources
needed, estimated timeline, community involvement,            TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, Page 165-189
means of evaluation)                                          SACS Component 5


Define your implementation plans?                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, Page 165-189
                                                              Extended Contract, EXTENDED LEARNING PROGRAMS, Section 5, Pages 6-7
                                                              SACS Component 5

Address in your action plan the required clusters for your
program area?                                                 Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Section 2
                                                              TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45




                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 212 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                   Systemwide
                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)        (A)       (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)

Based on data, determine how the system goals include
and address continuous career-technical program
improvement?                                                 Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2


Determine how the system addresses plans for meeting
performance levels on the core indicators of
performance? (must address each deficient core)              Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Evaluation, Section 5


Define what staff development your system will provide
for career-technical teachers to assist them in exceeding
the core indicators of performance?                          Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Professional Development, Section 3



Define what summative assessment will be used?               TCSPP Template 5.1, Page 165-189
                                                             SACS Component 5
                                                             SPP Annual Performance Report


Describe how you will evaluate the SIP process?
                                                             SACS Components 5 and 6


Determine how you will address monitoring
recommendation found in the systems’ most recent             Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2
career-technical and special education program               SPP Annual Performance Report
evaluations?                                                 Census Court Report & State Report
                                                             End of Year Report

Address in the action plan the evaluation process            Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Section 2
required for each question within each cluster area?         SPP Annual Performance Report
                                                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1, Pages 5-45




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 213 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology
                                                                                                                                   Systemwide
                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
In the TCSPP did you: (Indicate where in the plan, or other system documentation, this information can be found.)

Determine how you will evaluate the system assessment
process of career-technical programs that is used to
ensure continuous program improvement?                       Career Technical, Perkins Plan, Program Improvement, Section 2


Discuss the Review/Revision Process of your
comprehensive systemwide plan?
High Priority LEA Requirements— The LEA’s revised
TCSPP includes the SEA’s responsibilities for                Template 3.1, Pages 47-90
improvement. The LEA’s revised TCSPP includes a              Template 6.3, Page 220
determination of why the district’s previous plan did not
bring about increased student academic achievement.


Define your plans for implementation and evaluation of
your action plan?                                            SACS Components 5 and 6
                                                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1, Page 165-189




                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)

Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 214 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:
The percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high
school with a regular high school diploma are                TCSPP Template 1.1, Pages 5-45
comparable to the percent of all youth in your LEA           Special Education, CYCLICAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW, March 2006, Indicator
graduating with a regular diploma?                           #1
SPED State Measurement: Measurement for youth with
IEPs should be the same measurement as for all youth.
Explain calculation. SPP/APR Indicator # 1/CPR # 1
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))



The percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high          Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review (CPR) Indicator #2
school are comparable to the percent of all youth in your
LEA dropping out of high school?
SPED State Measurement: Measurement for youth with
IEPs should be the same measurement as for all youth.
Explain calculation. SPP/APR Indicator # 2/ CPR # 2
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 215 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)         (T)
Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:
                                                               Special Education, CYCLICAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW Indicator #3 (not
Participation and performance of children with disabilities    required by JCS - to complete March 2006; no deficiency) Indicator #11, #11a,
on statewide assessments:                                      #11b
    A. Percent of schools meeting the State’s AYP
        objectives for progress for disability subgroup.
    B. Participation rate for children with IEPs in a
        regular assessment with no accommodations;
        regular assessment with accommodations;
        alternative assessment against grade level
        standards; alternate assessment against
        alternate achievement standards.
    C. Proficiency rate for children with IEPs against
        grade level standards and alternate achievement
        standards?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 3/
CPR # 3
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 216 of 245
                                                              Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                               Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                  (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)        (T)
Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:
Rates of suspension and expulsion:                             Special Education, CPR Indicator #4
    A. Percent of schools identified by the LEA as
        having a significant discrepancy in the rates of
        suspensions & expulsions of children with
        disabilities for greater than 10 days in a school
        year; and
    B. Percent of school identified by the LEA as having
        a significant discrepancy in the rates of
        suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10
        days in a school year of children with disabilities
        by race and ethnicity?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 4/
CPR # 4
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A); 1412(a)22))


The number and percent of children with IEPs ages 6
through 21:                                                    Special Education, CYCLICAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW Indicator #5
    A. Removed from regular class less than 21% of
        the day
    B. Removed from regular class greater than 60% of
        the day
    C. Served in either public or private separate
        schools, residential placements, or homebound
        or hospital placements?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 5/
CPR # 5
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A))




                                                                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 217 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)           (T)
Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:
The number and percentage of preschool children with         Special Education, END OF YEAR Table 8
IEPs who receive special education and related services
in settings with typically developing peers (e.g. early
childhood settings, home, and part-time early childhood /
part-time early childhood special education settings)?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 6/
CPR # 6 (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A))

The percentage of preschool children with IEPs who
demonstrate improved:                                        Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review Indicator #7
    A. Positive social-emotional skills (including social
       relationships);
    B. Acquisition and use knowledge and skills
       (including early language/communication and
       early literacy); and
    C. Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their
       needs?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 7/
CPR # 7 (20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))

Percent of parents with a child receiving special
education services who report that schools facilitated       Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #8
parent involvement as a means of improving services
and results for children with disabilities?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) SPP/APR Indicator # 8/
CPR # 8 (20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
*LEA may use State parental survey or develop one of
their own for the TSCPP.

The percentage of schools identified by the LEA as



                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 218 of 245
                                                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                   Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                                  Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                     (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)         (T)
Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:
having disproportionate representation of racial and              Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #9 (not required by
ethnic groups identified for special education and related        JCS to complete – no disproportionality)
services that is the result of inappropriate identification?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) Indicator # 9 & State
Indicator – Intellectually Gifted.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C))

The percent of schools identified by the LEA with
disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic              Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #10 (not required by
groups in specific disability categories that is the result of    JCS to complete – no disproportionality)
inappropriate identification?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) Indicator 10 and State
Indicator for Intellectually Gifted.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C))

Percent of children with parental consent to evaluate,
who where evaluated and eligibility determined within 60          Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #11
days (or State established timeline)?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) Indicator # 11.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))

The number of children referred by Part C prior to age 3
who are found eligible for Part B services and who have           Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #12
an IEP developed & implemented by their third birthday?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) Indicator # 12. Using
federal criteria, Goal can not be less than 100%
Compliance (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))




                                                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 219 of 245
                                                            Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                              Federal      Special     Career-    Extended
                                                             Programs     Education   Technical   Contract   SACS     Technology   Systemwide

                                                                (F)          (S)         (C)        (E)       (A)         (T)
Do your Most Current Data used in the CURRENT Year’s TCSPP indicate that:
The number and percentage of youth with disabilities age     Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #13
16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated,
measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services
that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-
secondary goals?
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) Indicator # 13. Using
federal criteria, Goal can not be less than 100%
Compliance (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))


The number and percentage of youth with disabilities
who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school and
who are competitively employed, enrolled in some type of
postsecondary school, or both, within one year of leaving
high school as compared to nondisabled youth no longer       Special Education, Cyclical Performance Review, Indicator #14 (due to be
in secondary school?                                         reported in 2006-2007 school year)
SPED State Measurement: Refer to TN. Part B State
Performance Plan (2005-2010) Indicator # 14. Using
federal criteria, Goal can not be less than 100%
Compliance (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
* LEA can use state transition survey (in process of
development) or develop own procedure for TCSPP




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) –Page 220 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                   TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.1

                            TCSPP PROCESS EVALUATION
The following summary questions are related to Process. They are designed as a
culminating activity for you to analyze the process used to develop this system-wide
improvement plan.


Evidence of Collaborative Process - Narrative Response Required
What evidence do we have that shows that a collaborative process was used
throughout the entire planning process?
             Collaboration: Documentation of 11 Leadership Team meetings from
             August 2007 through May 2008 to address the ongoing TCSPP process
             and additional component team meetings
             Component team collaboration: Board of Education members,
             Supervisors of all departments, Administrators, teachers, parents,
             students, CTE Director, community representatives, Director of Schools
             Email of meeting notices & notes
             Sign In sheets
             Meeting outlines



         Evidence of Alignment with beliefs, missions, vision
What evidence do we have that proves alignment between our data
and our beliefs, missions and vision?
  - Data and researched based instruction are addressed in our
     Leadership Team meetings, professional development trainings
     system-wide and our PLC grade level meetings at the school
     level.
  - Our decision-making framework uses the Central Office
     leadership team setting the framework, principal monthly
     meetings for collaboration with the leadership team and school
     level meetings with teachers and PTO organizations to involve
     school level collaboration
  - Policies and procedures are aligned with state law and state
     mandates. The policy committee has met 3 times this year to
     consider student needs and system priorities and goals.
  - Our mission and shared vision statements are the focus of the
     goals established for TCSPP, including academics, graduation
     rate and technology.



         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.1 Page 221 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   - Our beliefs, missions and vision are blended with our data to establish
     our professional development, teacher trainings and principal summits.



Evidence of Alignment of Data and Goals - Narrative Response Required
What evidence do we have that proves alignment between our data and our goals?
Goal 1: Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement
Score 2 NCE points. Improve 9-12 subgroups of economically disadvantaged,
African American, Students with Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage
proficient/advanced by 4%.
Data Source: TCAP Data
Evidence of Practice:

      Focused professional development for regular education, special education,
      CTE, and ELL aimed at:
         o vocabulary development
         o reading in the content area
         o reading comprehension strategies
         o teacher mentoring to assist new teachers acclimate to the Blueprint and
             the balanced literacy program
         o writing assessment focus on Four Square writing strategies and holistic
             scoring methods
      Summer Reading Camp Read Along
      Extended school year for students with disabilities
      Before and after school tutoring
      Read 180 classes for struggling readers in grades 6-9
      On-going professional development training for literacy coaches to
      coordinate services in the schools and classrooms.
      Professional Development with teachers to compare current TN
      curriculum standards, teaching strategies and new standards. – April25,
      2008
      Use of Think Link in grades 6-8, high and piloted grades 3-5 to track
      student progress compared to state literacy standards and provide
      practice probes to individual students in identified areas of weakness.
      School Intervention teams established to identify struggling literacy
      students, plan interventions and monitor progress – RTI process.


Goal 2: Increase collaboration of middle and high school core content teachers
by 50% over the previous school year to insure progression of sequential skill
acquisition resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.
Data Source: TCAP & Gateway
Evidence of Practice:
      Professional development


        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.1 Page 222 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


         o middle and high school math
         o technology integration (reading in the content area) for regular education,
            CTE, ELL, and special education
         o address Blueprint and SPI in relation to middle and high school
            curriculum standards
      Special Education collaboration from middle school to high school by
      implementing new English/Math high school Gateway classes
      Continuation of education summits with all 6-12 and CTE administrators
      LINK program designed to transition middle students to high school and orient
      them to curriculum offerings including CTE and university paths.

Goal 2 has been met and no longer a part of the 2008 TCSPP

Goal 3: To improve the district’s per pupil ADM expenditure of $6,241 by meeting or
exceeding the state’s ADM expenditure of $6,970 allowing students equal access to all
educational resources in order to increase student proficiency by 2% on TCAP and
Gateway tests and to eliminate the achievement gap that separates low-income and
minority students from other students.

Data Source: Report Card

Evidence of Practice:
      Quarterly Director’s Reports
      Annual Report
      Educational Advisory Committee
      Public Relations Awareness initiative
      District Website
      Parent Involvement Link (Hear From You)
      School Commissioners and County Commissioners joint meetings related to
      funding

This goal is no longer a part of our 2008 TCSPP.


Goal 4 - Increase math TCAP Criterion referenced Academic Achievement Score
2 NCE points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content
teachers by 50% over the previous year to insure progression of sequential skill
acquisition resulting increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests

Data Source: TCAP, Gateway

Evidence of Practice:
   Summer and year long on-going Professional Development for middle and
high school teachers to consider curriculum strategies, collaborative practices
then design pacing guides and curriculum maps.
  Implementation of middle school math labs for underachieving students



         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.1 Page 223 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


 Offered middle school and high school math tutoring
 Credit Recovery for high school students
     Use of Think Link to monitor and track progress for piloted grades 3-5, all
     students grades 6-8 and ninth grade algebra classes. Use of Think Link
     practice probes for individual students in identified areas of weakness.
     Math inclusion classes for students in grades 6-9, math lab for any
     struggling math student in grades 6-8.


Goal 5 – Increase the graduation rate by 1.2% each year for the next four years.

Data Source: Report Card

Evidence of practice:
  Implementation of inclusion classes at the high school for English and math,
continue inclusion classes in grades 6-8
  Link Program for Freshmen transition
  Credit Recovery
  Academic tutoring
  Individual academic counseling
  Teacher training to utilize Explore data for instructional strategies
  Read 180 classes for students in grades 6-9 identified as struggling readers
  Tracking of individual progress in English and math grades 6-8, piloted grades
3-5 and high school algebra through Think Link assessments and practice
probes
Implementation of RTI process for literacy in grades K-5 to identify, provide
interventions and progress monitor struggling students



Goal 6 – Increase Technology integration to support state curriculum
performance indicators. Integration will be focused on increasing student
achievement on ACT Explore to College Ready status in math, reading, and
science subject areas.

Data Source: ACT, Explore, & TCAP

Evidence of Practice:
  Technology courses offered by district technology trainer to train teachers on
available curriculum resources on JCS website
Provided Think Link for assessment and individual student progress monitoring
Professional development for teacher-created websites




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.1 Page 224 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Evidence of Communication with All Stakeholders- Narrative Response Required
What evidence do we have of our communication of the TCSPP to all stakeholders?
      The Comprehensive Plan is posted on our district website (http://jc-
      schools.net/JCS-CompPlan.pdf)
      Presented to all administrators (May 2007 Principals’ meeting) who shared the
      plan at the building level with educators
      Presented to the School Commissioners and public (May Work Session 2007)
      Published in Standard Banner (June 2007)
      All leadership team members was presented a final copy of TCSPP
      Component teams communicated via email




Suggestions for the Process- Narrative Response Required
What suggestions do we have for improving our planning process?
      TCSPP was presented as a process that would eliminate other required
      plans/reports, however it has become an added layer; the additional plans
      should be eliminated.
      There are multiple sections in this plan that are extremely repetitive and should
      be streamlined. Components 1 and 3 should be combined. Component 4
      should consist of only one set of templates.
      It is not a working plan, as we have not had a year to implement the plan and
      review the results. We have been required to rework the plan before the results
      are in. This should be a two-year cycle (as with the building level SIP):
           o write the plan
           o implement the plan
           o evaluate the plan
           o revise goals and action steps accordingly




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.1 Page 225 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                      TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.2

                         TCSPP IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION

The following summary questions are related to TCSPP Implementation. They are
designed as a culminating activity for you to plan the monitoring process that will ensure
that the action steps from Component 5 are implemented.


Evidence of Implementation - Narrative Response Required
What is our plan to begin implementation of the action steps?
GOAL 1 – Increase Reading TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic
Achievement score 2 NCE points. Improve 9-12 sub-groups of
Economically Disadvantaged, African-American, Students with
Disabilities, and Hispanic percentage proficient/advanced by 4%.

Action Step 1 – Utilize Read 180 pretest to identify struggling readers in grades
6-12 and provide Read 180 and Language! as intervention programs for at-risk
population.
   - 3 year grant initiative with Nieswonger Foundation to purchase, train and
      implement Read 180 in grades 6-9 initiated July, 2008
   - Training with SRA, Promethean and Literacy trainings to initiate Read 180
      program
   - On-going training and professional development for Read 180 teachers
   - Language! program started at Jefferson County High school and White
      Pine making this program available now for all students in grades 6-12.


Action Step 2-Provide professional development with instructional strategies for
diverse populations and to address new curriculum implementation.
   - Grade Level professional development for overview of new standards
   - In our current budget, an additional ELL instructor is requested
   - School level PLC meetings
   - Training with administrators on implementing PLC

Action Step 3 –Continue the Reading in the Content Area professional
development and literacy training for teachers in grades 4-12 and CTE teachers.
   - Provide year long Balanced Literacy professional development

Action Step 4 – Provide content area and CTE writing prompts for monthly
school-wide Write Away Days.
   - System wide write away days are posted on the school calendar
   - New teacher training on scoring rubric

Action Step 5 – Provide an additional ELL/ESL position.


         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 226 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   - Position has been budgeted based on needs determined from TCSPP data

Action Step 6 – Establish PLC sessions on scheduled professional development
days based at grade, content, school, and district levels.
   - Professional development calendar has been established and posted for 2008-
      2009
   - Principal training for administrators on establishing PLC’s scheduled at summer
      principal’s retreat

Action Step 7 – Add an additional literacy coach to address Tier II
implementation and professional development.
   - TCSPP data results indicate the need to additional literacy coach to implement
      RTI training
   - Literacy Coach position in proposed 2008-2009 budget

Action Step 8 – Literacy coaches to train paraprofessionals to support the RTI
process.
   - RTI paraprofessionals are in proposed 2008-2009 budget
   - Literacy coaches to receive Think Link training August 2008
   - District reading specialist and RTI coordinator will train literacy coaches

Action Step 9-Support implementation of RTI process through addition of
paraprofessionals.
   - RTI paraprofessionals are in proposed 2008-2009 budget

Action Step 10-Provide poverty training for language arts teachers in grades 6-
12.
    - District reading specialist will provide on professional development schedule

Action Step 11-Present a variety of reading intervention strategies to novice
teachers through the district’s Teacher Induction Program.
   - New Teacher Induction Program is established as required by School Board
      policy including monthly training sessions.


Action Step 12- Implementation of ACE (achieving cooperative engagement)
program in grades 6-8 as intervention for at-risk populations addressing study
skills and literacy.
   - Study of data for at-risk students, discipline records, and RTI intervention needs
       indicate need for positive behavior supports and academic interventions for
       middle school students.
   - Middle and high school principal summit meetings determined the ACE
       intervention program has ahigh priority need.
   - Staffing for Ace program with use of paraprofessionals has been included in
       2008-2009 proposed budget.




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 227 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Action Step 13- Provide a special education and regular education inclusive
class at the high school to continue the progress made by the special education
and regular education class.
   - Inclusion classes for ninth grade English and math has been established
      this school year, 2007-2008.
   - Inclusion classes for grades 6-8 system-wide were established in 2006-
      2007.
   - In order to complete our goal of Gateway completion for special needs
      students, inclusion planning has taken place at Jefferson County High
      School in preparation of tenth grade inclusion needs. Teachers have been
      identified and a summer inclusion training schedule developed.

GOAL 2 – Increase collaboration of middle and high school core
content teachers by 50% over the previous school year to insure
progression of sequential skill acquisition resulting in increased
proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway tests.

This goal is not a part of our 2008 TCSPP as we have successfully
completed all action steps.

Action Step 1 – Establish a summer math professional development session for
middle school pre-algebra teachers, led by a team of high school algebra teachers.
Communicate strategies and curriculum developed through district website for
curriculum implementation in classroom aimed at increasing student achievement.
          − June-July, 2006
          − Follow-Up: October 31, 2006
          − Feb. 23
          − March 16

Action Step 2 – As a result of providing inclusive professional development with
technology integration, strategies for reading comprehension in the content area for
grades 6-12 will be implemented for regular education, special education, CTE, and
ELL teachers. Communicate strategies through district website for parents and
teachers
         − August 4, 2006, Session 7 Grades 6-8 Teachers: Using the Newspaper
             in the Classroom, Presenter: Alice Dollar, JCHS Commons Area
         − August 4, 2006, Session 8 Grades 6-8 Language Arts Teachers:
             Introduction to Penguin Literature Program Resources, Presenter: Diane
             Jones, Facilitator: Missy White, Location: JCHS Conference Room
         − November 7, 2006, 6-8 Language Arts Teachers: Prentice Hall
             Technology Resources, Stacy Hilliard, Tech Center
         − January 2, 2007, Reading Strategies for 9th Graders, Betty Suttles,
             Reading Specialist
         − February 16, Reading Strategies CTE Workshop, Betty Suttles



         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 228 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


         − February 16, Worksheets Don't Grow Dendrites, Special Education and
           Inclusion teachers


Action Step 3 – Provide professional development to address Blueprint & SPI in
relation to middle and high school curriculum standards. Share the curriculum through
district website for implementation in classroom to increase student mastery of
performance indicators.
           − June 2, 2006, Grades 6-12 Administrator's Educational Summit, Creating
              a Bridge Between Middle and High School
           − August 3, 2006 In-service Day Principal Directed
           − August 4, Grade 9-12 Teachers, Writing Assessment
           − August 17, 2006– Curriculum 4:00-6:00 at Rush Strong School
              Before the Lesson Begins (New Teacher Workshop)
           − November 7, Grade 6-8 Science Teachers: United We Stand ...
              Continuing Along the Road for Success, Jan Coley Presenter
           − November 7, Grade 6-8 Language Arts Teachers: Prentice Hall
              Curriculum Technology Resources
           − November 7, Grades 6-12 Administrator's Educational Summit Direction
              for Reading and Math Programs
           − January 15, 2007 In-service Day Principal Directed
           − January 18, Administrator's Educational Summit, Every Child A Readers,
              Every Teacher A Reading Teacher (open to the public)
           − February 16, 6-8 Math Teachers: Addressing the Blueprint for Learning
              through Hands-On Math, Nancy Henson, Math Consultant, KY Dept. of
              Education, Jefferson Middle School Auditorium
           − February 16, 2007 Grades 6-8 Departmental Meetings Language Arts,
              Science, & Social Studies
           − February 16, 2007 Grades 3-5 Math Teachers: Addressing the Blueprint
              for Learning through Hands On Math, Pat Wilder
           − February 16, 2007 Grades 9-12 CTE Teachers: Literacy-Based
              Technology Resources for Career and Tech Ed, Betty Suttles, Reading
              Specialist
           − April 27, 2007 Grades 6-12 Teachers: State standards and the Blueprint
              for Learning in the Content Areas
           − April 27, 2007 Grades K-5 Teachers: Math Scope and Sequence
           − April 3, 2007 Literacy Summit with Administrators

Action Step 4 – Provide professional development for special education teacher for
implementation of Destination of math, a technology-based program for students with
disabilities in grades 6-12.
            -   August 4, 2006, Destination Success workshop, Special Education
                Teachers

Action Step 5 – Establishment of LINK, a transition/orientation program designed to



         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 229 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


inform, motivate, and encourage incoming freshmen providing the freshmen with a
variety of activities designed to inform, establish behavior/conduct expectations, and
establish positive relationships. Each LINK student will have an adult mentor
throughout the year. LINK activities will be held during the year to enrich the learning
experience thus increasing student achievement.
           13 Extended Contracts for LINK:
           -  August 3, 2006 initial orientation day
           -  June 2007 LINK Camp for rising freshmen

Action Step 6 – Conduct an educational summit for 6-12 and CTE administrators to
share best practices aimed at aligning curriculum and improving student achievement
in core content areas.
          − June 2, 2006 Administrator’s Summit
          − July 28, Principals’ Academy
          − November 7, 2006 Administrator’s Summit
          − January 18, 2006 Administrator’s Summit
          − April 3, 2007 Literacy Summit with Administrators


GOAL 3 – To improve the district’s per pupil ADM expenditure of
$6,241 by meeting or exceeding the state’s ADM expenditure of
$6,970 allowing students equal access to all educational resources in
order to increase student proficiency by 2% on TCAP and Gateway
tests and to eliminate the achievement gap that separates low-
income and minority students from other students.

This goal is no longer a part of our 2008 TCSPP.
Action Step 1 – The Director of Schools will improve public awareness through a
quarterly Director’s Report to members of the County Commission and an annual
report, which includes student performance, to School Board Commissioners through
email correspondence.
          − Quarterly Reports: October 2006
                                January 2007
                                 May 2007

Action Step 2 – An Education Advisory Committee to serve a dual function of
providing quarterly feedback to the Board and participating as a steering committee for
long-range planning activities, using performance data, which will be communicated to
stakeholders through the district website and print publications.
          − January 18, 2007 Educational Administrators’ Summit
             Education Advisory Committee Members:
             Doug Moody, Director of Schools
             Mandy Schneitman, Central Office
             Debbie Berry, Central Office


         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 230 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


              Bill Nolen, Central Office
              Connie Campbell, Central Office
              Faye Humbard, Technology
              Sherry Finchum, Central Office
              Norma Huff, Central Office
              Mike Long, Central Office
              Susan Price, Elementary Teacher/Parent
              John Cagle, CTE Director
              Bertie French, Mentoring Coordinator
              Jan Coley, Technology
              Tommy Arnold DES Assistant Principal
              Nancy Ann France, JCHS Assistant Principal
              Susan Roach, JCHS Counselor
              Sam Hollignshead, Middle School Teacher
              Tim Landefeld, Middle School Teacher
              Karla Mills, Elementary Teacher
              JoAnn Hodgson, Middle School Teacher
              Tim Collins, MMS School Assistant Principal
              Jennifer Sanford, JCHS Teacher
              Pat Wilder, JCHS Teacher
              Betty Suttles, Reading Specialist
              Amy Sharp, Elementary Teacher
              Kim Hawkins, Parent
              Polly Johnson, Elementary Teacher
              Debbie Webb, Educational Diagnostician
              Robin Beeler, Parent of Special Need Child

Action Step 3 – Develop and implement a public relations awareness initiative,
address equal student access and student perform data, to assist administrators in
efforts to enhance communications with stakeholders.
            − Annual Report: Submitted August 2006
            − Standard Banner’s weekly Education Focus section
            − Standard Banner’s Board Meeting Reports

Action Step 4 – Utilization of the district website to improve and enhance
communications with parents through a newsletter from the Board, which will share
student performance data and detail student equal access.
          − Performance and Assessment Update to Board
          − Report Card highlights shared at district website
          − Educational focus presentation at each Board meeting

Action Step 5 – Provide parental involvement through a “We’d Like to Hear from You,”
link accessible from the district website.
              Established 8-06
              Parental/community concerns or suggestions have been submitted to the
              appropriate department head or director.


         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 231 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




GOAL 4-Increase math TCAP Criterion Referenced Academic Achievement Score
2 NCE points and provide collaboration of middle and high school core content
teachers by 50% over the previous school year to ensure progression of
sequential skill acquisition resulting in increased proficiency by 2% on TCAP
and Gateway Tests.

Action Step 1-Utilize Think Link for progress monitoring for grades K-8 and all
9th grade Algebra classes.
          -  Think Link assessment has been utilized during the 2007-2008
             school year in grades 6-9
          -  In proposed budget, Think Link has been proposed for grades PK-5

Action Step 2-Provide professional development for teachers to begin
implementation of the new math curriculum through the development of a scope
and sequence pacing guide and essential math skill checklist.
         -  High school math teachers have coordinated collaborated
            professional development with middle school math teachers
            throughout this school year to establish pacing guides and skills
            checklist
         -  Middle school inclusion grant has been approved from SDOE for
            inclusion math strategies

Action Step 3-Acquire a district level math specialist to serve as a curriculum
coach for grades K-12.
  - Through TCSPP administrator survey, a math specialist was determined to
be a high priority

Action Step 4-Provide after school math tutoring for at-risk population.
         -  RTI process has been established this year to identify at-risk
            population
         -  Think Link assessments have been utilized to track and identify
            struggling math students
         -  Before and after school tutoring has been implemented at select
            schools

Action Step 5-Increase math instructional time for students in grades 6-8.
         -  Middle school administration has collaborated to identify best
            practices for instructional time needed for math competency
         -  Scheduling by principals is being reconsidered to provide
            additional math instructional time

Action Step 6-Implementation of ACE (achieving cooperative engagement)
program in grades 6-8 as intervention for at-risk population.
     - Study of data for at-risk students, discipline records, and RTI intervention needs
   indicate need for positive behavior supports and academic interventions for middle



         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 232 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


   school students.
   - Middle and high school principal summit meetings determined the ACE
      intervention program has a high priority need.
   - Staffing for Ace program with use of paraprofessionals has been included in
      2008-2009 proposed budget.


Action Step 7-Provide credit recovery for grades 9-12 math.
   - District personnel have studied and visited other school district’s
      recovery programs
   - Career Ladder monies to provide after school credit recovery program

GOAL 5-Increase the high school graduation rate by 1.2% each year for the next
four years.

Action Step 1-Continue to provide Read 180 as an intervention program for
grade 9 struggling readers.
   - Read 180 classes for students in grades 6-9 identified as struggling
      readers
   - 3 year grant initiative with Nieswonger Foundation to purchase, train and
      implement Read 180 in grades 6-9 initiated July, 2008
   - Training with SRA, Promethean and Literacy trainings to initiate Read 180
      program
   - On-going training and professional development for Read 180 teachers
   - Language! program started at Jefferson County High school and White
      Pine making this program available now for all students in grades 6-12.

Action Step 2-Collaborative professional development between transitional
grades.
   - Summer PLC training with administrators will provide use of collaborative
      professional development for transitional grades

Action Step 3-Develop intervention strategies to improve student performance
on Gateway Tests
   - Read 180 and Language! available for struggling students
   - After school tutorial and credit recovery

Action Step 4-Track at-risk students starting at Grade 4.
   - Use of Think Link data, RTI data, and school intervention team process
      established to track at-risk students
   - Think Link for grades PK-5 is in proposed 2008-2009 budget

Action Step 5-Offer credit recovery programs for grades 9-12 students
   -    - District personnel have studied and visited other school district’s
      recovery programs
   - Career Ladder monies to provide after school credit recovery program



         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 233 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Action Step 6-Focus utilization of counselors for student tracking assuring that
students not on track for graduation.
   - School counselor training for 2007-2008 in utilizing ACT Explore and Plan
      results
   - RTI process being developed for middle and high school students
   - Think Link assessment data tracking at middle school level
   - On going tracking of students with failing grades by school counselors

Action Step 7-Ensure student placement is aimed at student success through
the utilization of data; TCAP, Explore, TVAAS, and teacher recommendation
   - District personnel, administrators, and counselors have received in
       training by ACT for utilizing Explore and Plan results during the 2007-2008
       school year
   - School Data Analysis results per school have been provided by district
       testing coordinator
   - Principal training on use of data provided by district testing coordinator
   - Visit to another district by district leadership team on making data useful
       at school level
   - RTI process established and implemented in PK-5 Schools


Action Step 8-Continue LINK Program to meet transitional needs of incoming
Freshmen
   - Personnel for LINK program provided through extended contract monies
   - LINK schedule for upcoming Freshmen has been established

Action Step 9-Provide inclusionary classes in grades 9-12, ELL, and Students
with Disabilities for Gateway and EOC courses.
     - Inclusion classes for ninth grade English and math has been established this
   school year, 2007-2008.
   - Inclusion classes for grades 6-8 system-wide were established in 2006-2007.
   - In order to complete our goal of Gateway completion for special needs students,
      inclusion planning has taken place at Jefferson County High School in
      preparation of tenth grade inclusion needs. Teachers have been identified and
      a summer inclusion training schedule developed.
   - Additional ELL position is in proposed 2008-2009 budget
   - New ELL English inclusion class has been developed and planned with teacher
      training for 2008-2009

GOAL 6-Increase technology integration to support state curriculum
performance indicators. Integration will be focused on increasing student
achievement on ACT, Explore to College Ready status in math, reading, and
science subject areas.




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 234 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


Action Step 1-Provide increased Bandwidth to address the needs of the targeted
applications (pg 188) that are provided to schools.

Action Step 2-Increase Bandwidth to all sites through installation of fiber in all
schools to provide access to curriculum and instructional resources.

Action Step 3-Utilization of Think Link progress monitoring.
   - Technology has established Think Link access in all middle schools 2
      pilot elementary schools, and high school Algebra
   - Think Link for grades K-5 is in proposed 2008-2009 budget

Action Step 4- Offer technology-based professional development including eTc,
data collection, and pod casting to support curriculum.

Action Step 5-Offer on-line teacher created resources through Dynamic
Curriculum to align with new state standards.

Action Step 6-Expand Think Link progress monitoring to all Algebra classes at
Jefferson County High School.
     - Technology has established Think Link access in all middle schools 2
   pilot elementary schools, and high school Algebra
   - Think Link for grades K-5 is in proposed 2008-2009 budget

Action Step 7-Offer professional development sessions aimed at teacher created
web pages.

Action Step 8-Encourage utilization of e-mail and teacher created websites as
communication tools for professional assistance and parental support.




Evidence of the Use of Data - Narrative Response Required




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 235 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


What is the plan for the use of data?

The summative data will be used to review the effectiveness of our action steps toward
reaching our goals. Evaluation data will be used to determine the success of current
and future needs related to instruction and professional development. The data results
will provide direction toward development of long range strategic planning aimed at
improving instruction, curriculum, and student progress for all subgroups. This
evaluation will provide strategies for engaging learners and encouraging higher order
thinking and problem solving skills.
           The use of elementary and secondary TCAP and TVAAS data will be
           presented at the building level prior to the start of the school year. The data
           will be linked to SPI and the Blueprint for Learning. Data has been
           presented to the various parent teacher organizations.
           Summative data from Think Link will be used to determine the effectiveness
           of the balanced literacy program and RTI interventions.
           Running Records and Language arts benchmark assessment (K-5) will be
           used to identify at-risk students for referral to the RTI process
           Professional development survey data will be used to determine
           effectiveness and need for future planning.
           Data will be utilized to determine future grant project opportunities


Process for gathering data and analyzing data:
             Reading specialists and literacy coaches – reading data
             School administrators – ThinkLink
             TVAAS and TCAP – Testing Coordinator and Building Administrators
             Gateway and EOC Secondary - Testing Coordinator and Building
             Administrators
             Running Records and Language arts benchmark assessment (K-5) –
             Literacy Coaches and classroom teachers
             School Intervention Teams for RTI process
             Counselor utilization of ACT Explore and Plan results

Plan Adjustment:
            Leadership team
            Educational advisory team
            District administrators
            Building administrators
            CTE/ELL supervisors
            Special Education administrators
            All stakeholders

Annual Review of Summative Data
            District Leadership Team

Celebrating Success through Communication:



          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 236 of 245
                        Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


     District presentation to school board, the individual district schools, the
     public, and community organizations.
     Post successes on the district website
     Provide success information to the local media (Standard Banner)
     Director’s Quarterly Report




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 237 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                       TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.3

                 TCSPP MONITORING AND ADJUSTING EVALUATION

The following summary questions are related to TCSPP Monitoring and Adjusting.
They are designed as a culminating activity for the system to plan the monitoring
process that will ensure that the systemwide improvement plan leads to effectively
supporting local schools and building capacity for improved student achievement for all
students.


Evidence of Monitoring Dates – Listing Required
What are the calendar dates (Nov/Dec and May/June) when the Systemwide
Leadership Team will meet to sustain the Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide
Planning Process?
Identify the person(s) responsible for monitoring along with their position and the role
they will play in the monitoring process.
 Date           Member            Position                Role
 August 25      Dr. Archie Bone       Director of Schools               CEO of System/ Communication
 September      Sharon Winstead       Director of Finance               Finance/Budget
 29             Sherry Finchum        Director of C & I                 Inst. Leader, Prof Dev
 January 12 &   Bill Nolen            Director of Federal               Communication/
 26                                   Programs                          Finance/Accountability/Prof Dev
 April 6        Faye Humbard          Director of Technology            Tech/ SIS/Student Services
                Connie Campbell       Director of HR, Planning &        Testing/Evaluation/HR
                                      Assessment
                Norma Huff            Director of Food Services         Food Services/Wellness/Budget
                Debbie Berry          Director of SpEd                  Inst. Leader, Prof Dev/Compliance
                Mandy                 Director of Student Support       Inst. Leader, Prof Dev/Compliance
                Schneitman            and Transitional Services




          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 238 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



Evidence of a Process for Monitoring Plan - Narrative Response Required

What will be the process that the Systemwide Leadership Team will use to review the
analysis of the data from the assessments and determine if adjustments need to be
made in our plan?

Each Component Chair and committee is responsible for re-examining data from the
2008 TCSPP Plan. Changes in each component and the progress toward reaching
goals and completion of action plan will be reviewed by each committee and shared
with the district Leadership Team. The Leadership Team will aggregate the data and
determine goal and action steps revisions and decisions will be adopted at the January
Leadership Team meeting.

The district’s academic and non-academic plans will be adjusted based on review of
district needs indicated by data, budgetary and feasibility needs. The district
Leadership Team coordinates the reporting of progress and adjustment needs to
stakeholders.




           TCSPP MONITORING AND ADJUSTING EVALUATION

Evidence of a Process for Adjusting Plan- Narrative Response Required
What will be the process that the Systemwide Leadership Team will use for adjusting
our plan (person(s) responsible, timeline, action steps, resources, evaluation strategies)
when needed?
As current action steps are implemented, adjustments will be made based on new data
as goals are reached. Each action step has an identified responsible individual(s).
These individuals will report successes and any adjustments to the district Leadership
Team.      The Leadership Team will be ultimately responsible for any revisions or
additions to the plan coordinated with statewide end of the year reports and school level
SIPs.




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 239 of 245
                                Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




Evidence of a Plan for Communicating To All Stakeholders- Narrative
Response Required
How will the Systemwide Leadership Team communicate success/adjustments of the
plan to stakeholders?

             Local Media (Standard Banner)
             Website
             School level to administrators and teachers
             Parent and advisory groups
             Governmental meetings
             Board meetings
             Staff meetings
             Other means identified in the NCLB Communication Plan prepared for
             the original submission of the TCSPP.




        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 240 of 245
                                 Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                   TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.4

                        TCSPP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (ES)

All systems will submit the following Executive Summary to the Tennessee Department
of Education. (Note: High priority systems will submit the entire TCSPP.)



           What’s working?                                                  Evidence




  What deficiencies do we have?                                             Evidence
Why did we receive the deficiencies?




    How are we addressing the                                               Evidence
          deficiencies?
   What changes are we making?




         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 241 of 245
                                  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008




                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.5
                       EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION RESULTS
            FULLY       PARTIALLY          GOAL
         Implemented   Implemented          MET            If met, how do we know?                     If not met, what are next
           Yes or No     Yes or No       Yes or No                                                              steps?
Goal 1       Yes            No            Ongoing         Unable to determine                      Review and analysis of TCAP
                                                                                                   2008 data to determine
                                                                                                   progress. Continue LEAD
                                                                                                   project to address struggling
                                                                                                   readers at grades 6-12.
                                                                                                   Propose new ELL, Literacy
                                                                                                   Coach, and paraprofessionals
                                                                                                   for RTI implementation.
                                                                                                   Continue professional
                                                                                                   development activities and
                                                                                                   initiate ACE Program in grades
                                                                                                   6-8
Goal 2      Yes            No                Yes          All             professional
                                                          development activities were
                                                          completed and evaluated
                                                          with on line surveys. LINK
                                                          program was established
                                                          and is maintained at JCHS.
                                                          Math inclusion classes were
                                                          established.     Curriculum
                                                          pacing guides and Dynamic
                                                          Curriculum was developed
                                                          by middle and high school
                                                          math curriculum team
Goal 3      Yes            No                 No                                                   After review by Leadership
                                                                                                   Team, goal determined to be


                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 242 of 245
  Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008


                                                                   unattainable at this time due to
                                                                   budgetary demands from a
                                                                   potential building program.
                                                                   District did increase local
                                                                   funding, however the new BEP
                                                                   Funding formula has left the
                                                                   district below the state ADM.




Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 243 of 245
                                               Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                                            Appendix

Highly Qualified Status
Highly Qualified Statistics

                  Jefferson County                             2006-2007              Get Stats
     District:                              School Year:

                                                                     Total Core Academic                 Percent of Core Academic
 District                            Total Core Academic
                  District Name                                       Courses Taught By                     Courses Taught By
 Number                                Courses Taught
                                                                   Identified HQ Educators               Identified HQ Educators
  00450          Jefferson County           1161                                1159                                  99.83



Only 1 teacher in Jefferson County is not highly qualified, Richard D. Cox, who is currently on a waiver teaching special
education. He is enrolled in Teach Tennessee this summer and will complete the program summer ‘08.

A best effort will be made to fill all future core subject area vacancies with highly qualified teachers. Title funds will be
used to reimburse currently employed teacher expenses for college course work/praxis to enable them to become highly
qualified.




                                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 244 of 245
                                             Jefferson County Schools 2007-2008



                                                       Addendum

                                           Jefferson County Schools
                                    IIA Plan for Improvement for 2007-2008
                                            Highly Qualified Status

The following core courses were taught by a teacher who was not highly qualified during the 2006-2007 school year:

Course Code: 0806 Mathematics              Teacher of record: Amy Ball
                             th
The teacher was teaching a 6 grade math class for which she was highly qualified; and transferred to a 7th grade math
class which she was not highly qualified to teach. After the 2006-2007 school year, this teacher was transferred to teach
7th grade Language Arts for which she is highly qualified to teach.

Course Code: 3407 U.S. Government Teacher of record: Marty Euverard
The teacher was certified in History; and he was assigned to teach U.S. Government for which he was not highly qualified.
The teacher left the school system at the end of the 2006-2007 school year.

To prevent the issues identified from occurring again, school principals have been trained on the highly qualified criteria
so they can verify highly qualified status before assigning an existing teacher who is not highly qualified to teach a core
course. As a result of this training, Jefferson County Schools had 100% of core academic courses taught by identified HQ
teachers for 2007-2008.




                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 – Template 6.3 Page 245 of 245

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:24
posted:5/9/2011
language:English
pages:245
hkksew3563rd hkksew3563rd http://
About