Submission Templates

Document Sample
Submission Templates Powered By Docstoc
					         TENNESSEE COMPREHENSIVE
      SYSTEMWIDE PLANNING PROCESS
                         (TCSPP)


              Components 1-6
           Submission Templates for
                SCHOOL SYSTEM:
            RUTHERFORD COUNTY

               Submit On or Before May 15, 2009
High Priority Systems: Submit On or Before November 1, 2007




               Tennessee Department of Education
                 Commissioner Lana C. Seivers


                      TDOE MISSION:
         HELPING TEACHERS TEACH AND CHILDREN LEARN
                  Document Version, August, 2007
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                                                                 RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS


ASSURANCES ............................................................................................................................................................3
COMPONENT 1..........................................................................................................................................................4
    SCHOOL SYSTEM PROFILE DEVELOPMENT AND COLLABORATIVE PROCESS IDENTIFICATION ..
COMPONENT 2........................................................................................................................................................17
    BELIEFS, MISSION, AND SHARED VISION.........................................................................................................
COMPONENT 3........................................................................................................................................................19
    ACADEMIC AND NON-ACADEMIC DATA ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS: DEVELOPING PRIORITIES
    FOR IMPROVING SCHOOLS................................................................................................................................
COMPONENT 4........................................................................................................................................................29
    CURRICULAR, INSTRUCTIONAL, ASSESSMENT, AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS .............
COMPONENT 5........................................................................................................................................................72
    COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMWIDE ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT............................................................
COMPONENT 6........................................................................................................................................................86
    PROCESS EVALUATION, IMPLEMENTATION, AND MONITORING/ADJUSTING PLAN FOR
    ACHIEVING RESULTS ...........................................................................................................................................




This copyrighted material was produced by the State of Tennessee Department of Education.

No parts of this manual may be copied, photocopied, or reproduced in any form or by any means
without permission in writing from the State of Tennessee Department of Education. All
trademarks, service marks, products or services are trademarks or registered trademarks of their
respective holders.




                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 2 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                  RUTHERFORD COUNTY



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




I certify that _______________________________________________________ School System
has utilized the data and other requirements requested from each department, as shown in the
Compliance Matrix 5.1 found in the Framework/Guide, 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.




__________________________________________                                ______________________
Signature of Director of Schools                                          Date Signed




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 3 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                   COMPONENT 1


               SCHOOL SYSTEM PROFILE DEVELOPMENT AND
                COLLABORATIVE PROCESS IDENTIFICATION




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 4 of 95
    ED-5191 August 2007                                                                      RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                          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. This information
    is to be turned in to the TDOE as part of Component 1.


Composition of the Systemwide Leadership Teams –Listing required
                         Member                                                           Role
                                                             Systemwide Leadership Team Chair, Poverty Data,
Amy Wise, Title I Coordinator
                                                             Parent/Guardian Demographics, Scientific Research
                                                             Component 4 Chair and Student Performance, Perceptual
Don Odom, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction
                                                             Data
                                                             Component 2 Co-Chair and Student Performance,
Elizabeth Church, Language Arts Instructional Specialist
                                                             Perceptual Data
                                                             Component 2 Co-Chair and Student, School
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator
                                                             Characteristics, Performance and Perceptual Data
Anne McCraw, T.C. Director and Coordinator of Title II,      Component 3 Co-Chair and Student Performance,
V and Assessments                                            Perceptual Data
Josh Kubly, Safe Schools Program and Testing
                                                             Component 3 Co-Chair and Safe Schools
Manager
                                                             Component 5 Co-Chair Technology and Scientific
Amy Blanton, Technology Coordinator
                                                             Research
Shirley Bell, Coordinator of Special Education               Component 5 Co-Chair and Student
                                                             Component 6 Co-Chair and Student Characteristics,
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator
                                                             Community Characteristics, Perceptual Data
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical               Component 6 Co-Chair and Student Characteristics and
Education                                                    Student Performance Data
Jeff Sandvig, Assistant Superintendent of Budget and
                                                             Financial Data and Resources
Finance
Gary Clardy, Assistant Superintendent of Engineering         Facilities, Demographic Data, Community Characteristics
Paula Barnes, Assistant Superintendent of Human
                                                             Staff Characteristics, Student Characteristics and Services
Resources
Bob Mayes, Attendance Supervisor                             Student Characteristics and Perceptual Data
Joe Herbert, Adult Education Supervisor                      Student Performance
Dorris Jernigan, School Board Member                         Community and Perceptual Data
                                                             Parent/Guardian Demographics, Community and
James Evans, Community Liaison
                                                             Perceptual Data
Butch Campbell, Principal of Walter Hill School              School Characteristics
Carla Lyons, Owner of Carla’s Salon and Parent               Community Characteristics, Perceptual Data
Tina Prater, Secretary                                       Minutes




                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 5 of 95
     ED-5191 August 2007                                                                       RUTHERFORD COUNTY



Fred Blair, School Nutrition Supervisor                        Poverty Data
Mike Snell, Transportation Supervisor                          Student Demographics
Kim Snell, Liaison                                             ATLAS (homeless) Services
Frankie Holland, Teacher                                       School Based Instruction
Sue Ford, Educational Assistant                                Classified Instruction Personnel
Ashley Eady, Riverdale High School Student                     Student Information
Harry Gill, Jr., Director of Schools                           District Vision




                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 6 of 95
      ED-5191 August 2007                                                                      RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                            TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1
                                                      (Continued)

            Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
                Component 1 Member                                                          Role
                                                               Systemwide Leadership Team Chair, Poverty Data,
Amy Wise, Title I Coordinator
                                                               Parent/Guardian Demographics, Scientific Research
                                                               Component 4 Chair and Student Performance, Perceptual
Don Odom, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction
                                                               Data
                                                               Component 2 Co-Chair and Student Performance,
Elizabeth Church, Language Arts Instructional Specialist
                                                               Perceptual Data
                                                               Component 2 Co-Chair and Student, School
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator
                                                               Characteristics, Performance and Perceptual Data
Anne McCraw, T.C. Director and Coordinator of Title II, V      Component 3 Co-Chair and Student Performance,
and Assessments                                                Perceptual Data
Josh Kubly, Safe Schools Program and Testing Manager           Component 3 Co-Chair and Safe Schools
                                                               Component 5 Co-Chair Technology and Scientific
Amy Blanton, Technology Coordinator
                                                               Research
Shirley Bell, Coordinator of Special Education                 Component 5 Co-Chair and Student
                                                               Component 6 Co-Chair and Student Characteristics,
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator
                                                               Community Characteristics, Perceptual Data
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical                 Component 6 Co-Chair and Student Characteristics and
Education                                                      Student Performance Data
Jeff Sandvig, Assistant Superintendent of Budget and
                                                               Financial Data and Resources
Finance
Gary Clardy, Assistant Superintendent of Engineering           Facilities, Demographic Data, Community Characteristics
Paula Barnes, Assistant Superintendent of Human
                                                               Staff Characteristics, Student Characteristics and Services
Resources
Bob Mayes, Attendance Supervisor                               Student Characteristics and Perceptual Data
Joe Herbert, Adult Education Supervisor                        Student Performance
Dorris Jernigan, School Board Member                           Community and Perceptual Data
                                                               Parent/Guardian Demographics, Community and
James Evans, Community Liaison
                                                               Perceptual Data
Butch Campbell, Principal of Walter Hill School                School Characteristics
Carla Lyons, Owner of Carla’s Salon and Parent                 Community Characteristics, Perceptual Data
Tina Prater, Secretary                                         Minutes
Fred Blair, School Nutrition Supervisor                        Poverty Data
Mike Snell, Transportation Supervisor                          Student Demographics
Kim Snell, Liaison                                             ATLAS (homeless) Services
Frankie Holland, Teacher                                       School Based Instruction
Sue Ford, Educational Assistant                                Classified Instruction Personnel



                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 7 of 95
       ED-5191 August 2007                                                                          RUTHERFORD COUNTY



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
Ashley Eady, Riverdale High School Student                          Student Information
Harry Gill, Jr., Director of Schools                                District Vision


                 Component 2 Member                                                              Role
Elizabeth Church, Language Arts Instructional Specialist            Component Co-Chair
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator                           Component Co-Chair
Paula Barnes, Supervisor of Human Resources and
                                                                    Staffing and Student Services
Student Services
Doug Young, Owner of City Tile and Murfreesboro City                Community, business and government response, views
Council                                                             and needs
Shirley Bell, Supervisor of Special Education                       Issues with special needs population
Jackie Drake, Instructional Secretary                               Classified staff views
Deb Richards, Teacher                                               Teacher role and objectives for school system
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator                                       Works with English language learners
Amy Wise, Title I Coordinator                                       Federal Programs
Ellaina Taylor, Teacher                                             Teacher role and objectives for school system
Weston Wax, Student                                                 Student view point of school system
Kris Marshall, Instructional Technology Specialist                  Technology Effectiveness in Training and Integration
Kevin Wax, Parent                                                   Parent and Community view
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical
                                                                    Career and Technical Program Effectiveness
Education
Will Shelton, Principal of Blackman Middle School                   School level view point and needs
Robert Kates, MTSU English Professor                                Community, business, and role of University
Rick Wise, Rutherford County School Board Member                    Community and Board view




                 Component 3 Member                                                              Role
                                                                    Co-Chair and student performance, staff characteristics,
Anne McCraw, Teacher Center Director
                                                                    financial data, perceptual data, record keeper
Josh Kubly, Safe Schools Program and Testing Manager                Component 3 Co-Chair and Safe Schools
                                                                    Represented parent/guardian demographics and
Mary Esther Bell, Parent
                                                                    perceptual data
Ester Victory, Owner of Crosslin Supply                             Represented community, reviewed perceptual data
                                                                    Represented community and financial data, reviewed
Terry Hodge, School Board Member
                                                                    perceptual data
                                                                    Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Jon Dinkins, Principal of Wilson Elementary
                                                                    community and perceptual data
                                                                    Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
John Ash, Principal of Christiana Middle School
                                                                    community and perceptual data
                                                                    Provided and reviewed student, school and staff
Lisa Bogle, Elementary School Coordinator
                                                                    characteristics, student performance and financial data



                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 8 of 95
      ED-5191 August 2007                                                                      RUTHERFORD COUNTY



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
                                                               Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator
                                                               community and perceptual data
                                                               Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Phyllis Washington, High School Coordinator
                                                               community and perceptual data
Avy Seymore, Assistant Principal of LaVergne High              Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
School                                                         community and perceptual data
                                                               Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Shirley Bell, Coordinator of Special Education
                                                               community and perceptual data
                                                               Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator
                                                               community and perceptual data
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical                 Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Education                                                      community and perceptual data
Don Odom, Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and           Provided student, school and staff data, reviewed
Instruction                                                    community and perceptual data




                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 9 of 95
    ED-5191 August 2007                                                                       RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1
                                                     (Continued)

          Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
               Component 4 Member                                                          Role
Don Odom, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction             Component Chair
Joe Herbert, Adult Education Supervisor                       Report on Adult Education program Effectiveness
                                                              Report on Elementary Level Program Effectiveness
Lisa Bogle, Elementary School Coordinator
                                                              including Federal Programs
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator                     Report on Middle Level Program Effectiveness
Phyllis Washington, High School Coordinator                   Report on Secondary Level Program Effectiveness
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical
                                                              Report on Career and Technical Program Effectiveness
Education
                                                              Report on English as a Second Language Program
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator
                                                              Effectiveness
Linda Prichard, Instructional Specialist Grades Pre-K – 5     Analyze Instructional Programming in Grades Pre-K – 5
                                                              Analyze Instructional Programming in Language Arts
Elizabeth Church, Language Arts Instructional Specialist
                                                              Grades 6 – 12
Kim Day, Mathematics and Science Instructional                Analyze Instructional Programming in Mathematics and
Specialist                                                    Science Grades 6 – 12
Kris Marshall, Instructional Technology Specialist            TestMate Clarity Data Analysis
Anne McCraw, Teacher Center Director and Coordinator
                                                              Report on Teacher Training and Student Testing
of Title II, Title V and Assessments
Lee Rennick, Chamber of Commerce Director of
                                                              Report on Community and Business Partnerships
Business and Education Partnership
Donald Jernigan, School Board Member                          Board Input
Rhonda Holton, Principal of Eagleville School K-12            Evaluate Delivery of Instructional Effectiveness
Jackie Drake, Instructional Department Secretary              Collection, Review, and Entry of TCSPP Data
Sarah Jessie, Instructional Specialist of Hands on
                                                              Evaluate Elementary hands on Science
Science




               Component 5 Member                                                          Role
Shirley Bell, Coordinator of Special Education                Component Co-Chair, and Student Performance Data
Amy Blanton, Technology Coordinator                           Component Co-Chair, Technology and scientific Research
                                                              Report on English as a Second Language Program
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator
                                                              Effectiveness
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical
                                                              Report on Career and Technical Program Effectiveness
Education
                                                              Poverty Data, Community Characteristics,
Amy Wise, Title I Coordinator
                                                              Parent/Guardian Demographics, Scientific Research




                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 10 of 95
    ED-5191 August 2007                                                                       RUTHERFORD COUNTY



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
                                                              Report on Elementary Level Program Effectiveness
Lisa Bogle, Elementary School Coordinator
                                                              including Federal Programs
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator                     Report on Middle Level Program Effectiveness
Phyllis Washington, High School Coordinator                   Report on Secondary Level Program Effectiveness
Linda Prichard, Instructional Specialist Grades Pre-K – 5     Analyze Instructional Programming in Grades Pre-K – 5
                                                              Analyze Instructional Programming in Language Arts
Elizabeth Church, Language Arts Instructional Specialist
                                                              Grades 6 – 12
Kim Day, Mathematics and Science Instructional                Analyze Instructional Programming in Mathematics and
Specialist                                                    Science Grades 6 – 12
                                                              Report on Technology Effectiveness in Training and
Kris Marshall, Instructional Technology Specialist
                                                              Integration
Anne McCraw, Teacher Center Director and Coordinator
                                                              Report on Teacher Training and Student Testing
of Title II, Title V and Assessments
Paula Barnes, Assistant Superintendent of Human               Staffing Characteristics, Student characteristics and
Resources and Student Services                                Services
Lee Rennick, Chamber of Commerce Director of
                                                              Report on Community and Business partnerships
Business and Education Partnership
Dr. Mark Byrnes, School Board Member                          Board Input
Richard Zago, Principal of Stewarts Creek Elementary          Evaluate Delivery of Instructional Effectiveness
Don Odom, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction             Student Performance, Perceptual Data
Gail Vick, Principal of Blackman High School                  Evaluate Delivery of Instructional Effectiveness
Maria Lopez, Parent                                           Parental Input




               Component 6 Member                                                          Role
                                                              Component Co-Chair and Report on English as a Second
Diane Mackey, ESL Coordinator
                                                              Language Program Effectiveness
Kay Nixon, Coordinator of Career and Technical                Component Co-Chair and Report on Career and Technical
Education                                                     Program Effectiveness
Shirley Bell, Coordinator of Special Education                Student Performance Data
Amy Blanton, Technology Coordinator                           Technology and Scientific Research
                                                              Poverty Data, Community Characteristics,
Amy Wise, Title I Coordinator
                                                              Parent/Guardian Demographics, Scientific Research
                                                              Report on Elementary Level Program Effectiveness
Lisa Bogle, Elementary School Coordinator
                                                              including Federal Programs
Shelia Bratton, Middle School Coordinator                     Report on Middle Level Program Effectiveness
Phyllis Washington, High School Coordinator                   Report on Secondary Level Program Effectiveness
Linda Prichard, Instructional Specialist Grades Pre-K – 5     Analyze Instructional Programming in Grades Pre-K – 5
                                                              Analyze Instructional Programming in Language Arts
Elizabeth Church, Language Arts Instructional Specialist
                                                              Grades 6 – 12
Kim Day, Mathematics and Science Instructional                Analyze Instructional Programming in Mathematics and
Specialist                                                    Science Grades 6 – 12
                                                              Report on Technology Effectiveness in Training and
Kris Marshall, Instructional Technology Specialist
                                                              Integration



                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 11 of 95
    ED-5191 August 2007                                                                     RUTHERFORD COUNTY



Composition of the Component Leadership Teams –Listing required
Anne McCraw, Teacher Center Director and Coordinator
                                                            Report on Teacher Training and Student Testing
of Title II, Title V and Assessments
Paula Barnes, Assistant Superintendent of Human             Staffing Characteristics, Student characteristics and
Resources and Student Services                              Services
Lee Rennick, Chamber of Commerce Director of
                                                            Report on Community and Business partnerships
Business and Education Partnership
Dr. Mark Byrnes, School Board Member                        Board Input
Richard Zago, Principal of Stewarts Creek Elementary        Evaluate Delivery of Instructional Effectiveness
Don Odom, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction           Student Performance, Perceptual Data
Gail Vick, Principal of Blackman High School                Evaluate Delivery of Instructional Effectiveness
Maria Lopez, Parent                                         Parental Input




                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 12 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                      RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                     TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1
                                                (Continued)

     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?
Data collecting for the system profile was the responsibility of the different supervisors, coordinators, and
specialists. The following data was collected in Rutherford County in order to access information about
students and student achievement: student population profile, demographic data; IEP information;
Assessments for ESL students; Special Education’s End of the Year Report, CPR, and TN Part B State
Performance Plan; TCAP; TVAAS; business partnership data; STARS;TESS; software program
assessments; school TSIPs, Adult Education Baldridge Quality Control Plan, teacher, parent, and
administration surveys generated by the Title I Department; Title I collaboration agreement with Head
Start; the Census Bureau and Chamber of Commerce; various Planning Departments in the cities and
county; system financial data; School Nutrition data; multiple parent surveys: district developed, CTE,
and special ed. results for the system and schools; staff characteristics; and community information.
Parent/Guardian information will be obtained from STAR Student, the student attendance, performance,
and information software program. CTE recommendations are reviewed.

The Data Sources Work guide was reviewed and each person was responsible for obtaining the
necessary data.



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?

All departments updated information collected with the most recent available for this 2009 review.

Perceptual data will be used to determine the mission, vision, and beliefs of the Rutherford County
School System. Teacher Surveys, parent surveys, principal surveys, CTE advisory recommendations
and various data collected by the Leadership Team will be analyzed to determine system perceptions,
community beliefs, and goals for the school system. These tools will be used to determine the current
perception of the system and what possible problems exist. Insight will be gained about the effectiveness
of the school in meeting the educational needs of the students of Rutherford County. The information
gained should allow the system to adjust its mission statement, vision, and beliefs about the system to
more adequately provide educational opportunities that fit the needs of the students. All information will
be analyzed to develop a system level focus for the Rutherford County Schools.




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 13 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                     RUTHERFORD COUNTY



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

All departments updated information collected with the most recent available for this 2009 review.

Improved student academic performance in a rapidly growing student population is a priority for
Rutherford County Schools. One way we measure the effectiveness of instruction by evaluating the
results of several testing tools. Listed below are the system wide assessments.


 Assessment Tool                          Assessment
 1.   Cogat                               Cognitive Abilities
 2.   Gateway                             Language Arts, Mathematics, Science
 3.   End of Course Testing               Physical Science, English I and US History
 4.   Writing                             Ability to communicate through writing
 5.   Achievement                         Overall knowledge for grades 1-8
 6.   Iowa Algebra                        Mathematics
 7.   AGS                                 Preschool Early Assessment
 8.   RCBOE Kindergarten Exit Test        Kindergarten Achievement
 9.   Portfolio                           Special Education Assessment
 10. KUDER                                Career and Technical Assessment
 11. DIBELS                               Early Literacy Skills (RTI pilot schools)
 12. Formative Assessments                PLC collaborative essential skills test
 13. Explore                              Academic skills in core content for high school paths
                                          and interest inventory
 14.   PLAN                               ACT preparation and post secondary planning
 15.   ThinkLink                          Grade level skill proficiency (at-risk schools)


In addition to these tools the system analyzes graduation rates, National Merit Commended Scholars,
Semifinalists, Finalists, National Merit Scholars, Report Card, TVAAS, TestMate Clarity, IEP’s,
PSAT/SAT/ACT, Child Find, Phelps Readiness, and The Perkins Report Card to determine performance
on Core Indicators. Software programs such as ExamView, Orchard, Cornerstone, SkillsBank, A+,
Academy of Reading and Math, Elementary Reading Benchmarks, and Lexia Reading provide
assessments and prescriptive assignments. Student performance will be analyzed at the school and
district levels by objective, subject areas, and student population areas. Longitudinal assessment
information was gathered to determine the achievement effects of students who attended district
preschools.

In an effort to ensure that appropriate parent notifications are provided and understood, Rutherford
County’s assessment data is found on the State website and given to individual parents. Necessary
translations are provided.




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 14 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                     RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 1.1
                                               (Continued)

     Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

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?

All departments updated information collected with the most recent available for this 2009 review.
School district personnel provided guidelines on equity as required by the individual programs. BEP
guidelines were followed in determining classroom size and teacher student ratios.
The following are in place and ongoing:
• Employment procedures for the employment of highly qualified personnel as well as assuring
     present personnel are highly qualified are in place to meet NCLB requirements by the beginning of
     the 2009-2010 school year. The system is continuing to work toward the goal of 100% highly
     qualified. We are now 99.93%.
• Title I services are based on a per pupil expenditure formula.
• Special education services are equally distributed based on weighted time in schools throughout the
     system.
• ESL services are provided in an equitable manner based on student population needs.
• Computers are provided in each classroom based on a 1:5 ratio. (1 computer for every 5 students)
• Course and curricula offerings are equally maintained to meet the needs and interests of the
     students. Planned staff development and selected instructional materials are based on scientific
     research/best practice.
• Schools are provided equitable services for all students in Rutherford County.
• Rutherford County provides for the health, safety, and welfare of all students through programs and
     personnel such as: Respect and Protect which includes the SRO program and STARS, social
     workers, psychologists, coordinated school health and nurses.
• CTE funds are distributed based on program needs and equity by program area. CTE provides
     support to all CTE teachers and the CTE Coordinator actively recruits staff for all schools.


Delivery of Services - Narrative Response Required
What insights have we gained as to our delivery of services to schools?

All departments updated information collected with the most recent available for this 2009 review.

Much of what was learned by the team gave a sense of pride in the accomplishments of the students
and schools in our system. Through this process the team members have learned so much about the
similarities and differences in each program. The school system provides support and opportunities for
continuous learning through a robust in-service program and programs such as Instructional Facilitators
and the Teacher Center. Services provided adhere to standards and meet federal and state guidelines.
Teachers need to be aware of how our fast growing school system can continue to meet the needs of
our very diverse district. Schools need to increase family engagement to support student achievement.
The system needs to continue the pursuit of providing the latest technology equipment and staff
development needed to address student achievement. The system needs to address the potential to
gather data concerning human resources and services by system and by school through the use of
optional codes on TCAP. CTE secretaries provide support to all teachers in their school and feeder
schools. Needs assessments for new CTE course offerings include a student survey and workforce
demand.



                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 15 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                      RUTHERFORD COUNTY




Evaluation of the Collaborative Process- Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of the collaborative process used in the TCSPP?

All departments updated information collected with the most recent available for this 2009 review.

Our strength is shown through the collaborative process used throughout the leadership team to
develop and work toward a shared vision for our system. No territorial issues existed as the team
worked through the process of collecting data. All stakeholders were actively involved in the planning
process. The TCSPP was presented to the Superintendent’s Parent Advisory Committee in order to
include as much parent and community input as possible. Team members were dedicated to continuing
a planning process to promote a high achieving school system. Team members felt this process
validated the learning community already in place in Rutherford County. Our weakness is in data
gathering in that Rutherford County does not have an electronic system or process in place to gather
information on staff qualifications in a timely manner. The leadership team reviewed this narrative and
has concluded that it holds true for this year’s review as well as last year’s planning process. Time spent
with component chairs reviewing each
element as well as the component team meetings showed very collaborative discussion and sharing of
information. Rutherford County School System is proud that it is now a system in “Good Standing” under
NCLB.



(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) – Component 2 Page 16 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                   RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                      COMPONENT 2


                      BELIEFS, MISSION, AND SHARED VISION




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 17 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                    RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                  TCSPP TEMPLATE 2.1
                      BELIEFS, MISSION, and SHARED VISION


BELIEFS:

The Rutherford County School System believes
   • learning promotes individual student success.
   • providing a safe and nurturing environment is essential to student learning and staff
       effectiveness.
   • collaborating with parents, community, and the school system is vital to the development of self-
       directed, productive citizens.
   • achieving academic benchmarks through the use of research-based strategies is the
       responsibility of all educational stakeholders.
   • creating challenging programs is paramount in fostering continuous improvement and high
       expectations for the educational community.
   • empowering Professional Learning Communities to develop educational priorities and
       improvement strategies is key to academic success.




MISSION STATEMENT:

The mission of the Rutherford County School System is to empower today’s students to grasp
tomorrow’s opportunities.



SHARED VISION STATEMENT:

The vision of the Rutherford County School System is to provide students with the knowledge and skills
to become citizens who can adapt to meet the challenges of tomorrow.




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 2 Page 18 of 95
                   COMPONENT 3


ACADEMIC AND NON-ACADEMIC DATA ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS:
    DEVELOPING PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVING SCHOOLS
       ED-5191 November 2005



                                                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:
•   Rutherford County was one of 9 systems to receive all A’s in both achievement and Value Added for grades 3 – 8.
•   The system achieved AYP goals for all subgroups in all measured areas for students in elementary and middle schools.
•   The 3 year average for K – 8 value added was again all A’s for 2008.
•   Rutherford County CRT achievement scores for grades K – 8 improved from three A’s and one B to all A’s.
•   High school value added scores as measured on Gateway and EOC exams were above predicted levels in all contents except
    or math, which was NDD.
•   Explore science scores were higher than the national scores in the highest score group (20 – 25).
•   Explore results exceeded national results in all four subjects and in the composite.
•   PLAN results indicate that our students compare favorably with national norms in reading and science for the upper score
    ranges.
•   The 2008 three year average for ACT was above predicted levels in all measured contents. This was also true for actual
    observed scores reported on the 2008 Report Card.
•   Attendance indicators for grades K – 8 were above the state goal.
•   The system earned A’s in Writing at grades 5, 8 and 11.
•   The Attendance Rate for K – 8 (95%) exceeds the state goal of 93%.
•   The 2007 Carl Perkins Career Technical Report card indicated that with a score of 95.15% we exceeded the goal in
    Reading/Language Arts. We also exceeded the goal for math with a score of 98.39%. The Student Graduation rate dropped a
    little so, although we met or exceeded the goal, we are considered to be in improving status.

Needs:
•   Rutherford County’s long-term, high growth rate has led to major funding constraints in both the general-purpose school budget
    and the building program budget. These funding constraints make it difficult for the system to maintain a differentiated
    instructional program. The improvements necessary to address the needs of subgroups and schools that are at risk of not
    making AYP are especially hard to fund.
•   Our school system needs to work with the county government to increase local instructional funding levels. Our high growth
    level forces us to use funds for physical facilities and makes it difficult to maintain instructional spending per pupil. Our schools
    will require increased funding if we are to maintain current achievement levels and address the needs of at risk students. The
    improvement this year in the per-pupil expenditure was related more to an increase in state funding than to local efforts.
•   Rutherford County needs to focus on the graduation rate at all high schools in order to meet the 90% requirement by 2013.
    Although we are achieving AYP standards as a system, our graduation rates must improve to keep pace with increased
    requirements. This year, Oakland High School is in School Improvement 2 because of their graduation rate. LaVergne High
    School is also on Target for the same reason. While we have not met the 90% graduation goal, we are meeting the intermediate
    goals set by the state.
•   Value added and criterion referenced academic achievement scores are generally at high levels but have room for
    improvement. On a more specific note, although TVAAS scores resulted in all A’s, the mean gain for every content area
    decreased from 2007.
•   Of concern are scores that appear to be on a downward trend, even though the three-year average gain remains equal to or
    greater than the growth standard. Those are:
           Math – 6th grade
                                       th
            Reading/Language Arts – 7 grade
           Science – 7th and 8th grade
•   The gain for 5th grade science decrease for the third year and the three-year average is lower than the 3-year gain for the state.



                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 20 of 95
       ED-5191 November 2005


•   Three areas are below the growth standard by more than two standard deviations. Those are
         Social Studies Grade 8 (did show improvement this year from –3.1 to –2.6)
         Language Arts Grade 7 (decreased from –1.0 to –1.7)
         Science Grade 8 (decreased from .9 to –1.5)
•   Math Gateway scores for this year were NDD when compared to the state scores but the 3-year average, at –2.7, is still below
    the state average.
•   Mean student scores on the math portion of the ACT are above predicted scores and above state averages but have decreased
    over the last three years (20.27 to 20.18 to 19.98).
•   Central Middle School is on Target for math scores of SWD. LaVergne High is on Target for the reading scores of Hispanic
    students. LaVergne Primary and Roy Waldron are on target for the reading scores of SWD and Oakland High is on target for
    the math scores of SWD and AA.
•   Explore scores in math and reading are lower than the national comparison group at the upper levels.
•   PLAN results indicate that our students score below national norms in English and math and below college bound juniors in all
    content areas.



What evidence/sources support your response?

2006 and 2007 and 2008 Report Cards
TCAP results including achievement, writing and Gateway assessments
TVAAS Reports
Three year AYP history (locally developed report)
Special Education End of the Year report
Special Education December Student Count
Drop Out Rate Report from Tennessee DOW Web Site
Carl Perkins Career Technical Report Card




                                   Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 21 of 95
     ED-5191 November 2005



Evaluation of Disaggregated Data - Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of your system based on the disaggregated data?
Strengths:
•   AYP goals were met for all K – 8 subgroups in all assessed areas.
•   The percentage of students scoring Advanced in K – 8 Language Arts/Reading and Math increased in all subgroups.
•   The percentage of 9 – 12 students scoring Not Proficient in Language Arts/Reading decreased in all subgroups except LEP.
•   The number of K – 8 students scoring Proficient or Advanced in Math increased in all subgroups.
•   The number of K – 8 students scoring Proficient or Advanced in Language/Arts increased in all subgroups except Native
    American.
•   Although K – 8 math scores for SWD are still below required levels, there was a 10% increase in the students who scored
     Proficient or Advanced (70% to 80%).
•   The AYP scores for students in grades K – 8 exceed state levels in math and Language Arts/Reading in all subgroups.
•   The percent proficient in 9 – 12 math and Language Arts/Reading increased for all groups except LEP.
•   AYP scores for 9 – 12 equal or exceed state levels in math and Language Arts/Reading for all subgroups except LEP.

Needs:
•   African American and Students with Disabilities failed to make AYP in 9 – 12 math.
•   Hispanic students failed to make AYP for 9 – 12 Language Arts/Reading. African American and Asian/PI did not increase
    the number of students scoring Proficient in Language Arts/Reading.
•   The percentage of LEP students scoring Not Proficient in Math increased.
•   In grades K – 8, the following groups and contents showed increases in students scoring Not Proficient:
         Math: Grade 5 – Asian/PI
         Language Arts: Grade 4 – Asian/PI
                         Grade 5 – African American and Hispanic
                         Grade 7 – African American and Hispanic
         Science: Grade 3 – Hispanic
                   Grade 4 – Asian/PI, Hispanic, SWD, Females
                   Grade 5 – Hispanic
                   Grade 8 – Asian/PI
         Social Studies: Grade 3 – Hispanic
                         Grade 6 – LEP
                         Grade 7 – Asian/PI, Hispanic
•   K – 8 AYP requirements for Math are not met for SWD (Required 86, Actual 80)
•   K – 8 AYP requirements for Language Arts/Reading are not met for
                  SWD (Required 89, Actual 80)
                  LEP (Required 89, Actual 80)
•   9 – 12 AYP requirements for Math are not met for
                  African American (Required 83, Actual 77)
                  SWD (Required 83, Actual 64)
                  LEP (Required 83, Actual 70)
•   9 – 12 AYP requirements for Language Arts are not met for
                  Hispanic (Required 93, Actual 88)
                  African American (Required 93, Actual 92)
                  SWD (Required 93, Actual 81)
                  LEP (Required 93, Actual 53)

•   The graduation rates for African American and Hispanic students are not on pace to meet requirements.




                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 22 of 95
    ED-5191 November 2005


What evidence/sources support your response?

2007 and 2008 Report Cards
TCAP Results including achievement, writing and Gateway assessments
TVAAS Reports
Three-year AYP History (locally developed report)
Special Education End of the Year Report
Special Education December student count
Drop Out Rate Report from Tennessee DOE Web site
Carl Perkins Vocational Report Card




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 23 of 95
       ED-5191 November 2005




                                               TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1
                                                           (Continued)

             Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

Evaluation of Non-Academic Data- Narrative Response Required
What are the strengths and needs of your system based on the non-academic data?

Strengths:
•   Rutherford County Schools serve 27,004 students housed in 42 schools. 5,312 students are receiving Special Education
    services from 276 teachers while Title I serves 6313 students with 19 teachers. Rutherford County also serves 1,890 ESL
    students representing 51 languages. There are 3700 students in our county with a non-English language background. We
    have 11 voluntary preschool programs, which serve 220 students with 11 teachers and 11 educational assistants. In addition,
    we have one Title I preschool and twelve Special Education preschools. While the incredible growth in Rutherford County
    slowed somewhat this past year, we did see an increase of about 800 students. We opened one middle school this year and
    plan to open a new elementary school in 2009 - 2010. We employee 2755 educators in certified positions and 1492 additional
    personnel in classified positions. This past year we added 141.5 new teaching positions. Using a “snapshot” report of
    teachers from February, 2009, Rutherford County has 49% of teachers with a Bachelor’s degree, 51% have a Master’s degree
    or above. Teachers with less than 4 years experience comprise 22% of our staff. Thirty-two percent have 4 – 10 years
    experience and 25% have 11 – 20 years experience. The remaining 21% have more than 21 years of classroom experience.
    Using these numbers, of the 2715 certified teaching positions in our system, 248 were filled by minorities. The most recent
    state report shows that 99.6% of core academic subjects are taught by Highly Qualified teachers.
•   The percentage of students system-wide who receive free and reduced lunch is 35.62% as of the beginning of February,
    2009.
•   In the most recent survey of teachers regarding their perception of staff development provided by Rutherford County, 73.24
    percent of respondents felt that most or all of the training they received was of high quality.
•   We continue to provide a three-day induction program for new teachers that receives high evaluations from participants. That
    induction program has been sustained by the work of four Instructional Facilitators who provide support for new teachers in
    the classroom throughout the year. We also have an ESL Facilitator who works with new ESL teachers and with other
    teachers who have ESL students in their classrooms.
•   As required by Title X of NCLB, Rutherford County continues to address the needs of homeless students through the ATLAS
    (Academic Time Leads to Achieving Students) program. The program provides training and services to support the
    school enrollment, attendance, and success of homeless students. These services are coordinated by the full time liaison, and
    instructional support is provided by two itinerant teachers. During the last school year, this program provided services to 605
    students.
•   School Technology Specialists or Instructional Technology Specialists are available in all 42 schools to provide teacher
    training on site to support technology integration in the classroom.
•    Rutherford County Schools believes that the key to preventing violence is a systems-approach based education that fosters
    healthy beliefs, feelings, attitudes and skills of expression before violence becomes habitual. The Rutherford County school
    safety plan includes participation in the state recommended Respect and Protect and STAR (Students Taking A Right Stand)
    programs. Rutherford County Schools also has a strong relationship with the County Sheriff's department and a
    nationally acclaimed School Resource Officer program. Directed by the Student Services department, Rutherford County
    Schools safety plan coordinates a multitude of programs to help provide a safe and secure learning environment.
•   Parents in the system participated in a phone survey in May, 2008. Of the 5,782 responses, significant percentages reported
    that they felt their children used technology in the classroom (72.3%); that they believed their children were being challenged
    academically (65.1%); That they felt parent/teacher conferences were beneficial (71.4%) and that they received reports from
    the school regarding their child’s progress (91.1%). They also responded positively to questions regarding the welcoming
    atmosphere at school and to questions regarding the feeling of safety associated with their school.
•   The Human Relations department participated in the Mid-America Educators Consortium in an attempt to expand minority-
    recruiting efforts. They also attended the Northeast Teacher Education Day and participated in a job fair in Wisconsin. In
    addition, we are now advertising in a minority recruiting on-line magazine and subscribe to the journal of the American
    Association for Employment in Education (AAEE). Rutherford County hosted their second job fair in the spring. More than
    600 applicants from across the Southeast visited and interviewed with staff from all schools. All administrators continue to
    place an emphasis on hiring qualified minority applicants.
•   We have developed a plan for differentiated pay scale for those teachers in high need areas. We are currently paying
    incentives to nine math teachers. They are eligible for additional pay for up to three years.



                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 24 of 95
       ED-5191 November 2005



Needs:

•   We continue to face challenges associated with the funds necessary to house and educate a growing student population. The
    proposal is now before the system’s funding body seeking approval to build two middle schools. Although the vote has not
    occurred, there is an obvious lack of support from the County Mayor which could certainly impact the opening of these two
    schools. Although the per pupil expenditure increased this year, it is still below the state average by almost $1,000 per
    student. Every school system is negatively impacted by the current economic condition. Rutherford County is no exception.
•   There is a continued need for at least one more Instructional Facilitator. We add a significant number of new teachers each
    year and we must be able to support and nurture these new teachers so they will develop into effective and competent
    educators. The five facilitators are working hard to meet the needs of new teachers but their caseloads are huge.
•   Our Human Resources Department continues to need a software program that would allow the system to move an applicant
    through the HR process from application to employment. Presently, HR maintains a program for applicants, the Teacher
    Center maintains another for tracking in-service and accounting maintains yet another for payroll purposes. There is no
    program that allows for data gathering and analysis of teacher information as it impacts instruction. A comprehensive program
    would allow us to track teacher data more efficiently as well as using that data to make determinations about the links between
    teacher demographics and student achievement. HR has begun work to gather data in an Excel format that will provide
    increased ability to track staff and provide some reporting functions but there will still be no comprehensive program that ties
    all the data together.
•   Rutherford County should continue their focus on recruiting and hiring minority teachers. We should also institute a program
    for interviewing teachers who exit our system to gather information that could help in recruitment and retention.

What evidence/sources support your response?

2008 Tennessee State Report Card
Payroll information provided by the accounting department
Data from Human Resources Department
Formal and informal surveys of staff members, parents and community members
Evaluations of professional development programs
Title I, Title II, Title X reports and needs assessments as a part of the NCLB projects
System Technology Plan
Safe and Drug Free Schools Reports




                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 25 of 95
       ED-5191 November 2005



                                                TCSPP TEMPLATE 3.1
                                                           (Continued)

             Evaluation of Our Process for Developing Priorities for Improving Schools

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:
•   For the fifth summer, Rutherford County will provide two full days of training for our teachers with a focus Differentiated
    Instruction and how it can be used to address the new curriculum standards for the state of Tennessee. “Tools for Success” will
    include sessions on Singapore math, literacy skills, 6-trait writing, inclusion and reaching struggling learners. There were 988
    teachers in attendance at the 2008 conference. Teachers will be able to choose sessions presented by more than 20 nationally
    recognized experts in differentiated teaching strategies. Presenters will link those strategies to one or more of the new
    standards.
•   This year, in collaboration with Title I, we continued a program that provides an Intervention Coach at 15 elementary schools.
    Those teachers work with both teachers and students to improve skills in reading and math. These coaches have received
    training throughout the school year both in intervention strategies and also in the coaching process itself.
•   We have completed introductory training for all of our schools in the new curriculum standards that will be in place next year.
    Teams from every school were trained and returned to their schools to share. We also printed hard copies of the standards for
    every teacher who is responsible for assessed content.
•   We are piloting a K – 5 Reading Response to Intervention (RTI) Plan in five non-Title and ten Title I schools. We use DIBELS as
    a progress-monitoring tool in grades K –1 and initial results have been very positive for those students who have moved to tier II.
•   In our secondary schools, we are beginning to provide on-line instruction for some at risk students who need the opportunity to
    learn additional credits.
•   Technology programs are in place at every school to allow students the opportunity to remediate missed skills, review areas that
    are of concern and expand and enhance established concepts.
•   We have developed and implemented a Credit Recovery program that is designed to provide an opportunity for students to
    make up failed work within certain parameters and to receive a grade for successful completion of that work.
•   Rutherford County continues to expand the role Professional Learning Communities in our schools. There are four days
    scheduled throughout the year when students leave early so that PLC teams can meet. This school year the teams have
    focused on the new standards and each school was directed to establish a Data Team to share information with other teams in
    their school.

Needs:
•   The greatest challenge facing our county continues to be growth. We need to be able to address this growth in an efficient
    manner with competent and qualified teachers in every classroom who have the skills necessary to meet the unique needs of
    our student population. Even though we are building and opening schools, we are not keeping pace with growth and are totally
    dependent on the Rutherford County Commission for the funds necessary to build those schools.
•   Many of these new students do not come from homes where English is the primary language. We need to be able to provide
    teachers for these students who are familiar with strategies that are appropriate in both ESL and regular classrooms.
•   We have three content area specialists but we need to be able to split science and math responsibilities. Those very different
    disciplines are presently being served by one person.
•   We must also continue to support technology through funding for new and updated hardware, software and support personnel.
•   We need to continue to recruit Highly Qualified teachers for all grade levels and content specialties.
•   It would be beneficial to have a benchmark assessment program in place that tracks students longitudinally. The data would be
    helpful to PLC teams as they look at overall student achievement and would provide another source of information for the RTI
    program.




                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 26 of 95
      ED-5191 November 2005




What evidence/sources support your response?

2007 and 2008 Report Card
TCAP results including achievement, writing and Gateway assessments
TVAAS reports
Three year AYP History (locally developed report)
Special Education End of the Year Report
Special Education December student count
System SACS plan
Evaluations of Professional Development sessions/programs
2008 Teacher Professional Development Questionnaire Data Summary Report




                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 27 of 95
    ED-5191 November 2005


Evaluation of the Prioritized Goals - Narrative Response Required
What are your data driven prioritized goals?
•   To increase the percentage of students with disabilities in grades 3 – 8 who score Proficient or Advanced in
    Reading/Language Arts by 9%.
•   To increase the number of K – 8 ESL students who score Proficient or Advanced in Reading/Language Arts and
    Writing by 9%.
•   To increase the percentage of K – 8 students with disabilities who score Proficient or Advanced in math by 6%.
•   To increase the percentage of 3 – 8 students who score Proficient or Above in Math by:
         Students with Disabilities – 6%
•   To increase the percentage of 3 – 8 students who score Proficient or Above in Language Arts/Reading and
    Writing by:
         Students with Disabilities – 9%
         Limited English Proficient – 9%
•   To increase the percentage of 9 – 12 students who score Proficient or Above in Math by:
    African American – 5%
         Students with Disabilities – 21%
         Limited English – 13%
         CTE – 0.5%
•   To increase the number of 9 – 12 students who score Proficient or Advanced in Language Arts/Reading and
    Writing by:
         Hispanic – 5%
         African American – 1%
         Students with Disabilities – 12%
         Limited English – 40%.
         CTE – 0.5%
•   To increase system ACT English and Math scores by 0.1%
•   To increase the number of boys who score Proficient or Advanced on the Writing Assessment by 3% at every
    grade level.
•   To increase value added gains for 7th grade Language Arts so that it is equal to or greater than the state growth
    standard.
•
                                         th
    To increase value added gains for 8 grade Social Studies so that it is equal to or greater than the state growth
    standard.
•   To improve the value added science scores in 8th grade so that there is no longer a downward trend and that
    they remain above the state growth standard.


Non-Academic Goals for Rutherford County School in priority order:
•   To improve the graduation rate by 2% at high schools that are not on track to meet the 90% graduation
    requirement and to increase the graduation rate of CTE students by 0.5%
•   To extend and enhance the role of PLC teams in developing intervention strategies
•   To recruit, train and retrain Highly Qualified teachers
•   To provide extensive training for all teachers in the new standards and for 9 – 12 teachers in the Tennessee
    Diploma Project in teaching strategies for extended teaching and learning and in non-traditional scheduling
•   To add math and science courses as needed to meet the requirements of the American Diploma Project
•   To provide information to funding authorities to support increased financial support for instructional programs
    to include software, hardware and technology support personnel
•   To identify and purchase a system-wide benchmark assessment that will allow teachers to track the academic
    progress of students across time
•   To purchase an affordable software program that will provide demographic and employment data for teachers
    and support personnel




                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 28 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      COMPONENT 4


           CURRICULAR, INSTRUCTIONAL, ASSESSMENT, AND
                 ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 29 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1a

                                                         CURRICULAR PRACTICES

                                      Standards & Research                                            Data Analysis for                  Comprehensive
Current Curricular                                                   At-Risk and New
                                          Based Aligned                                                  Continuous                       Curriculum for
Practices                                                         Teacher Support System
                                            Curriculum                                                 Improvement                  Differentiated Learners
                                    K-12 RCS Course               Five Teacher                    Analyze Three-year AYP &         Offerings for: Pre School;
                                    Offerings; Curriculum         Facilitator/Mentors,            TVAAS Reports; System            K Readiness; Alg. I, II, and
                                    Scope & Sequence;             including ESL                   and School Staff                 geometry in Gr 7-8;
                                    Hands-on-Science Gr. K-5;     Facilitator/Mentor; ASSIST:     Development for Data             Comprehensive HS
Evidence of Practice                Teachers provided access      Newly Employed Teacher          Analysis; CTE Report Card;       program; Spectrum for
                                    to A Blueprint for Learning   Induction Program; CTE          ACT, Explore, and PLAN           gifted; Honors CTE
                                                                  Occupational Pre-service                                         Classes; Keyboarding
                                                                  Workshops                                                        offered in middle school for
                                                                                                                                   credit

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

Is it a principle & practice of
high-performing school                         Yes                            Yes                              Yes                               Yes
systems?
                                                                                                                                   Effective for elementary,
Has the current practice been
                                             Effective                     Effective                         Effective             less effective in high school
effective or ineffective?
                                                                                                                                   Algebra I
                                    NCLB AYP Reports;             ASSIST Agendas and              Five-Year TCAP History           Five-Year TCAP History
                                    TVAAS Reports; ACT            Evaluation Summary;             and TVAAS Reports; Staff         and TVAAS Reports; Pre
                                    Report; HSTW                  Facilitators’ Logs; CTE         Development                      School Assessment and
                                    Registration; Course          Certificates of Attendance      Agenda/Rosters; CTE              Surveys; D.I. Conference
What data source(s) do you
                                    Offerings; Scope &            and Surveys                     Report Card; System              Agenda; Approved CTE
have that support your answer?
                                    Sequence; software                                            Report Card                      Honors Courses
(identify all applicable sources)
                                    aligned to curriculum;
                                    Hands on Science; PLC
                                    Essential Learning; CTE
                                    and Academic Pathways




                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 30 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                               RCS is in NCLB “Good           RCS is in the fourth year      All Principals and Assistant     TVAAS 3-8 scores indicate
                               Standing” status. On the       of a New Teacher               Principals trained on            all A’s from 2006 thru
                               Report Card 2008, RCS          Facilitator (mentoring)        TVAAS analysis in 2007.          2008. High school 3-year
                               Elem. earned all A’s in        Program. Feedback from         High School value-added          value added is “ABOVE”
                               student achievement and        mentored teachers and          all ABOVE expectations           expectations in all subjects
                               all A’s in value added. High   administrators supports the    except Algebra I (NDD) in        except Algebra I (Below).
Evidence of effectiveness or
                               school 3-year value added      continuation of the            2008                             100% of the 7th and 8th
ineffectiveness
                               is “ABOVE” expectations in     program. Partially funded                                       grade students taking the
                               all subjects except Algebra    by Title II and Title III                                       Algebra I Gateway scored
                               I (Below).                     funds, RCS                                                      P/A with over 99%
                                                              administrators voted the                                        scoring “ADVANCED.”
                                                              facilitator program as #1
                                                              funding priority.
                               Course Offerings at all        System-wide support for All    ALL schools sent                 Differentiated Curricular
                               Comprehensive HS;              New Teachers with one          administrators for the           offerings PK – 12; software
                               Electronically Published       additional Teacher             TVAAS and NCLB                   purchased to address the
Evidence of equitable system
                               Scope & Sequence; All          Facilitator added for          assessment training.             needs of students below,
support for this practice
                               Schools Use the Current        2007/2008                                                       on, and above grade level
                               Adoption for Textbooks &
                               Materials
                               Continue and Revise as         Track Teacher Retention        Continue NCLB and                Continuation of effective
                               State/National Standards       Rates and Survey               TVAAS training and               practices of aligning
                               and New Textbook               Principals and Teachers for    expand itemized analysis         curricular standards to
                               Adoptions Occur; Examine       Improvement Suggestions;       and training as more             Differentiated Instruction
Next Step (changes or
                               AP and CTE industry            Survey Exiting Teachers        formative assessments            techniques.
continuations)
                               Certified offerings, dual      and expand to 2nd and 3rd      become available
                               enrollment; develop IB         year teachers as funding
                               program at Oakland High        becomes available.
                               School.




                                                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 31 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      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?)


The Central Office Staff has a high level of involvement with the schools in implementing research based
high quality curricular practices and materials. With the adoption of each textbook, a team of Central
Office staff and classroom teachers analyze vertical and horizontal alignments to the state framework.
Although the six to nine month process is time consuming, it is a highly productive endeavor that is
followed by stakeholders’ involvement in developing a scope and sequence aligned to standards.
Professional development is required for teachers using the adopted textbook. Within RCS there is a
linkage of curricular support with Special Education, Title I, and Technology Support Services. Textbook
and material adoptions also vary to insure the curriculum is academically challenging to all students.
Examples include the use of more rigorous textbooks/curriculum in high school advanced honors and
AP courses.

Curriculum and Instruction Department staff meetings are scheduled monthly with reports analyzing
curricular and instructional trends along with emerging needs. Appropriate staff is then assigned to
follow up with individual schools or teachers to take action or make recommendations.

Instructional coordinators and specialists are in the schools assisting with curricular and non-curricular
practices on a whole staff or individual teacher basis. Scheduling is paramount as administrative duties
encroach on quality time.

Rutherford County requires teachers to earn 12 hours of approved independent professional
development. After three years of the RCS online in-service and training link, School Station, we
concluded that the software has improved our ability to disseminate training opportunities and track
attendees. Administrators now have the ability to track individual school staff in-service selections as a
factor of the growth component of the evaluation process.



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

Rutherford County Schools recognizes that prioritizing time for curriculum development, selection, and
analysis is essential. Within the constraints of current personnel, we feel that we are using available
time efficiently and effectively in support of curricular needs.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 32 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




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?)

Rutherford County is fortunate in our ability to fund the purchase of new textbooks for all students with
each curricular adoption. The administration and the Board of Education have made full textbook
adoption a priority along with financial support for technology and software. Over $200,000 was spent in
2005 to purchase a Tennessee standards-based concept/grade recovery program for high schools.
During the summer of 2006, teams of teachers were employed to create lessons that fill gaps and
improve alignment within the recovery program to State Curriculum Standards. Twenty-two high
school teachers have been approved for Extended Contract grade/credit recovery and
remediation programs for the 2008/2009 school year.

While additional funding could be used to target curricular materials for gaps identified, as a whole, there
is not a great demand in this area. Our greatest challenge may be the funding necessary to
accommodate the annual 2% to 5% growth in student enrollment and to provide the textbooks and
instructional materials to cover all of the subject area needs.

There is also a financial challenge in maintaining honors, advanced placement, and IB curriculum
choices at the high school level, while also lowering pupil-teacher ratios for under-achieving students.
Career and Technical program offerings are heavily dependent upon federal Perkins funds on order to
stay up-to-date with industry standards, provide supplemental materials for CTE honors classes, and
support Career and Technical student organizations.

In 2008-2009, Rutherford County Schools budgeted over $50,000 in training and dissemination of
materials for the new and more rigorous state curriculum standards that become effective for the
2009-2010 school year. Title III provided training for teachers and administrators to improve
classroom instruction for English language learners.



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

Since Rutherford County has committed to funding textbooks for every student in each adoption cycle,
we believe that we are committing available funding for primary curricular needs. A gap exists in our
ability to adequately expand electronic and printed supplemental materials in support of our research-
based differentiated instruction focus across the spectrum of student achievement.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 33 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1b
                                                  (continued)

                                CURRICULUM GAP ANALYSIS

Curriculum 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 high quality curriculum practices?)

Rutherford County Schools currently employs three general education coordinators, one each for
elementary, middle grades, and high school. In addition there is a Career and Technical Coordinator, an
ESL Coordinator, a Title I Coordinator, a Special Education Coordinator, a combined Teacher Center
and Testing Coordinator, a Technology Coordinator, and specialists to assist with early childhood,
Hands-on-Science, grades 6-12 mathematics and science, grades 6-12 language arts, technology,
homeless students, and parent liaisons. The school system has also provided School Technology
Specialists (STS) in most schools on either a shared or full-time basis to assist in the training and
delivery of curricular supportative hardware and software.    The system continues to fund training
opportunities for additional teachers in support of Advanced Placement (AP) and International
Baccalaureate (IB) curricular offerings. Six CTE secretaries provide support to all CTE teachers.




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

The curricular personnel gap is predominately the need to meet pupil-teacher ratios, add classified
support staff, as well as Central Office staff, with an annual 2%-5% student population increase. To
address growth, RCS will need to open two new schools or expand existing facilities annually
(approximately 1,300 new students in 2007-2008 and 730 new students in 2008-2009) to cover the
growth. RCS employs approximately 300 teachers annually to accommodate growth, retirements,
transfers, and leaves. Additionally, Central Office expansions should include STS growth positions,
additional instructional specialists to separate mathematics and science, social studies, and reading. As
the system’s Response to Intervention (RTI) implementation plan progresses, there will be the need for
additional literacy and/or academic coaches to be assigned to the school level. There is also a need for
an additional person dedicated to academic and other data analyses coupled with interpretive follow up
to the schools as a tool to better analyze curricular and instructional effectiveness. There is an emerging
need for additional personnel to cover pre-school mentoring, elementary growth, and support for
alternately licensed teachers.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 34 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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?)

Rutherford County’s commitment to technology (one computer for every five students in grades K-12)
and appropriate software has proven to be a valuable resource in meeting the differentiated curricular
and instructional needs of students. Software has been selectively chosen to align with state standards
and is being used for remediation, enrichment, as well as concept and grade recovery.

RCS’s commitment to technology support services provides teachers and instructional staff with links to
subject scope and sequence and active web linked sites for additional resources.

There continues to be a good relationship with the Rutherford County Chamber of Commerce Business
Education Partnership, which is annually providing approximately $75,000 in the form of mini-grants to
teachers with innovative teaching/learning strategies. The Chamber also provides school year and
summer institutes for guidance counselors and classroom teachers to better connect the curriculum to
“real world” experiences. Significant partnerships with Middle Tennessee State University and the
Jennings Jones Foundation are also examples of other resources/grants that enhance our curricular
offerings.

Extended contract funds provide a trained instructor for interested students to participate in an after-
school pneumatics and robotics program at the Nissan North America’s training facility.

The Tennessee Business Roundtable provides $2,500 in scholarships to the Virtual Enterprise Business
Plan winners.

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

RCS actively pursues additional grant opportunities and cultivate additional resources beyond the
General Purpose School fund. Updated and additional software along with online course offerings are
needed to expand our curricular offerings for grade recovery, remedial instruction, advanced placement
(AP), dual enrollment, and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses.

Rutherford County Schools has contracted with a grant writer to seek additional funds to support the
CTE Virtual Enterprise initiative.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 35 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.1c

                      CURRICULUM REFLECTIVE QUESTIONS

The completed Curriculum gap analysis should enable the Systemwide 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 system provides curricular and financial support for all schools at a uniform per pupil allocation of
$7,347 per pupil in 2007/2008. This represents $998 per pupil less than the state average. Staff
and material resources have increased at academically challenged schools in the form of additional
middle school reading academies, double dose mathematics, Extended Contract allocations,
educational assistants, and grants such as the Century Community Learning Center at Central Middle.
Certified and classified staffing allocations are annually assessed and adjusted at identified schools to
address NCLB and TVAAS targeted needs. There remains a need to further lower pupil teacher ratios
and provide additional classified SPED inclusion assistants at selected sites to better address academic
challenges. There remains a middle grades discrepancy between K-8 school curricular/co-curricular
offerings and the middle school curricular offerings. There is also a need to up-date technology-
hardware enhancements necessary to run adopted textbook software. CTE program budgets are based
on program needs and instructional costs. Additional CTE funds are provided for supplemental
materials in order to integrate academics into the curriculum.


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

Available curricular funds and resources are effectively allocated among our schools as evidenced by
increases in NCLB, AYP, and TVAAS scores. For 2008, the system was identified as in “Good
Standing” for meeting NCLB requirements. In K-8 math, RCS achieved 96% APY in 2008 as
compared to 83% in 2003. Likewise, K-8 R/LA/W was 95% compared to 90% in 2003. For high
schools, the 2008 R/LA/W P/A% was 96% compared to 94% in 2003. Algebra I AYP scores in
2008 were 90% P/A compared to 89% in 2003. The system authorized the employment of an
additional Algebra I teacher for six of the comprehensive high schools to facilitate additional intervention
time in 2007. Principals submit annual budget requests for to address school specific NCLB needs and
other academic priorities. BEP 2.0 is enhancing our ability to finance targeted needs. The system
funded a summer school program that served over 1,100 students in 2008.


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

Current basic needs are being met; however, there is an increased need for additional staff to lower
pupil-teacher ratios, additional school-based technology persons (STS), additional instructional
specialists to separate mathematics and science, for social studies, and reading specialists. There is
also a growing need for an additional person dedicated to data analysis with follow up to the schools.
There is an emerging need for additional personnel to cover pre-school mentoring, elementary growth,
and support for alternately licensed teachers.




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 36 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                                    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?

One curriculum strength for Rutherford County is our dedication to adopting textbooks and supporting
materials aligned to state standards. Generally, we pilot competing proposed adoption series to
evaluate curricular standards alignment prior to the final selection in the adoption year. Upon adoption,
RCS provides each student with the most current adoption of the texts. Staff and textbook vendors
conduct multiple workshops to train new and existing personnel in using adoptions to meet current
standards. This is evidenced by documentation of textbook, materials, and software orders and in-
service training records. The strongest evidence of an effective curriculum is the fact that RCS is
meeting current NCLB standards and the 2006 thru 2008 TVAAS (value-added) grades were all A’s in
the elementary grades. AYP elementary proficiency in math is currently 96% and reading/language arts
is 95%. Adequate yearly progress of special groups such as students with disabilities and ELL has
increased at a rate three to five times that of the general population. High school math (Algebra I) is
currently at 90% AYP, language arts (English II) at 96%, Biology 98.1% and EOC proficient/advanced
scores are English I at 97.5%, physical science at 97.9%, and US History at 98.0%.

Rutherford County gives the ACT Explore test to all eighth grade students. In 2008, system
averages exceeded the national averages in all four subject areas and the composite. Explore
scores (Rutherford vs. National) were: English (15.2 vs. 14.2); Math (15.5 vs. 15.1); Reading (14.6
vs. 13.8); Science (16.8 vs. 15.9); Composite (15.6 vs. 14.9).

Rutherford County Schools offers honors, advanced honors, AP and honors CTE courses to the high
school population. Oakland High began offering International Baccalaureate courses in 2007/2008 and
has projected a 2009-2010 IB enrollment of 150 IB students.

The six-month adoption process examines horizontal and vertical alignments with state standards. As
skill gaps are identified in the selection process, supplemental materials and software are identified to fill
those gaps. We currently do not see indicators that would lead us to further question adopted textbooks.
The Rutherford County Schools’ textbook adoption process and follow up new textbook introductory
training are major strengths of our curriculum selection and implementation process.

The 2008 state report card detailed a total CTE course enrollment of 19,284 students with a
graduation rate of 94.95% compared to a state rate of 84.40%.




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 37 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




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.

    •   to maintain funding levels to provide newly adopted textbooks and supplementary materials in
        the hands of every student while growing at an annual rate of 2%-5%.
    •   to provide system-wide dissemination and training of revised state curriculum standards.
    •   to provide adequate hardware, software, bandwidth, and supplemental materials to support our
        mission.
    •   to increase the number of students, especially minorities, enrolling in more academically
        rigorous honors, AP, IB courses to enhance value-added scores and better prepare students for
        success in higher education endeavors.
    •   to increase CTE course offerings in order to improve the graduation rate.
    •   to increase CTE and academic integration and participation in nontraditional programs.
    •   to increase local average scores for ACT and Plan.



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

Instructional staff will continually analyze disaggregated data at the school and system level to identify
curriculum gaps and provide for needed adjustments. Existing personnel will address needs within
existing parameters. Growth and improvement and other needs will be addressed by annual budgetary
requests, grant applications, and private funding sources.




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 38 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2a

                                                      INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES

                                       System-wide              Academic               Academic                Instructional
Current Instructional                                                                                                                Instruction Aligned
                                       Differentiated         Remediation             Enrichment                Technology
Practices                                                                                                                               to Standards
                                     Instruction Focus        Opportunities          Opportunities               Support
                                                           Summer School;
                                                                                  Ext Cont Enrichment      Instructional
                                                           Extended Contract                                                         Lesson Plans
                                                                                  Offerings; HS AP,        software; Academy
                                                           school-year                                                               Aligned to
                                    DI Conference in ’08                          Advanced, and            of Reading;
                                                           programs;                                                                 Standards;
                                    for approximately                             Honors Courses in        Homework Hotline;
                                                           Concept/Grade/                                                            Framework for
                                    1,000 Rutherford                              academics and            A+ Software;
                                                           Credit Recovery;                                                          Evaluation Driven
                                    County Schools                                honors CTE;              Extensive Training
Evidence of Practice                                       Central Middle CCL                                                        Staff Development;
                                    Educators and a                               Spectrum for Gifted;     Support; FasttMath
                                                           Transition Grant;                                                         CTE Student
                                    Tools for Success                             Planning for IB          Grades 6-8;
                                                           Reading in the                                                            Competencies,
                                    Conference in 2009                            Program at Oakland       Academy of Math;
                                                           Content and Math;                                                         Rubrics, and Core
                                    for 1,100 teachers.                           High, dual               upgrade of CTE
                                                           Academy of Reading;                                                       Indicators of
                                                                                  enrollment/credit        hardware and
                                                           FasttMath;                                                                Performance
                                                                                  and CLEP                 software
                                                           Academy of Math

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

Is it a principle & practice of
high-performing school                      YES                   YES                      YES                      YES                       YES
systems?
                                                           Effective for Ext.
                                                           Cont. & Summer
                                                           School, DD Math
                                                           and Academy of
Has the current practice been
                                          Effective        Reading;                     Effective                 Effective                Effective
effective or ineffective?
                                                           Grade/Credit
                                                           Recovery needs
                                                           additional time; CCL
                                                           Effective




                                                                    Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 39 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                                                                                   Extended Contract        Software Offerings;
                                                            Ext. Contract          Enrichment Apps          Homework Hotline
                                                            Application Approval   '08/'09; RCS Course      Report; Technology
                                                                                                                                      Lesson Plans; New
What data source(s) do you          NCLB & TVAAS            '08/'09; Community     Description              Training Report;
                                                                                                                                      Teacher Induction
have that support your answer?      Reports '08;            Centered Learning      Handbook;                CTE and Perkins
                                                                                                                                      Agenda; CTE
(identify all applicable sources)   Conference Agenda       Contract (CCLC);       Spectrum Program         budget reports;
                                                                                                                                      Report Card
                                                            Summer School          Summary; Dual            TESS – Technology
                                                            Brochure               Enrollment/Credit        in Education Survey
                                                                                   Data                     System
                                                                                                                                      RCS in NCLB “Good
                                                                                                                                      Standing” status. K-
                                                                                                                                      8 Report Card 2008,
                                                                                   School year
                                                            Summer School                                                             achieving all A’s in
                                                                                   Extended Contract
                                                            2008 - 1,148                                                              achievement and
                                    Grades 3-8 attained                            enrichment               Homework Hotline
                                                            students with                                                             value-added gains.
                                    all A’s in 2008 in                             programs served          received 4,333 calls
                                                            approximately 697                                                         High school 3-year
                                    achievement and                                1,007 students in        in ‘07/’08. For
                                                            high school                                                               value added is
                                    value-added scores                             ‘07/’08; IB program      ‘08/’09 RCS
                                                            students receiving                                                        “ABOVE”
                                    on the State Report                            at Oakland High;         employed 30
                                                            additional credit.                                                        expectations in all
                                    Card. High school                              Grades 3-8: TVAAS        School
                                                            Extended Contract                                                         subjects except
Evidence of effectiveness or        TVAAS Gateway &                                75%-tile students’       Technology
                                                            personnel served                                                          Algebra I.
ineffectiveness                     EOC averages                                   group percentiles        Specialists, 3
                                                            3,962 students for                                                        Title III
                                    “ABOVE”                                        exceeded the 75%         curriculum
                                                            remediation and                                                           Accountability
                                    expectations, except                           expectations:            technology
                                                            intervention                                                              Benchmarks met
                                    Algebra I. Three-year                          Math = 82%               specialists, 18
                                                            programs during                                                           for 2007-2008; CTE
                                    Gateway & EOC                                  R/LA = 81%               technicians, and 2
                                                            the ‘07/’08 school                                                        improved in
                                    “ABOVE,” except for                            Science = 81%            cable installation
                                                            year. 70 summer                                                           academic
                                    Algebra I                                      SS = 80%                 persons.
                                                            school graduates                                                          attainment in
                                                            in 2008                                                                   reading/la (91.38%
                                                                                                                                      to 95.15%) and
                                                                                                                                      math (97.29% to
                                                                                                                                      98.39%)
                                                                                                                                      Principals require
                                                            Summer School                                   Classroom
                                                                                                                                      state standard to be
                                                            Transportation         Summer School            Computers in K-12
                                                                                                                                      referenced in lesson
                                    NCLB AYP Individual     provided Gr. K-12 at   Transportation           at ratio of 1per 5
Evidence of equitable system                                                                                                          plans; Online In-
                                    School Reports          system expense;        Provided Gr. K-12;       Students; School
support for this practice                                                                                                             service offerings;
                                    Indicate Gains          Implementation of      HS Honors and AP         Technology
                                                                                                                                      CTE secretaries for
                                                            Credit/Grade           Course Enrollments       Specialists at each
                                                                                                                                      middle & high
                                                            Recovery Software                               School
                                                                                                                                      school



                                                                     Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 40 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                                                                                                                            Continue and
                                                                         Summer school &                                    expand availability
                        Continue/Monitor DI
                                                                         Ext. Cont '09/'10;                                 of electronic lesson
                        strategies for '09/'10;                                                   Continue hardware/
                                                  continue summer        add additional CTE                                 plans; implement
                        schedule 2010 Tools                                                       software upgrades
                                                  school & develop       Industry Certified                                 curriculum
                        for Success Conf. to                                                      aligned to state
                                                  Extended Contract      courses in                                         mapping for
                        include collaborative                                                     standards; continue
Next Step (changes or                             interventions for      2009/2010; train                                   Algebra I;
                        strategic                                                                 to upgrade CTE
continuations)                                    '09/’10; monitor       additional AP                                      implement middle
                        interventions to                                                          hardware and
                                                  Grade/Credit           teachers and                                       school math
                        strengthen PLCs;                                                          software; phase in
                                                  Recovery and adjust    additional IB                                      summer institute;
                        refine Response to                                                        LCD projectors in
                                                  as needed              teachers at                                        seek secretarial
                        Invention (RTI)                                                           classroom.
                                                                         Oakland High                                       support funding for
                        Programs
                                                                         School                                             CTE.




                                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 41 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      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?)

The focus of the Rutherford County School System is meeting the instructional needs of a diverse and
growing student population. “Time on task” for support and delivery of instruction is of the highest
priority. Job descriptions of central office staff include staff development and support services for
instruction. Teachers attend required training facilitated by the staff when a new textbook is adopted;
Blueprint for Learning inservice opportunities are offered annually; staff conducts data driven needs
inservices at individual schools; the online inservice announcement and scheduling program originally
purchased in 2005 continues to be updated to better disseminate opportunities; staff are following up the
August 2009 Tools for Success Conference with inservice offerings; and Central Office staff select
classroom teachers to participate in development of curricular scope and sequence and formative
assessments. CTE coordinator provides support for HSTW, technology, integration, budgetary, and all
aspects of the industry.




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

There is a need for additional instructional specialists to devote time to assist teachers in research-
based strategies for science, social studies, and reading instruction at all grade levels. We recognize
that additional time will also be required to provide direction and strengthen support for programs that
challenge our higher achieving students. Rutherford County is implementing additional National
Certification courses in CTE and also implementing an International Baccalaureate (IB) magnet program
at Oakland High School.

Additional training time is required to transition teachers to the more rigorous curriculum
standards, for CTE integration, and high school extended teaching/learning time.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 42 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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?)

Instructional spending is a priority for the Rutherford County School System. A May 23, 2005 article by
Diane Long in the Tennessean reported expenditures on seventeen urban and middle Tennessee
school systems. Data extracted from the tables indicates that RCS had the highest percentage budget
expenditure for “direct classroom instruction” at 66.46%.

Funding for the instructional program is provided by the General Purpose School Fund, state and federal
entitlements, grants, and foundations. According to the 2008 Report Card, per pupil expenditure for
RCS is $998 per pupil below the state average. Because we are the fastest growing school system in
Tennessee, the demand for facilities needed to meet pupil/teacher ratios competes locally with available
funding for instructional purposes. If debt service and capital outlay dollars were considered, Rutherford
County more favorably aligns with the state average for total educational expenditures.

Rutherford County uses an intensive and sustained approach for research-based instructional
improvement. Beginning in 2004 and continuing, RCS has dedicated additional Title II and Title V
funding for the strengthening of instructional practices. From 2005 through 2009, Rutherford County
contracted with Staff Development for Educators to present a systemwide Differentiated Instruction
Conference for up to 1,000 teachers. Perkins and Title II monies provided funding for administrators and
teachers to attend conferences for High Schools that Work and Making Middle Grades Work along with
additional workshops and on-site assessments. Title II and Perkins funds provide CTE teachers and
administrators the opportunity to attend the Association for Career and Technical Education Conference.
Additional Title II funding has been used for a new teacher induction program and follow-up mentoring.
Title I continues to support the differentiated instruction focus by providing additional funding for
sustained training at Title I and identified at-risk schools.




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

Continued and expanded funding for staff training is needed to strengthen differentiated instruction skills
for existing staff and for approximately 300 teachers employed annually. The instructional facilitators’
responsibilities have increased due to state requirements for alternately licensed teachers and the
continuing needs of new teachers. Those positions, partially funded with Title II and III funds, should
be the permanent responsibility of the General Purpose School Funds. Mentoring for existing staff,
including at-risk classroom teachers is a high priority. As our Response to Intervention (RTI) plan is
implemented, funding will be required to provide supplemental materials and additional staffing for our
at-risk populations. Growth of central office instructional staff has not kept pace with system growth.

Consideration should be given to the funding of CTE secretaries at the school level, within the GPS
budget.

Training for the new curriculum standards will be needed in 2009-2010 and beyond. Training for
new standards is ongoing but specific needs will become more evident after 2010 test results are
reported.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 43 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2b
                                                  (continued)

                              INSTRUCTIONAL GAP ANALYSIS
Instructional 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 instructional practices?)

The Curriculum Gap Analysis addressed the need for additional system wide instructional personnel.
However, maintaining current levels of instructional support is challenged by our high growth rate in
staffing equivalent of two new schools annually. A snapshot in February 2009 indicates that 22% or
approximately 600 teachers have less than 4 years of teaching experience. The Central Office
instructional personnel gap is also widening. It is difficult to maintain current levels of instructional
support with rapidly growing teacher and student populations with minimal increases in central office
personnel.

The annual addition and replacement of approximately 300 new teachers compound Rutherford
County’s ability to recruit, train, mentor, and retain a highly qualified teaching force. The elementary,
middle level, high school, CTE, and Special Education Coordinators assist the human resource staff at
recruitment fairs to identify candidates. Declining Extended Contract funds makes it more difficult to
staff school year and summer intervention programs for remediation, concept, grade, and credit recovery
without pulling additional dollars from general purpose school funds.

A 2007/2008 study within Rutherford County Schools indicates a positive correlation (.508) between the
percentage of teachers with 0-3 years experience and the percentage of economically disadvantaged
students at a school. Additionally, there is also a positive correlation (.383) between the percentage of
teachers with a B.S. only degree and the percentage of economically disadvantaged students at a
school. The large number of new teachers being employed by RCS, which generates more BS level
teachers, explains some of the discrepancy. Additionally, increased enrollment and the subsequent
need for new schools have increased in our lower socio-economic geographic areas.               Additional
evaluation of the trend is warranted.



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

The number of Instructional Facilitators (4 general ed.; 1 ESL) is insufficient to adequately mentor the
approximately 300 new teachers annually employed, assist with identified at-risk teachers, and to meet
with alternative licensure teachers. Student population increases necessitates additional central office
support specialists for technology, science, social studies, elementary, pre-school, and reading. A
rapidly growing ELL population along with increased demands for services to gifted and special needs
population creates the need for personnel with specialty certifications. Additionally, there is an
increasing need for a full-time position dedicated to testing and data analysis to assist in identifying
instructional priorities and clerical support for CTE.

RCS needs to ensure that schools with higher populations of lower socio-economic students are staffed
with experienced teachers holding advanced degrees in percentages comparable to the system
average.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 44 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




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?)

Rutherford County is continuously seeking outside resources to assist with the training and support of
personnel in research-based strategies. Examples include the Chamber of Commerce Business
Education Partnership (CCBEP) for training teachers and counselors; CCBEP mini-grant funds to
teachers for innovative practices; new state lottery funded preschool programs; joint RCS and Nissan
Skills Training for Enhanced Potential (STEP) robotics program; joint summer institutes for personnel
with Middle Tennessee State University; and other grants as available. The Jennings and Rebecca
Jones Foundation provides a summer reading workshop for teachers. Actively pursuing these
opportunities enhances our ability to narrow the gap in acquiring and maintaining highly qualified
personnel with in-depth knowledge of content, pedagogy, and developmental needs of students.



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

Other instructional support issues focus on our ability to upgrade instructional hardware and software to
maintain and/or expand current levels with the 2%-5% annual student enrollment growth rate and the
need to open the equivalent of two additional schools per year. We are currently budgeting
approximately $300,000 per year from general purpose funds to upgrade instructional technology, which
is not keeping pace with aging instructional hardware replacement needs. There remains a funding gap
in other resources for instructional technology replacements and improvements.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 45 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                    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?

Rutherford County seeks to maintain equity while meeting mandated special needs and poverty driven
programs. Local resources, such as additional educational assistants and literacy coaches, have been
employed to close the gap between Title I and non-Title I schools. When comparing schools with high
concentrations of poverty students and schools with NCLB issues, we realize that equity does not
always equate to sameness. Additional instructional initiatives above the basic program are provided to
identified high-risk student population schools. CTE programs and course offerings are determined by
student surveys and workforce demands.

Adequacy is a relative question that can never be affirmatively answered as long as we maintain the
desire for improvement and high achievement. Additional instructional resources will always be a
priority with the system belief statement “learning promotes individual student success.”



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

Rutherford County’s capital outlay dollars for facilities will continue to compete for local funding of new
and expanded instructional programs. Demands for high achievement and capital cost will increasingly
become a focus as the size and diversity of our student population changes, but we have been fortunate
that our Board of Education recognizes the instructional mission of our schools.

The CTE Coordinator meets annually with high school principals to review new course requests,
equipment, and instructional material needs prior to preparing the annual budget.

Data supports the conclusion that Rutherford County Schools’ instructional initiatives, funded at
$998 below the state ADA per pupil expenditure, resulted in a high level of student performance. We
remain cognizant of the fact that the student population growth and student diversity will continue to
impact Rutherford County’s ability to fund a rigorous instructional program while at the same time
meeting capital growth demands.




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 46 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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

When measured against NCLB standards, TVAAS data, and system comparisons, Rutherford County is
meeting the basic needs of our students. It is our desire, however, to improve instructional offerings for
regular and special needs students and expand the opportunities for higher achieving students. The
mission of the Rutherford County School System is to empower today’s students to grasp
tomorrow’s opportunities.




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 47 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.2d

                      INSTRUCTIONAL SUMMARY QUESTIONS

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?

One of Rutherford County’s instructional strengths is our ability to provide a quality instructional program
to a rapidly growing diverse student population. We currently have 46 different languages spoken in our
schools. Despite the challenge, the 2008 Report Card provides NCLB, TVAAS, and ACT data
supporting our instructional competencies. Since 2003, Elementary AYP proficiency in math has
increased from 88% to 96%, Reading/L.A. from 90% to 95%. AYP of special groups such as students
with disabilities and ELL have increased at a rate three to five times that of the general population. High
school math is currently at 90% AYP, language arts at 96%, and all EOC tests exceed a 97%
proficiency rate. Currently, Rutherford County’s three-year value-added ACT scores remain ABOVE
expected outcomes. Rutherford County continues to bring in new programs and stay on the cutting
edge in CTE. The CTE Report Card reflects improvement in reading/language arts (91.38% to
95.15%) and mathematics (97.29% to 98.39%).

Since 2003, elementary students scoring AYP “Advanced” in mathematics and reading/language
arts rose from 39% to 57% and from 38% to 56% respectively. High school reading/language arts
“Advanced” scores increased from 54% to 63% of the student population. With the exception of
Algebra I, we have been successful in moving additional students from “Proficiency” to
“Advanced” scores. These increases lend credibility for success in differentiating instruction to
meet individual student needs.



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.

Based upon Component 3 data our goals are the following:
   • to strengthen instructional interventions that assist all high schools in meeting their NCLB
       “improvement track” target graduation rates for NCLB identified subgroups
   • to address rising NCLB academic benchmarks primarily in the subgroups for students with
       disabilities, limited English proficient, Hispanic, and African-American
   • to create professional development and mentoring support for staff to advance
       instructional strategies that address Tennessee’s new and more rigorous standards
       while differentiating instruction
   • to build upon our current offerings so that we achieve our mission to empower today’s
       students to grasp tomorrow’s opportunities.
   • to maintain high value-added scores while strengthening value-added for the highest achieving
       groups equal to or greater than the state growth standard




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 48 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




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

Using a data-driven approach, the challenges will be met by a collaborative effort among stakeholders to
analyze and implement research-based instructional practices. Additional funding will be required from
the General Purpose School Fund, federal and state Title programs, and a combination of grants and
programs from both public and private sources.




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 49 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3a

                                          ASSESSMENT PRACTICES

                                                                                                         Professional
                         Grades K-12                          Traditional &        System-wide                                 Assessment
Current Assessment                          Diagnostic                                                   Development
                          Formative                            Alternative           Writing                                 Communication
Practices                                  Assessments                                                        for
                         Assessments                          Assessments          Assessments                               to Stakeholders
                                                                                                         Assessments
                                          TCAP; Phelps
                                          Kind. Screen;
                                          2nd- Grade
                                          COGAT; K-5
                                          reading
                                          benchmark;
                                                                                                        Annual
                                          DIBELS (15        Portfolio
                                                                                                        principal/asst.
                                          schools); Iowa    assessments in
                                                                                                        principal/staff
                                          Algebra           special
                                                                                                        AYP & TVAAS
                                          Aptitude;         education; Kuder
                        Professional                                                                    assessment
                                          Home/Private      CTE; 2008
                        Learning                                                                        training
                                          school credit     ThinkLink
                        Communities                                               Three                                      System Web-link
                                          tests; PLC        formative
                        formative                                                 systemwide            Additional           to test data;
Evidence of Practice                      Formative         assessment
                        assessments                                               writing prompts       training for 10      Five-Year history
                                          assessments 4     funding for 23
                        and ThinkLink                                             per year Gr 3-12      graduation           to principals/staff
                                          times per year.   schools
                        assessments in                                                                  coaches
                                          ACT, Explore,     including high
                        at-risk schools
                                          and Plan; LAS     school
                                                                                                        ThinkLink
                                          Links and         Algebra I; CTE
                                                                                                        Algebra I training
                                          ELDA; Simple      Performance
                                                                                                        for all high
                                          Assessment for    Indicators
                                                                                                        schools
                                          8th graders to
                                          evaluate
                                          technology
                                          skills; NAEP
                                          assessment for
                                          HSTW site.




                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 50 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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

Is it a principle & practice of
                                          Yes                Yes                     Yes                  Yes                   Yes                   Yes
high-performing school systems?

Has the current practice been
                                        Effective          Effective              Effective             Effective            Effective             Effective
effective or ineffective?

                                                                                                                                              Web Site Links;
                                                                             Special               System-wide                                Six-year TCAP
What data source(s) do you have     PLC documents                            Education             practice                                   History by
                                                       Sample Tests                                                      Training Agenda;
that support your answer?           & Think Link                             Summaries;            summaries;                                 school/system;
                                                       and Summaries                                                     Sign-in Sheets
(identify all applicable sources)   reports                                  Kuder                 State Report                               TCAP Parent
                                                                             Summaries             Card                                       Copies; Board
                                                                                                                                              Minutes
                                    Formative                                                      System-wide
                                    assessment                                                     Grades 5, 8,
                                    purchases:                                                     have received
                                                       Individualized        SPED
                                    in 2008/2009                                                   A’s on the            RCS earned all
                                                       student               portfolios:
                                    purchased                                                      report card for       A’s on the ’08
                                                       placement for         2005-06 – 158,
                                    ThinkLink for                                                  last three years      TVAAS report.
                                                       instructional         2006-07 – 170,
                                    6,322 students                                                 and are above         High school          Positive
Evidence of effectiveness or                           effectiveness;        2007-08 – 165,
                                    in higher                                                      state averages.       TVAAS is             feedback
ineffectiveness                                        ACT Explore           2008-2009 –
                                    poverty                                                        Grade 11              “ABOVE” in           stakeholders
                                                       used to improve       194; Kuder
                                    schools, 2,351                                                 writing remains       every subject
                                                       high school           summaries; CTE
                                    ThinkLink Alg. I                                               statistically         except in
                                                       placement for         Report Card;
                                    tests, and                                                     above                 Algebra I
                                                       ‘08/’09               CTE enrollments
                                    DIBELS tests                                                   projections for
                                    for over 4,000                                                 the three-year
                                    K-1 students.                                                  average.
                                    All schools have                                                                     All Schools
                                    PLC formative                                                  Director              participated in
                                                                                                                                              All Rutherford
Evidence of equitable system        assessments.       System-wide           System-wide           Requires All          TVAAS training
                                                                                                                                              County Schools
support for this practice           ThinkLink basic    practice              Practice              Schools To            and value-added
                                                                                                                                              Included
                                    assessment for                                                 Participate           scores are
                                    at-risk schools                                                                      increasing




                                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 51 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                                                                                   PLC school
                                           Continuation
                        Continue to                                                team will
                                           with adjustments
                        monitor and                                                modify writing
                                           as needed
                        restructure PLC                                            plan for school                            Continue links
                                                                                                         Continue training
                        formative                                                  to raise writing                           and consider
                                           Train staff on     Continuation                               for CRT changes
Next Step (changes or   assessments;                                               scores to equal                            online parent
                                           the use of ACT     with adjustments                           and
continuations)          develop                                                    or exceed                                  portal with STAR
                                           EXPLORE and        as needed                                  Disaggregation
                        questions                                                  reading and                                attendance when
                                           PLAN for better                                               of Data
                        aligned with new                                           language arts                              available
                                           academic
                        standards.                                                 performance
                                           placement of
                                                                                   scores
                                           students




                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 52 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      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 central office provides staff development in alternative assessments and data analysis. Time is
provided for Professional Learning Communities to develop and implement formative assessments at
the elementary, middle, and high school levels. CTE instructors are in the process of developing
formative assessments.

The system continuously trains central office staff and principals annually in data analysis and
intervention strategies. Training of teachers in data analysis at the school level is increasing with many
schools training and giving individual teachers access to the TVAAS website. School level in-services
prioritize additional time on instructional intervention strategies after the data analysis.

The Director of Schools and staff from the Curriculum and Instruction Department meet individually
with schools that are not in “Good Standing” under NCLB criteria. Monitoring visits to the schools
follow these initial sessions.

The Director of Schools requires at least five collaborative meetings among principals in each of the
following school grade structures: K-5, K-8, 6-8, and 9-12. The Director and Instructional Staff attend
each of these sessions and participate in discussions of curricular, instructional, and assessment issues.



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

Additional time will be required to expand development and implementation of formative assessments
throughout all grade levels along with follow-up time for disaggregated analysis of the results.
Rutherford County Schools is in the second year of implementing Professional Learning Communities
within the schools under the direction of Dr. Bob Eaker and Dr. Jim Huffman from MTSU. One of the
key principals of the PLC is the development of common formative assessments followed by an item
analysis of the results.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 53 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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?)

Rutherford County currently uses standards aligned software, assessments provided with textbook
adoptions, teacher collaborative assessments, and commercial assessments for formative testing. The
purchase of commercial system-wide formative tests in key curriculum areas will require significant
monetary investment for the system. The development and/or purchase of system-wide formative tests
in key curriculum areas poses a financial challenge since commercial formative testing programs
typically cost $8 to $10 per student. ThinkLink formative assessments were provided to thirteen
higher poverty elementary and middle schools and for standard level Algebra I programs in ten
high schools in 2008/2009. Funds were not available to expand ThinkLink testing to other schools.
We are anticipating that the creation of Professional Learning Communities will lead schools in the
development of on-site formative tests. Research supports school staff developing their own
assessments because of the effect it has on increasing teacher awareness of alignment to state
curriculum standards. Approximately $80,000 was expended to purchase reporting scanners for
seventeen schools to enhance PLC team formative assessment analysis.


RCS is currently funding a system-created kindergarten test and provides ThinkLink® diagnostic
assessments grades 1-2 for analysis and data driven decision changes. All second grade students are
also given a standardized cognitive abilities test to assist in the early identification of students for gifted
services and students with significant cognitive impairments.




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

Budgetary consideration will be given to funding the purchase or creation of additional formative
assessments and tracking software to enhance our Response to Intervention (RTI) strategies.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 54 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                      TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.3b
                                                  (continued)

                                ASSESSMENT GAP ANALYSIS

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?)

Rutherford County has a half-time position dedicated to testing services. The current testing
coordinator has the dual role of Teacher Center and Testing Coordinator along with the monitoring of
several federal Title programs. Staff training for disaggregation and interpretation of TVAAS and
the state report card data is handled jointly by the Instruction and Instructional Technology
Departments. The Testmate Clarity software trainer also has a primary responsibility as the Middle
Level Instructional Technology Specialist.

Instruction Department staff members are proactive in TVAAS and NCLB data analysis, providing
individual analysis for targeted and at-risk schools. Annual training for data analysis is jointly conducted
by members of the Instruction Department, Technology Department, and the Testing Coordinator. The
CTE Coordinator meets with principals to review the CTE Report Card data.




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

A gap exists in personnel for data analysis when the fifth largest and fastest growing school system in
Tennessee does not have a full time person dedicated to the analysis and dissemination of data to
various departments and schools. The most acute need is for data analysis related to student
achievement and the tracking of results obtained from initiatives associated with the system’s
improvement plan.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 55 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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?)

Currently, Rutherford County relies heavily on purchased software and assessments provided by
textbook publishers. More analysis is needed to verify accuracy of the purported alignment to
Tennessee’s standards.

A small segment of our special education population participates in alternative assessments.
Unfortunately, the only viable option for this group is the portfolio when meeting state and NCLB
requirements.

A few schools have purchased an integrated copier and test-analysis machine. The associated software
gives immediate formative test item analysis feedback to teachers and administrators. The equipment is
approximately $4,500 per unit and system-wide use is limited due to budgetary constraints.
Approximately $80,000 in system funds was also expended to purchase reporting scanners for
seventeen schools to enhance PLC team formative assessment analysis.

Classroom Performance Systems (CPS) and interactive white boards were provided to all schools and
are widely used at the classroom level to provide immediate student achievement feedback for teacher-
created tests. Because of greater variability in alignment to standards for individual teacher created
tests, we will be moving to a collaborative model for the development of formative tests for both
academics and CTE.

All grade levels are utilizing assessment tools associated with textbook adoptions. This is becoming an
increasingly useful resource as publishers provide assessments better aligned to Tennessee curriculum
standards. Formats include printed, software driven, and online versions with good to excellent
prescriptive suggestions.

Software purchases and system training began in 2006/2007 to enable the system to pre-slug state test
forms and to create system-level scannable forms. System-created surveys on scannable forms will
better equip the system to assess stakeholders’ real-time perceptions of students/parents/staff on
academic and non-academic issues.




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

Professional Learning Communities will build collaborative use of system created assessments, but a
gap still exists in utilizing online and textbook provided assessments because of the lack of upgraded
computer hardware that supports commercial formative assessments. Several elementary schools are
having difficulty using the electronic assessment module included with the mathematics adoption
because of computer hardware and software incompatibility. Additionally, middle and high schools are
limited in the use of CPS and scanning systems because of financial constraints to purchase additional
units of this equipment along with the computers needed for producing diagnostic results down to the
classroom level.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 56 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                  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?

ThinkLink® assessments were provided to thirteen at-risk elementary and middle schools and
ten Algebra I programs in 2008/2009. Other schools have become increasingly dependent upon their
own resources to address this need or to develop in-house formative assessments. The size of our
system continues to make this a budgetary challenge when competing for higher prioritized needs.

There is equity and adequacy in elementary summative assessments as evidenced by the
systems budgetary commitment to ThinkLink® testing in grades one and two and a cognitive
ability test also in grade two. There are no current plans to expand additional high school system-
wide summative assessments beyond state provided Gateway and End-of-Course tests.

All schools could benefit from the recent purchase of design software that can be used to create
scannable opinion surveys. This software will allow Rutherford County Schools to better analyze needs
and perceptions of our stakeholders.

The CTE Coordinator assists the three High Schools That Work sites in developing action plans and
monitoring progress.




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

While we are going beyond state requirements for summative assessments, funds and resources remain
inadequate to effectively meet all of our formative assessment needs. Although some local funds and
Title funds have been allocated to address these needs, staff development and instructional
requirements have been given a higher priority.

The CTE Coordinator administers the three High Schools That Work grants to ensure that needs and
requirements are being met.




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 57 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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

TCAP AYP achievement data shows proficiency in math and language arts for the ALL subgroups in
grades 3-8. The greatest AYP challenges in grades 3-8 are the SWD and LEP subgroups, but both
currently are meeting AYP or Safe-Harbor goals at the system level. TVAAS and achievement scores
were all A’s in 2008.

High schools have likewise performed well on TVAAS standards and on NCLB proficiency
standards in 2008. Mathematics is currently 7% above AYP requirements and Language Arts 3%
above AYP requirements for the ALL subgroup. While the system is not on Target status, we
foresee additional challenges as the AYP requirement percentages rise, especially in the SWD, LEP,
African American, and ED subgroups.

When referencing current AYP and value-added requirements, there is a need for additional formative
testing to accurately assess disaggregated subgroup performance against state standards. As AYP
performance standards rise, the need will become increasingly acute.




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 58 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                  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?

   •   System-wide use of technology and assessment software is a strength based upon our
       technology usage reports.
   •   A sustained commitment by the central office to system-wide assessment training and data
       analysis is evidenced by achieving all A’s for value-added and achievement on the 2008 State
       Report Card.
   •   System-wide PLC days are used by principals and staff to collaboratively develop and
       disseminate formative tests as evidenced by school level inservice agendas.
   •   Blackman High School, LaVergne High and Eagleville High have received High Schools
       That Work grants for 2009/2010 to continue HSTW initiatives.



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.

   •   to develop or acquire additional standards-aligned formative assessments at the K-5, K-8, and
       9-12 schools including constructive response assessments more closely aligned with NAEP and
       ACT requirements.
   •   to ensure and promote awareness, training, and utilization of various on-line and off-line
       software assessments, including the Classroom Performance System that will facilitate
       immediate feedback with disaggregated reports as a tool to determine efficacy for scientifically-
       based research of instructional interventions.
   •   to provide additional personnel to analyze disaggregated data and assist schools in interpreting
       data and implementing reforms based upon individual school data.
   •   to partner with MTSU, Motlow, Nashville State Community College, and the Tennessee
       Technology Centers, to develop third party CTE end-of-sequence assessments, dual-credit
       courses, and dual-enrollment courses.




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 59 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




Assessment Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required

 How will we address our challenges?

Rutherford County will allocate additional time and resources to assist schools in disaggregating data
and purchasing or developing formative assessments for all students.            Professional Learning
Communities (PLC) training began in 2006/2007 with implementation in all schools in 2007/2008. PLC
includes a strong training component in the systematic development and analysis of formative tests.
Budgetary consideration will be given to employment of additional personnel and staff training to assist
schools in interpreting data and implementing reforms based upon individual school needs.




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 60 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4a

                                                    ORGANIZATIONAL PRACTICES

Current                                                                                  High Quality
                                Intervention     Comprehensive        Professional                          System-wide        Recruitment &        Administrator
                                                                                            Staff
Organizational                   Coaching           Budget              Learning
                                                                                          Develop-
                                                                                                            Technology          Employment         Collaboration &
Practices                                          Planning           Communities                               Plan            of H.Q. Staff        Evaluation
                                                                                            ment
                                                                                                                                H.Q. teacher
                                                                                                                               recruitment;
                                                                                                                               aggressive
                                                                                                           In-classroom        participation in
                                                                                         ASSIST:           computers K-        teacher
                               Fifteen elem.
                                                                                         Teacher           12 at a 1:5         recruitment         Required
                               Literacy & Math
                                                                                         Induction;        ratio;              fairs; MTSU         Principals’
                               Intervention
                                                                                         Diff. Inst.       instructional       collaboration;      Collaborative
                               Coaches for       Comprehensive        Professional
                                                                                         Conferences       software,           Hosted RCS          Mtgs each Yr
                               RTI; employed     budget planning      Learning
                                                                                         from Aug.’        training, and       recruitment         K-5, K-8, Middle,
Evidence of Practice           or identified     includes all         Communities
                                                                                         05 through        support;            fair for            H.S.; Annual
                               10 graduation     departments &        established in
                                                                                         Aug. ‘09; In-     purchase CPS        approximately       Director's
                               coaches           individual schools   all schools
                                                                                         service           systems and         600                 Evaluation for
                               during 2007-
                                                                                         Guide;            management          applicants;         Principals and
                               2008 and
                                                                                         Sustained         software;           Chamber of          Assistant Supts.
                               2008-2009.
                                                                                         Training          upgrade CTE         Commerce
                                                                                                           technology          qualify of life
                                                                                                                               video;
                                                                                                                               Math/Science
                                                                                                                               incentive pay

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

Is it a principle & practice
of high-performing school           Yes                 Yes                 Yes               Yes                Yes                 Yes                  Yes
systems?




                                                                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 61 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                             Promising;
Has the current practice
                             continue
been effective or                                  Effective         Effective          Effective         Effective            Effective            Effective
                             monitoring
ineffective?
                             grad. rate
                                                                                     ASSIST
                                                                                                       System                                  Collaborative
                                                                                     Agenda;
                                                                                                       Technology                              meeting minutes,
                                                                                     Differentiated                        Director's
                                                                                                       Plan; TESS                              principals’ &
                                                                                     Instruction                           memo;
What data source(s) do you   Employment        Budget                                                  survey;                                 assistant
                                                                  Documents          Offerings; In-                        recruitment fair
have that support your       lists and         documents;                                              Website of tech                         superintendents’
                                                                  supporting PLC     service                               reg.; MTSU
answer? (identify all        training          budget                                                  staff; School                           Performance
                                                                  components         guide, School                         pre-service
applicable sources)          documents         memorandums                                             Station; Web                            Contracts;
                                                                                     Stations web                          Classes; Online
                                                                                                       Links; CTE                              Performance
                                                                                     link; board                           Applications
                                                                                                       budget                                  Goal Setting
                                                                                     contract
                                                                                                       expenditures                            Memo
                                                                                     approvals
                             Formative
                                                                  PLC                Evidence of       Teachers
                             assessments                                                                                                       Attendance at
                                                                  implemented in     classroom         trained to
                             and progress                                                                                                      prof. growth
                                                                  ALL schools in     practices;        technology          RCS
                             monitoring                                                                                                        opportunities for
                                               High TCAP          2007/2008.         survey            plan; Support       employed
                             indicate                                                                                                          data driven
                                               scores although    Director           indicated         Tech. Services      approximately
                             structured                                                                                                        decision-making;
Evidence of effectiveness                      $998 below state   scheduled fall     73.24% of         report; new         300+ new or
                             intervention is                                                                                                   principals’
or ineffectiveness                             average ADM        and winter         respondents       tech plan           replacement
                             working.                                                                                                          contracts
                                               expenditure for    face-to-face       rated most        developed in        teachers with
                             Graduation                                                                                                        include
                                               2007/2008          meetings for       or all staff      ‘07/’08;            99.6% H.Q. in
                             data is not                                                                                                       academic goals
                                                                  principals to      develop-          additional CTE      2007-2008
                             available, but                                                                                                    and PLC
                                                                  produce            ment was          technology
                             dropout rate is                                                                                                   implementation
                                                                  evidence.          high quality.     upgrades
                             improving.
                                               All schools and                                         System-wide
                             15 of 24 elem.    departments                                             practice;
                                                                                                                           Human
                             schools in        submit annual                                           School
                                                                                                                           Resource
Evidence of equitable        08/09 RTI         budgets; ADM       Director's                           Technology                              System-wide
                                                                                     Required                              records and
system support for this      pilot. All high   allocation to      system-wide                          Specialists                             practice for all
                                                                                     system-wide                           99.6% of core
practice                     schools have      schools; entire    requirement                          assignments;                            administrators
                                                                                                                           courses w/HQ
                             graduation        board comprises                                         RAM
                                                                                                                           teacher
                             coaches.          the budget                                              purchased for
                                               committee                                               h.s. CTE




                                                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 62 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005


                        Monitor                                                                   Upgrade
                                        Continue                                Continue
                        assessments                                                               hardware,
                                        effective                               effective                             Seek additional
                        and grad                                                                  Increase
                                        practices and        Continue           practice                              recruitment
Next Step (changes or   rates; expand                                                             bandwidth,                              Continue
                                        provide additional   effective          linked to                             opportunities,
continuations)          RTI plan for                                                              review/modify                           effective practice
                                        resources to         practice           revised                               employ, &
                        additional                                                                technology plan
                                        NCLB Targeted                           standards &                           retain H.Q. staff
                        grades &                                                                  every three
                                        schools                                 data analysis
                        schools                                                                   years




                                                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 63 of 95
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?)

All Rutherford County Schools are accredited by AdvancED SACS-CASI and have developed belief
statements, mission, and shared vision statements. After reviewing the “Family Friendly Schools
Survey,” the Rutherford County School Board adopted the new state recommended policy that will
potentially increase the level of family and community engagement at the school and system level.
Beginning in 2006/2007, the Rutherford County Board of Education began broadcasting meetings over
the local cable television network. The result has been an increased the level of stakeholder feedback.

The Director of Schools requires the principals of our 43 schools to meet collaboratively a minimum of
five times annually as a component of continuous professional development for school leaders. The
meetings are grouped by schools with grades K-5, K-8, 6-8, and 9-12 with central office instructional
department staff attending, making presentations, and collaborating with administrators at these
meetings. Analysis indicates that the exchange of ideas among administrators is resulting in
organizational and procedural changes within individual schools as well as improving instructional
methodology.

Additional central office and school organizational planning is conducted through committees. Examples
of committees include textbook adoptions, in-service and staff development, technology media/materials
planning, curriculum scope and sequence, testing coordinators, school board policy committee,
participation in the Chamber of Commerce’s Business Education Partnership (BEP) Board, Title I
Advisory Committees, CTE Advisory Committees, P-16 Council, and advisory committees for other
programs.

Professional Learning Communities are becoming well-established through training and system
provided inservice. Training and follow up consultation with Dr. Bob Eaker, one of the authors of
Learning by Doing, is being provided. The system calendar includes four one-half early student
release times for PLC teacher collaboration times. The Board of Education included these days
through the 2010-2011 school year.

The budget planning process for the coming fiscal year begins in January with each school and
department submitting budgetary requests to the Assistant Superintendent for Accounting and Finance.
Principals list priority requests for instructional and facility improvements. For 2007/2008, principals
were given an opportunity to make specific financial requests to address NCLB challenges at his/her
individual school. A significant number of these requests were funded. The entire seven-member Board
of Education serves on the Budget Committee and conducts open meetings to review and hear budget
requests.
ED-5191 November 2005


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

We believe that a significant amount of time is currently being allocated to organizational planning, the
communication of high expectations, and inservice training. The challenge for a growing system is for
the district to continue to provide intensive and sustained high quality professional development while
monitoring effectiveness within a system that has one of the lowest per-pupil central office staffing ratios
in Middle Tennessee. Existing organizational gaps are budget issues related to supervisory and support
personnel not keeping pace with student enrollment growth.

School level and system level organizational practices are further supported as we continue to schedule
time for training in the development of Professional Learning Communities. RCS, in collaboration with
MTSU, have included sessions for school administrators with peer practicing PLC facilitators from other
locations around the nation.




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 65 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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?)

Rutherford County Schools’ commitment to effective organizational strategies is emphasized in the belief
statement that educational priorities and improvement strategies should be supported through budget
requests. A portion of the ADM allocation of State BEP and local funds flows directly to schools to
facilitate site-based innovations and in 2008-2009 each school was offered an allocation of $3,000 to
address individual school training needs.

Beginning in 2007/2008, funding was provided for fifteen schools to pilot an elementary literacy and
mathematics early intervention initiative including the development of a Response to Intervention (RTI)
plan for Rutherford County. The pilot model is being improved as we encounter new possibilities.

Beginning in 2007/2008, the initial six graduation coaches were employed to address the system-
wide graduation rate and to assist two high schools that will not attain their NCLB graduation
rate improvement track requirement. Four additional personnel have been reassigned or
employed to provide graduation coach assistance to all high schools and alternative schools.




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

While the state report card indicates that Rutherford County is a high achieving system, capital outlay
and personnel requirements associated with adding one to two new schools per year competes for
funding for expanded district supervisory and support personnel. There is a need to add additional
instructional specialists to support the schools in elementary, PreK, science, social studies, and reading.
There also remains the need for a person dedicated to data analysis and research.

If the elementary reading and mathematics intervention coaches prove to be as beneficial as
preliminary data suggests, additional funding will be needed to expand the program to all twenty-
five elementary schools.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 66 of 95
  ED-5191 November 2005


                                      TCSPP TEMPLATE 4.4b
                                                  (continued)

                             ORGANIZATIONAL GAP ANALYSIS
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?)

The organizational structure of the RCS Central Office includes a Director of Schools, and four Assistant
Superintendents for Curriculum & Instruction, Accounting & Finance, Personnel and Human Resources, and
Engineering and Construction. To more effectively address issues and implement instructional strategies
Curriculum & Instruction encompasses the following: Attendance, Special Education, Adult Education,
Teacher Center and Testing, Technology, Materials/Textbook Center, Title I, ROTC, and Spectrum for the
gifted students, Coordinators, Instructional Specialist and Facilitators. Joint meetings with coordinators and
supervisors of these departments foster common goals and provide the structure for response to research-
based curriculum and instruction initiatives.

Title I and local funds have allowed us to create Academic Time Leads to Achieving Students (ATLAS). This
program provides services to homeless students in all Rutherford County schools. Title I may provide these
services to non-Title I schools due to the reauthorization of the McKinney-Vento Act under the No Child Left
Behind law. Rutherford County continues to serve over 550 students annually through A.T.L.A.S. We
recognize the importance and the need to continue this program.

Rutherford County employs only H.Q. teachers for new positions unless the director authorizes temporary
approval on a case-by-case basis. Principals have the capability to search teacher applications by
accessing the RCS online teacher application program maintained by Human Resources’ teacher
recruitment initiatives. Principals interview teachers based upon identified school staffing needs and make
the recommendation to the Director of Schools for final approval. The Human Resources Department
has scheduled Rutherford County Job Fairs since 2007 with over 500 prospective applicants
attending annually, including a significant number from other states. Recruiting sufficient numbers
of minority teachers remains an ongoing challenge with the HR department scheduling out-of-state
visits to area job fairs that typically have higher numbers of minority candidates.

Specialized personnel are added to address identified needs. Examples include 15 RTI pilot school
elementary reading and mathematics coaches and the high school graduation coaches added in
2007/2008.

In 2007/2008 the Human Resources Department and Testing began sharing a new position to address
emerging needs. This person is also designated as the Safe Schools Manager to coordinate training for
crisis emergency, safety, first responders, school violence, and suicide prevention.

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

Personnel gaps exist for system-wide specialists in elementary, Pre-K, science, social studies, and reading.
A full-time data analysis person is also needed to expand our ability to assist schools in disaggregating,
interpreting, and addressing issues in a data-driven environment, as well as support staff for CTE. Other
challenges include providing adequate services for the rapidly growing ESL population and fulfilling the
system’s technology plan.

On-going cultural diversity training is needed to address possible student suspension rate
differences as identified in Component 3.


                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 67 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




Organizational 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 organizational practices?)

Rutherford County is fortunate to be located in the same county as Middle Tennessee State University.
The collaboration between the district and MTSU is a valuable resource. MTSU is currently assisting
Central Middle School with additional student intervention and teacher training services. MTSU faculty
members participate in the system’s Administrator’s Academy for potential school principals and
assistant principals. MTSU is providing personnel for training in the creation of Professional Learning
Communities. MTSU and Rutherford County also jointly operate the Homer Pittard Campus School for
laboratory experiences.

The Rutherford County Chamber of Commerce Business Education Partnership (BEP) was created to
link the district and schools with the business community. The BEP has funded and provided personnel
for academies for math, science, and guidance counselors. Additionally, the BEP is currently funding
approximately $75,000 per year in mini-grants to individual teachers for innovative instructional
programs.

Additional resources are provided by individual companies. Examples include Old South Properties,
Rutherford County Home Builders Association, and The Masonry Institute, provided funds for a masonry
facility at Oakland High School. Nissan directly supports our Drivers’ Education program by providing
cars to the schools and allows the use of their training facilities for offsite course offerings in pneumatics
and robotics.

Rutherford County Schools provides each enrolling student with a copy of the “Student Handbook and
Code of Behavior and Discipline.” The handbook is a subset of the BOE online policy manual.    The
handbook and the BOE Policy Manual contain disciplinary policies that address disorderly conduct,
weapons, drugs, and other infractions related to our Safe and Drug-Free Schools initiatives.

Rutherford County Schools will continue to utilize outside resources that match and support our mission
and vision and enhance our ability to implement research-based effective school practices.

Middle Tennessee State University, Motlow Community College, and other post-secondary
institutions continue to join with RCS in developing dual enrollment and dual credit
opportunities for our students.

Rutherford County Schools subscribed to School Messenger, a telephone and email
subscription service in the fall of 2008. The service is used to generate announcements to
parents and to collect information via the electronic survey option. It has noticeably expanded
the ability to communicate with stakeholders at the school and system level.

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: OTHER RESOURCES
Stakeholder input will continue to be strengthened through on-line opportunities for dual
enrollment/credits with MTSU, Motlow, and other post-secondary institutions, via electronic
messaging through School Messenger, and through community resources which provide CTE
partnerships that extend academic and elective focuses.




                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 68 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                     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?

Staffing at the school level is determined by state student-teacher ratios and special system initiatives.
School level administrative and support staff are still being allocated using the previous SACS-CASI
requirements. In 2009-2010, there will be 57 full or part time assistant principal positions and 76
full or part time guidance counselors assigned to the 43 schools. All schools met the pupil-teacher
ratios according to the fall 2008 Preliminary Report. There will always remain the question of adequacy,
especially in our growing environment. Our challenge is to provide additional organizational support
commensurate with our growth and changing needs, to maintain AdvancED standards for all of our
school, and continue to provide staffing beyond AdvancED for identified at-risk schools.

All high schools and middle schools have CTE support staff to assist the teachers and support
instruction.



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

The 2008 Report Card supports our effectiveness in targeting funds and resources to meet the
basic needs of schools at an ADM expenditure of $998 below the state average. Data provided by
the Tennessean a few years ago reported that Rutherford had the highest percentage of funds for direct
classroom instruction of seventeen reported school systems. Conversely, RCS would have the lowest
percentage expenditure for all other organizational and maintenance needs. To fill the gap, Rutherford
County seeks external non-capital and financial resources. These include state and federal funds,
grants, foundations, and community collaborative ventures. Since many of these resources are
classified as “soft monies,” we recognize the necessity to continually evaluate funding commitments
related to organizational needs.


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

Organizational structure is one of the strengths of the Rutherford County School system. A high level of
performance expectations is communicated from the Board of Education to all stakeholders. Parents
and the community are provided updated and current information through the web at both the school
and system level. Academic performance on the 2008 Report Card and our own internal monitoring
supports the supposition that we are meeting the needs of the majority of our students. Specific areas
targeted for improvement were identified in Component 3 and will be addressed in Components 5 and 6.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 69 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005




                                    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?

Rutherford County’s organizational strength is the collaborative model of analyzing and addressing
identified concerns. Success is evidenced by our ability to make significant increases in student
achievement while managing our population growth. Enrollment increases in the last four years have
ranged from approximately 800 students to almost 1,900 students per year. During this period,
elementary AYP proficiency in math increased from 90% to 96% and reading/language arts
increased from 90% to 95%. Adequate Yearly Progress scores for special groups, such as
students with disabilities and LEP have increased at a rate greater than safe-harbor
requirements. Elementary TVAAS and achievement scores for 2008 report A’s in all subjects.
High school math is currently at 90% AYP, language arts at 96%, and all EOC tests exceed 98%
proficiency. Rutherford County’s CTE programs saw an improvement in non-traditional
enrollment in 2008 and a reported 95.65% Secondary School Completion rate compared to
84.94% statewide. The CTE graduation rate was 94.95% compared to 84.40% for the state.



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.

Our challenges are as follows:
   • to recruit, sustain and train highly qualified staff to meet the curricular and instructional needs of
       our growing and diversified student population.
   • to maintain a sustained and intensive staff development program that assists schools in
       research-based instructional methodology and organizational effectiveness.
   • to continue training and implementation of the Professional Learning Communities model at
       each RCS school.
   • to maintain and improve SACS-CASI organizational staffing requirements while providing
       additional support for identified at-risk schools.
   • to secure funding for central office staff growth in the same ratio as the expanding student
       population and schools served.
   • to analyze system-wide demographic data as it impacts teacher effectiveness, student
       achievement, and stakeholder perceptions.
   • to assist CTE teachers in strengthening skill proficiency instruction and academic integration.




                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 70 of 95
ED-5191 November 2005



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

Organizational challenges will be addressed by pursuing additional monetary and non-monetary support
from local, state, federal, public, and private sources. The system’s School and Community Relations
liaison continues to pursue grant opportunities as well as keeping our stakeholders informed of
academic achievements and ongoing needs.

Beginning with training in the 2006/2007 school year, the system strengthened the collaborative model
by using MTSU professors and outside consultants to train principals and central office staff in the
elements of Professional Learning Communities. These PLC essential principles are being included as
expectations in the Director of Schools annual performance contract with administrators.




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 4 Page 71 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                 RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                    COMPONENT 5


    COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMWIDE ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT




                      Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 72 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                                       RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                                           TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1


                                                                      GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development
Template5.1–(RubricIndicator5.1)                                                                                                                            Revised DATE: ___March 31, 2009_________
                      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 graduation rate by 2% in schools not meeting Graduation Rate Improvement track requirement
                                                                 Goal      and increase the graduation rate of CTE students by 0.5% .
                    Which need(s) does this Goal address?                  Component 3 Prioritized Goals
How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?                    Rutherford County Board of Education has adopted the TCSPP as their five year plan.
ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator 5.2)                                                                         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 you   sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are strategies     step.)
and interventions which should be scientifically based where possible                                                                      Projected
and include professional development, technology, communication,
and parent and community involvement initiatives within the action
                                                                                                 Person(s)             Required            Cost(s) &                                  Performance Results /
                                                                              Timeline                                                                      Evaluation Strategy
steps of each goal.                                                                             Responsible            Resources            Funding                                         Outcomes
                                                                                                                                            Sources
                Identify potential nongraduates and                        July 2009 -         Assistant           $285,847 from          GP Budget,        Comparison of            Summer School 2008
                implement/strengthen intervention strategies               July 2011           Superintendent      GP for summer          Special ED        Extended Learning        – 1,148 students with
                such as:                                                                       for Curriculum      school, $50,000        GP, E-rate        Programs Annual          697 high school
                                                                                               and                 from 21st Century                        Report; Traditional
                     •    Extended Learning Programs                                                                                                                                 students receiving
                                                                                               Instruction,        Community                                and Summer               additional credit. 70
                          (Credit/Grade Recovery, Summer
                                                                                               Instructional       Learning Centers                         School Roster of         summer school
                          School, Tutoring,)
                                                                                               Coordinators;       grant for              Grant from        Graduates, System        graduates in 2008.
                     •    FreshStart                                                           Extended            transition               st
                                                                                                                                          21 Century        Report Card with
                     •    Middle/High School Transition                    Transition          Learning            program, $1            Community         previous results
  Action                  Program between Central Middle                   Program             Programs            million from           Learning
   Step                   School and Oakland High School                   Summer ‘09          Committee,          Special Ed GP          Centers
                     •    SPED Inclusion Gateway classes                                       School
                     • Improve attendance by notifying                     August ’09          Principals,         $60,000 from GP
                          parents of daily absences through the            through May         Middle and          for annual fees
                                                                           ‘11                 High School         for parent                                                        638 SPED students in
                          use of an automated parent                                                                                                                                 99 SPED Gateway
                          notification system.                                                 Guidance            notification
                                                                                               Counselors,         system                                                            Inclusion classes
                TECH –Install and support computer-based
                instruction.                                                                   Graduation
                                                                                               Coaches                                                                               A + software installed




                                                                                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 73 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                    RUTHERFORD COUNTY




           PD – How to implement tutoring and other                                                                                                        for grade, credit
           strategies for at-risk students.                                   Technology                                                                   recovery. On-line
           Communication/Parent Involvement –                                 Coordinator                                                                  opportunities offered
                •   Notify students and parents of                                                                                                         through e4TN program.
                    intervention opportunities
                Provide “Parent Resources” link on system
                website                                                                                                                                    http://www.rcs.k12.tn.us
                                                                                                                                                           /rc/resources/resources
                                                                                                                                                           _frameset.htm
           Analyze summative and formative student test       Incrementally   Testing           $10,000 for        GP Budget,      Review of               Formative
           data to determine system/school/student needs      at end of       Coordinator,      ThinkLink          e-Rate          disaggregated           assessments and
           for all disaggregated groups                       instructional   Instructional     Algebra I                          reports, state report   progress monitoring
                                                              cycle when      Coordinators,     subscriptions                      card, and Grad          indicate structured
                •     Professional Learning Communities
                                                              scores are      Supervisors,      from GP                            Rate Improvement        intervention is
                      (PLC)
                                                              available       Specialists,                                         Track report.           working. Graduation
                •     To identify and purchase a system-
                                                                              Principals, and                                                              data 5 of 8 high
                      wide benchmark assessment that
                                                                              Teachers          $200,000 for                                               schools and district
                      will allow teachers to track the
                                                                                                assessment                                                 do not have 90%
                      academic progress of students
 Action                                                                                         program from                                               graduation rate.
                      across time.
  Step                                                                                          GP, Title II,
                                                                                                stimulus, IDEIA
           Communication to stakeholders – Links to
           State Report Card and TVAAS located on
           system website
                                                                                                $329,708.88                                                District website –
                                                                                                from e-Rate to                                             www.rcs.k12.tn.us
                                                                                                support
                                                                                                (WAN)Wide Area
                                                                                                Network
           Provide disaggregated test analysis training for   August 2009     Assistant         $200 for           GP Budget       Sign-in sheets,         Identification of
           graduation coaches and other appropriate staff     – May 2011      Superintendent    materials                          agenda for training     students at-risk for
                                                                              for Curriculum                                       session                 graduation
                                                                              and
                                                                              Instruction,
 Action                                                                       Testing
  Step                                                                        Coordinator,
                                                                              Assistant
                                                                              Superintendent
                                                                              for Budget and
                                                                              Finance,
                                                                              School Board




                                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 74 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                RUTHERFORD COUNTY




           Focus staff development on innovative,           July 2009 –   Director of       $3,300 from         GP Budget;    SchoolStation         Over 65,000 hours of
           scientifically based research practices to       June 2011     Teacher          Perkins, $25,000     Title IID,    Professional          in-service credit were
           address the needs of all disaggregated groups.                 Center,          from IDEIA and       IDEIA;        Development           earned by RCS
           TECH –Support computer-based instruction                       Assistant        GP, $6,000 from      Perkins,      summary reports,      teachers in 2008-2009
           and training                                                   Superintendent   Title IID, $10,000   Grants        Improved              Technology Staff
 Action                                                                   for Curriculum   from GP for                        performance on All    training attendance –
  Step                                                                    and              substitutes                        CTE Core              22,991 attendees
                                                                          Instruction,                                        Indicators,           attained 8,279 hours
                                                                          Technology                                          Improved              of professional
                                                                          Coordinator,                                        performance on        development
                                                                          CTE                                                 TESS
                                                                          Coordinator
           Review and revise curriculum offerings and       July 2009 –   CTE              $341,628.10          Perkins, GP   State Report Card,    District and school
           programs of study to improve academic            June 2011     Coordinator,     Perkins,             Budget        Part V;               websites, student
           performance, occupational skill attainment,                    Assistant        $394,050 GP                        County Course         orientation at school
           nontraditional enrollment and completion.                      Superintendent                                      Offerings; CTE        sites, student handbook
                                                                          for Curriculum                                      Enrollment and
 Action
           Community and Parent - Notify students and                     and                                                 Completion; and
  Step     parents of curriculum offerings.                               Instruction,                                        Developed
                                                                          Principals,                                         Programs of Study
                                                                          Guidance
                                                                          Counselors

           Implement additional sheltered English classes   July 2009 –   ESL              $50,000 from         GP Budget;    Implementation of     Added sheltered Eng I
           in core subject areas for English Language       June 2011     Coordinator      GP for teacher       Title III     courses               and II at OHS. Added
 Action
           Learners.                                                      and high         salary, $10,000                                          sheltered Eng I, Eng II,
  Step                                                                    school           Title III for                                            and Alg I at LHS.
                                                                          principals       Materials
           Work with the County and School CTE              July 2009–    CTE              No funding                          Improved CTE         Evaluations reviewed
 Action    Advisory Councils to evaluate CTE programs       June 2011     Coordinator      needed                             course offerings      and program
  Step     and make recommendations for improvement.                                                                          and programs of       improvements
                                                                                                                              study                 budgeted.




                                                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 75 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                                   RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                                          TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                              GOAL 2 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                                 Revised DATE: ______March 31, 2009______

                    Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)
                                                                       Recruit, sustain and train highly qualified staff to meet the curricular and instructional needs of a growing and diverse
                                                              Goal     student population.

                   Which need(s) does this Goal address?               Component 3 Non-Academic Prioritized goal for 100% highly qualified instructional staff

How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year Plan?                Rutherford County Board of Education has adopted the TCSPP as their five year plan.

ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator 5.2)                                            IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – Template 5.3 – (Rubric Indicator 5.3)
                                                                       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, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are        step.)
strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based
                                                                                                                                              Projected
where possible and include professional development, technology,
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives                               Person(s)                 Required              Cost(s) &        Evaluation         Performance Results /
                                                                         Timeline
within the action steps of each goal.                                                        Responsible                Resources              Funding          Strategy                Outcomes
                                                                                                                                               Sources
               Recruit highly qualified teachers to meet               July 2009 –       Assistant                 $12,000 from Title        GP; Title      Hiring of Highly     District staff
               identified curricular and instructional needs and       June 2011         Superintendent of         II                        II, E-Rate     Qualified            attendance at
               to meet NCLB mandate regarding Highly                                     Human Resources                                                    teachers, State      recruiting fairs in
               Qualified teachers in core content areas                January -         and Student                                                        Report Card %        Ohio, Minnesota,
                   •     District and off-site recruitment fairs       April of          Services,                 $329,708.88 from                         HQ                   Nashville and
                   •     Allow principals to post positions            each school       Coordinators of           e-Rate to support                                             Knoxville, TN. District
                         earlier while the pool of applicants is       year              Instruction,              (WAN)Wide Area                           Use of               recruitment fair held
  Action                                                                                 Principals                Network                                  software
                         larger.                                                                                                                                                 April 2008 with 600+
   Step
                   •     To acquire an affordable software             Post                                                                                 program to           participants. 2009-
                         program that will provide                     positions                                   $100,000 from                            track                2011 fairs to be held
                         demographic and employment data               beginning                                   GP/Title II to                           demographic          each spring.
                         for teachers and support personnel.           in April                                    acquire software                         s and
                                                                                                                   program                                  assignments          http://www.rcs.k12.tn.
               Communication – Online applications and job             July 2009                                                                            of personnel         us/rc/hr/hr_frameset.h
               postings maintained on district website                                                                                                                           tm




                                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 76 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                       RUTHERFORD COUNTY




           Provide staff development and mentoring for                        Assistant               $68,000 from Title     GP, Title I,    Sign-in sheets,   ASSIST held July,
           new and struggling teachers                                        Superintendent of       IIA, $5,000 from       Title IIA,      agendas and       2008 with 140
           PD –                                                               Curriculum and          Special ED GP,         e-Rate,         evaluations       participants.
                •    ASSIST (New Teacher Induction              July 2009-    Instruction;            and $480,000 from      Special
                     Program)                                   July 2011     Teacher Center          GP for coaches         Ed GP                             3 coaches hired
                •    Add 16 additional Literacy/Math                          Director;               salaries and related                                     August, 2008
                     Intervention Coaches in K-8 schools        August        Instructional           costs, $20,000
                •    Provide 4 half day PLC days for            2009- 2013    Coordinators,           from Title I for                                         2007-2008
                     teacher collaboration                                    Specialists and         Title I coaches                                          Instructional
 Action
           Technology and Communication-                                      Facilitators; School-   training; $43,443                                        Technology Staff
  Step
                •    On-line staff development                  July 2009 –   based Technology        from GP for new                                          training attendance –
                •    PD taught by Instructional Technology      June 2011     Specialists; Special    teacher technology                                       22,991 attendees
                     Specialists and STSs                                     Education Liaison       training for                                             attained 8,279 hours
           On-line professional development catalog and                                               substitute costs.                                        of professional
           registration                                                                               $329,708.88 from                                         development
                                                                                                      e-Rate to support
                                                                                                      (WAN)Wide Area                                           http://schstation.rcs.k12.
                                                                                                      Network                                                  tn.us/rutherford/login.ph
                                                                                                                                                               p
           Provide training to all instructional staff to       August        Teacher Center           $300,000 from         Title I, IIA,   Conference        DI Conference in 2008
           meet the instructional needs of our growing          2009 – June   Director; Assistant     Title IIA, $60,000     IID, GP, e-     agenda,           was attended by over
           and diverse student population through a             2011          Superintendent of       from Title I,          Rate            attendance        980 RCS educators.
           differentiated instruction conference and                          Curriculum and          $40,000 from GP,                       records for
           sustained, intensive follow-up training                            Instruction;            $5,000 from Title                      conference
           Technology – Online notification, conference                       Instructional           IID, $329,708.88                       and follow-up
 Action
           registration and email reminders                                   Coordinators,           from e-Rate to                         sessions
  Step     PD – Instructional staff facilitates the                           Specialists and         support
           conference                                                         Facilitators; School-   (WAN)Wide Area
                                                                              based Technology        Network
                                                                              Specialists; Special
                                                                              Education Staff

           Provide training to instructional staff on revised   July 2009-    Assistant               Approx. $25,000        GP, Title       Sign-in sheets,   24 educators
           state curriculum standards.                          July 2010     Superintendent of       GP,                    II, Title I     agendas and       participated in state
                •    State summer institutes                                  Curriculum and          $56,000 Title II,                      evaluations       standards institutes,
 Action         •    Local summer institutes                                  Instruction;            $3,000 Title I                                           389 were trained
  Step          •    Train-the-trainer sessions                               Instructional                                                                    locally to share at
                •    On-site faculty trainings                                Coordinators and                                                                 school level
                                                                              Specialists;
                                                                              Director of Schools;
                                                                              School Board




                                                                                  Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 77 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                    RUTHERFORD COUNTY




           Seek local funding for CTE support staff          July 2009-    Assistant               $90,293.83 from     Perkins,     Funding           Funding provided for 3
                                                             June2011      Superintendent of       Perkins, $157,818   GP           provided          CTE secretaries.
                                                                           Curriculum and          GP                  Budget,                        Pursuing additional
                                                                           Instruction; Director                                                      funding for 3 others.
 Action
                                                                           of Schools, School
  Step     Communications and Community –                                  Board, CTE                                                                 Have met during the
           CTE/Business/Industry/Student advisory                          Coordinator                                                                year and made
           committees                                                                                                                                 recommendations for
                                                                                                                                                      program improvement.
           Continue to assist current teachers and           July 2009 –   Assistant               $3,000 for Praxis   Title IIA    System HQ         Reimbursed 22 for
 Action    educational assistants to become highly           June 2011     Superintendent of       and ParaPro tests                status            ParaPro expense and
           qualified in additional core courses.                           Curriculum and                                                             8 teachers for Praxis
  Step
                                                                           Instruction;                                                               expense in 2007-2008.
                                                                           Assistant
                                                                           Superintendent of
                                                                           Human Resources
           Provide additional training and support as        August        Assistant               No funding                       Correct coding    Training in September
 Action    necessary for school administration and staff     2009-June     Superintendent of       needed                           on Preliminary
  Step     responsible for coding and managing the           2010          Human Resources                                          Report
           Preliminary Report and STAR                                     and Student
                                                                           Services
           Provide administrative support for teacher        August        Assistant               No funding                       Experienced       Training August 2008-
 Action    evaluations using the HOUSSE Option to            2009-June     Superintendent of       needed                           teachers          June 2009
  Step     achieve HQ status                                 2010          Human Resources         Training by the                  gaining HQ
                                                                           and Student             State Department                 status
                                                                           Services
           Provide recruitment opportunities for the         January to    Assistant               Funding included                 No ESL            Fair Attendance and
 Action    purpose of hiring highly qualified ESL teachers   April of      Superintendent of       in district-wide                 teachers hired    Employment August
  Step                                                       each school   Human Resources         recruiting budget                on waivers        2008-June 2009
                                                             year          and Student
                                                                           Services
           Provide a differentiated pay plan                 July 2009-    Assistant               Contingent on       $5,000-      Number of         Incentives offered
               •   Reimburse tenured teachers for            June 2010     Superintendent of       available BEP       $20,000      teachers          July 2009-June 2010
                   college tuition up to 18 credit hours                   Human Resources         funding                          enrolled in
                   not to exceed $5,000 to add a                           and Student                                              endorsement
 Action
                   teaching endorsement in math,                           Services                                                 programs
  Step             physics, or chemistry
               •   Provide a one-time signing bonus          July 2009-    Assistant               Contingent on       $6,000-      Number of
                   of $6,000 ($2,000 for three years) to     June 2010     Superintendent of       available BEP       $30,000      teachers
                   new, fully licensed teachers in                         Human Resources         funding                          employed in
                   math, physics and chemistry                             and Student                                              math, physics




                                                                               Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 78 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                               RUTHERFORD COUNTY




               •      Provide a one time bonus of $4,000   July 2009-   Services             Contingent on         $4,000-      and chemistry
                      upon completion of National Board    June 2010    Assistant            available BEP         $40,000      Number of
                      Certification                                     Superintendent of    funding                            teachers
                                                                        Human Resources                                         submitting
                                                                        and Student                                             NBC
                                                                        Services                                                verification




                                                                           Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 79 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                                      RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                                             TCSPP TEMPLATE 5.1

                                                                GOAL 3 – Action Plan Development
Template 5.1 – (Rubric Indicator 5.1)                                                                                                                    Revised DATE: ______March 31, 2009______

                     Section A –Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.)
                                                                       Improve 2009-2010 academic performance growth standards by achieving A’s (K-8) and Above (9-12) in
                                                             Goal      TVAAS, while increasing AYP Proficiency/Advanced percentages.
                                                                       Component 3 prioritized AYP needs: Reading/LA/Writing SWD (+12% in H.S. +9% in K-8), LEP (+9% in K-8,
                                                                       +40% 9-12); Hispanic (+5% in H.S.); Af. Am. (+1% in H.S.)
                                                                        Math SWD (+6% in K-8, +21% in H.S.); LEP (+13% in H.S,); Af. Am. (+5% in H.S.)


                 Which need(s) does this Goal address?                 Component 3 prioritized TVAAS needs: 7th grade LA, 8th SS, 8th Science, 9-12 Math and increase male writing
                                                                       proficiency by 3% at each grade level.


                                                                       Component 3 prioritized CTE needs: Increase CTE student performance on indicators 1S1 and 1S2 to exceed
                                                                       the negotiated performance level of 89.62%+ AYP.
   How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five-Year
                                                                       Rutherford County Board of Education has adopted the TCSPP as their five-year plan.
                                               Plan?
 ACTION STEPS – Template 5.2 – (Rubric Indicator
                                                                                                 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – Template 5.3 – (Rubric Indicator 5.3)
                        5.2)
                                                                       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, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action
you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are        step.)
strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based
                                                                                                                                                      Projected
where possible and include professional development, technology,                                                                                                                               Performance
communication, and parent and community involvement initiatives                               Person(s)                                               Cost(s) &            Evaluation
                                                                         Timeline                                    Required Resources                                                         Results /
within the action steps of each goal.                                                        Responsible                                              Funding               Strategy
                                                                                                                                                                                                Outcomes
                                                                                                                                                      Sources
                Provide staff development to address the               June 2009 –       Assistant                 Per Year:                      GP, IDEIA,          Attendance              Attendance at
                needs of all disaggregated groups including            July 2011         Superintendent of         $8,000 Title X, $75,000        Title IIA, Title    records,                ATLAS
  Action        gender, homeless (ATLAS) and migrant                                     Curriculum and            from IDEIA/GP                  X, Destination      agendas,                Trainings:
   Step         students using scientifically based research                             Instruction;                                             Rutherford,         evaluations and         May 2008-45;
                and best practices which reflect the TN                                  Teacher Center            BC^3 Academy                   Jennings and        CCBEP Focus             Aug 2008-95;
                                                                                                                   $41,170 from Jennings          Rebecca             Group                   Spring 2008




                                                                                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 80 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                    RUTHERFORD COUNTY




           Curriculum Standards                                         Director;               and Rebecca Jones        Jones            recommendation      conference-2;
           Community – BC^3 Academy, Counselors’                        Instructional           Foundation, National     Foundation,      s                   Fall 2008
           Leadership Institute, Summer Business                        Coordinators,           Science Foundation       MTSU                                 conference-2;
           Camp, Grades 6-8 Reading Conference,                         Specialists and         through MTSU,            Partnerships                         275 School
           Writers’ Academy                                             Facilitators; School-   Destination              State Farm                           Nutrition
                                                                        based Technology        Rutherford,                                                   personnel
                                                                        Specialists; Special    Business Camp:                                                August 2008;
                                                                        Education Liaison       $5,212 Funding from                                           Attendance
                                                                                                State Farm and                                                specialists
                                                                                                Destination                                                   July 2008-35;
                                                                                                Rutherford,                                                   All school
                                                                                                Reading: $22,000 Title                                        faculties
                                                                                                IIA, $70,000 for                                              trained yearly
                                                                                                consultants and a                                             Teacher
                                                                                                Title I staff                                                 attendance at
                                                                                                development                                                   2008
                                                                                                facilitator, $50,000                                          activities:
                                                                                                Jones Foundation                                              Reading
                                                                                                Writers: $65,000 Title                                        Conference –
                                                                                                IIA                                                           70, Writers’
                                                                                                                                                              Academy –
           PD/Technology - Electronically-based           July 2009     Coordinator of          $ 14,000Title IID        Title IID        Sign-in sheets,     115, BC^3
           programs are installed and training is                       Instructional                                                     increase use of     Academy –
           provided to staff members                                    Technology,                                                       instructional       34,
                                                                        Instructional                                                     technology in       Counselors’
               •      Summer Technology Institute                       Technology                                                        classrooms          Summer
                                                                        Specialists                                                                           Business
                                                                                                                                                              camp – 40,
                                                                                                                                                              Youth
                                                                                                                                                              Leadership
                                                                                                                                                              Rutherford –
                                                                                                                                                              33 graduates
           Support the implementation of High Schools     July 2009 –   CTE Coordinator         $7,000 per HSTW site     High Schools     Receipt of          Eagleville and
           That Work Key Practices.                       June 2010                             from HSTW grant          That Work        grants,             LaVergne
                                                                                                $5,000 from Title IIA    Grant,           attendance          hosted
           PD – Attendance at local, state and national                                                                  Title IIA        records,            Technical
 Action
           HSTW/MMGW workshops and conferences                                                                                            technical           Assistance
  Step                                                                                                                                    assistance visit    visits. Teams
                                                                                                                                          reports, NAEP       attended the
                                                                                                                                          assessment,         HSTW
                                                                                                                                          Improved            Summer




                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 81 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                             RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                                                                                                     performance on      Conference. 5
                                                                                                                                     Perkins Core        CTE teachers
                                                                                                                                     Indicators          attended the
                                                                                                                                                         Pre-
                                                                                                                                                         Conference
                                                                                                                                                         on Math,
                                                                                                                                                         7 CTE
                                                                                                                                                         teachers
                                                                                                                                                         attended the
                                                                                                                                                         Pre-
                                                                                                                                                         Conference
                                                                                                                                                         on Literacy,
                                                                                                                                                         7 CTE
                                                                                                                                                         teachers
                                                                                                                                                         attended a
                                                                                                                                                         workshop on
                                                                                                                                                         Quality
                                                                                                                                                         Teaching:
                                                                                                                                                         Research-
                                                                                                                                                         Based
                                                                                                                                                         Strategies
                                                                                                                                                         That Work
           Provide additional staff and training to   July 2009 –   ESL Coordinator     $50,000 from GP for         GP, Title III    Staff ratio met,    Five
           achieve AYP for the ELL subgroup in        June 2011                         additional ESL                               in-service          additional
           reading/language arts and math                                               teacher.                                     attendance          ESL teachers
                                                                                        $175,000 from Title III                      records             and two
                                                                                        for teacher facilitators,                                        additional
                                                                                        EAs and staff                                                    ESL
                                                                                        development:                                                     educational
                                                                                                                                                         assistants
                                                                                                                                                         were
 Action
                                                                                                                                                         employed.
  Step                                                                                                                                                   Training for
                                                                                                                                                         ESL staff and
                                                                                                                                                         regular
                                                                                                                                                         classroom
                                                                                                                                                         teachers was
                                                                                                                                                         provided by
                                                                                                                                                         two ESL
                                                                                                                                                         Teacher
                                                                                                                                                         Facilitators




                                                                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 82 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                   RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                                                                                                                              funded by
                                                                                                                                                              Title III.

           Provide additional staff and training to       July 2009-    SPED Coordinator       SPED/Inclusion EAs:       IDEIA, GP        Employment of       Employment
           achieve AYP for the special education          June 2011                            Approx. $150,000 GP                        Inclusion EAs       of 6 teachers
           subgroup in reading/language arts and math                                          Staff Development:                         and teachers,       and 9
 Action
                                                                                               Approx. $15,000                            Attendance          educational
  Step                                                                                         IDEIA/GP                                   records for in-     assistants
                                                                                               Teacher positions:                         service sessions
                                                                                               Approx. $250,000 GP
           Use formative and summative assessment         July 2009-    Director of Schools,   $134,325 from GP for      Title II, GP     Purchase of         2008/2009
           results to develop and implement academic      June 2011     Assistant              purchase of ThinkLink                      assessments         purchased
           interventions through Professional Learning                  Superintendent of      licenses and $4,200 for                    and completion      ThinkLink for
           Communities                                                  Curriculum and         DIEBELS                                    of training for     6,500
                  •    DIBELS K-1                                       Instruction            licenses,$6,500 from                       administration      students in
                  •    ThinkLink 1-2 system-wide, 3-8                                          Title II for training                      and analysis        high poverty
                       higher poverty schools, ALG I                                           $15,255.64 from GP                                             schools,
 Action                for high schools                                                        for ALG I                                                      2,469 for ALG
  Step            •    System-wide standardized                                                                                                               I in high
                       benchmark assessment and                                                $225,000 GP                                                    schools,
                       management system                                                                                                                      DIBELS tests
                  •    TVAAS Reports                                                                                                                          purchased for
                                                                                                                                                              4,100 K-2
                                                                                                                                                              students,
                                                                                                                                                              Teacher’s
                                                                                                                                                              trained
           Increase opportunities for and enrollment in   Spring 2009   Assistant              $1,500 from GP for        GP, Perkins,      Increased          Dual
           more rigorous/relevant courses/programs at     – Spring      Superintendent of      registration training,    Leadership       enrollment in       enrollment
           the high school level such as:                 2011          Curriculum and         $10,000 from GP for       Rutherford,      identified          courses are
                •   Dual enrollment, dual credit, CLEP,                 Instruction;           on-line courses,          participating    courses.            being
                    On-line Courses                                     Secondary and          $30,000 from GP for       student fees,                        implemented
                •   Industry certified CTE programs                     CTE Instructional      AP/IB training            local                                with
                •   AP and Honors offerings                             Coordinators                                     businesses                            MTSU.
 Action
                •   Academically aligned registration                                                                                                         Additional
  Step              procedure using Explore, PLAN,                                                                                                            honors
                    and ACT                                                                    $6,800 Leadership                                              courses have
                •   International Baccalaureate                                                Rutherford,                                Student success     been identified
                    Program at Oakland High School                                             participating student                      in postsecondary
                •   CTE technology equipment and                                               fees, local businesses                     training and/or
                    software upgrades                                                                                                     employment
           Communication/Parent Involvement –




                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 83 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                RUTHERFORD COUNTY




           Freshman Orientation/Registration
           Community – Youth Leadership
           Rutherford/College Peer Panel
           PD – Teachers trained to teach AP/IB
           courses




           Increase achievement for at- risk students                 Assistant            $200,000 consultants,       GP, Title I,      Improved TVAAS      RTI pilot 10
           and reduce IDEIA referrals                                 Superintendent of    materials, Staff            Title II, IDEIA   and AYP scores      Title I schools
                •   Student Assistance Team (SAT)                     Curriculum and       Development                 Stimulus          and reduced         and 5 non-Title
                •   Response to Intervention (RTI)                    Instruction;         Facilitator, and tow                          referrals to SPED   I schools 2008-
                •   PLC Team collaboration meetings                   Instructional        ATLAS teachers from                                               2009, 8 staff
                •   Pre-School classes                                Coordinators;        Title I                                                           development
                                                        July 2009-    Principals, and      $3,000 GP                                                         days for Title I
 Action         •   Title I ATLAS teachers
                                                        June 2011     Instructional        $25,000 Title II                                                  Intervention
  Step     PD –Training on use of formative
           assessments and tiered intervention                        Coaches               IDEIA Stimulus                                                   Coaches by
           strategies.                                                                                                                                       Dr.
                                                                                                                                                             Thommason
           Communication/Parent Involvement –
           Provide parent meeting and workshops


           Provide staff development for CTE teachers   June 2009 –   CTE Coordinator      $49,700.00 Carl             Carl Perkins,     Sign-in sheets,     105 CTE
           on use of technology, curriculum             June 2010                          Perkins, $1,000 Title II,   Title II          agendas,            Teachers
           improvement and CTE promotion                                                   $4,000 GP                                     evaluations and     attended
                                                                                                                                         performance on      training on
                                                                                                                                         core indicators     LanSchool
                                                                                                                                                             and CPS,
                                                                                                                                                             119 CTE
                                                                                                                                                             teachers
 Action
                                                                                                                                                             attended
  Step                                                                                                                                                       Literacy
                                                                                                                                                             training on
                                                                                                                                                             9/17/09,
                                                                                                                                                             91 CTE
                                                                                                                                                             teachers
                                                                                                                                                             attended
                                                                                                                                                             Literacy
                                                                                                                                                             training on




                                                                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 84 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                  RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                                                                                                                                              3/12/09


           Provide academic support for all students.     July 2009-    Assistant            $8,000 GP for              Title II, GP,     Homework            Homework
               •    Homework Hotline                      August        Superintendent of    Homework Hotline,          Middle TN         Hotline usage       Hotline
               •    Extended learning time for            2011          Curriculum and       $8,000 Title II            Electric’s        report, extended    received
                    remediation and enrichment                          Instruction;         Extended Contracts         Customer’s        contract report     4,373 calls in
               •    Grade/credit recovery                               Instructional        and Grade/Credit           Care Fund                             2007-/2008
                                                                        Coordinators;        Recovery: $360,000
 Action                                                                 Principals           GP                                                               56 Parents
           Communication/Parent Involvement –
  Step                                                                                       BookLIT: $2,353                                                  attended
           Provide parent meeting and workshops
                                                                                             Middle TN Electric,                                              BookLIT
               •    BookLIT                                                                  $51,000 avg Title I                                              meetings/
               •    Title I District Parent Workshops                                        salary Parent                                                    Workshops
                    and school level parent events                                           Facilitator
                    and workshops

           Provide teachers and students with up-to-      July 2009 –   Assistant            $1,075,800 from GP for     GP                Equipment           2007-2008
           date technology tools to enhance instruction   December      Superintendent of    equipping classrooms                         installed,          funding not
           and integration with ISTE and State            2011          Curriculum and       with mounted LCD                             monitoring of       available
           Standards in order to increase student                       Instruction;         projectors and screens                       integrated
           achievement.                                                 Assistant            and MM workstation                           instructional use
 Action        •    Equip classrooms with mounted                       Superintendent of    each year for three
  Step              LCD projectors and screens, and                     Engineering,         years.
                    MM workstation                                      Instructional        $350,550 from GP for
               •    Equip each high school with a                       Technology           mobile labs
                    mobile laptop lab                                   Coordinator,
                                                                        Technical
                                                                        Supervisor, STS’s
           Promote social and emotional well being of                   Assistant            $155,000 from Safe         Safe Schools,     Programs in         School,
           students through Respect Protect initiatives                 Superintendent of    Schools, $79,000 Title     Title IV          place               parent and
           including:                                                   HR/SS, Safe          IVSDFS                                                           student
                •   Character Education                                 School’s Program                                                                      surveys,
                                                          July 2009-
 Action         •   No Bullying                                         Manager                                                                               debriefings
                                                          June 2011
  Step          •   Peaceful School Bus Safety                                                                                                                following
                •   RCS Emergency Response Plan                                                                                                               safety drills,
                •   School counselors                                                                                                                         STARS end of
                •   STARS interventions                                                                                                                       the year
                                                                                                                                                              reports




                                                                              Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 5 Page 85 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                 RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                  COMPONENT 6


       PROCESS EVALUATION, IMPLEMENTATION, AND
   MONITORING/ADJUSTING PLAN FOR ACHIEVING RESULTS




                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 86 of 95
      ED-5191 August 2007                                                                   RUTHERFORD COUNTY



                                           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 systemwide 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?

       •   Emails of meeting notices
       •   Sign-in sheets
       •   Agendas
       •   Minutes of meetings
       •   Calendar of meeting dates



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 I
   Data Sources: State Report Card
                  NCLB AYP Report
   Evidence of Alignment: Results of state graduation rate shows five of eight high schools have not attained the
   90% graduation rate requirement according to the08 Report Card. One high school is in School
   Improvement II for graduation rate.

   Our curriculum gap analysis documents the tremendous challenge in providing funding to maintain curriculum
   offerings for advanced students while lowering pupil-teacher ratios for under-achieving students. Some AYP
   declines in high school grades underline the need for additional staff to provide lower pupil-teacher ratios and
   additional intervention time. Instructional gaps noted are the need for additional staff training for our at-risk
   populations and the need to replace and improve instructional technology for use with these students.

   Goal II
   Data Sources: State Report Card
                  State TVASS Report
   Evidence of Alignment: The most recent State Report Card shows 99.95% of core academic teachers as highly
   qualified. However, continued emphasis on recruitment and training is a priority to meet the personnel gap
   created by the 3%-5% annual growth in the student population requiring the employment of 200+ teachers each
   year.

       •   Accomplishment of belief, mission and shared vision requires the continued employment of highly
           qualified staff.
       •   Rapid growth of system requires constant recruitment to maintain and increase highly qualified staff to
           achieve system student achievement goals.
       •   Increasing numbers of newly hired employees require on-going staff development and mentoring.




                                 Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 87 of 95
        ED-5191 August 2007                                                                RUTHERFORD COUNTY


    Goal III
    Data Sources: State Report Card
                  State TVAAS Report

    Evidence of Alignment: All subgroups must be addressed to meet AYP of 100% by 2013-2014. Current
    subgroups not meeting AYP requirements are:


    K-8:
        •   SPED 70% proficient in K-8 mathematics and 76% proficient in K-8 reading/language arts
        •   LEP 76% proficient in K-8 reading/language arts.
    9-12:
        •   SPED 61% proficient in Algebra I and 75% proficient I reading/language arts
        •   LEP 54% proficient in reading/language arts

   Analysis of curriculum, instruction, and personnel indicate a continued
   emphasis on providing the instructional materials, technology, staff, and
   training to address the needs of all subgroups while addressing the special
   needs of at-risk populations.




Evidence of Communication with All Stakeholders- Narrative Response Required
What evidence do we have of our communication of the TCSPP to all stakeholders?

    •    Presentations at televised board meetings
    •    Plan posted on system website
    •    Advisory Councils – Teacher/Parent/Business
    •    Business Education Partnership
    •    Collaborative administrator staff meetings
    •    Instructional staff meetings
    •    Systemwide Leadership Team meetings
    •    AdvancED SACS Accreditation team meetings




Suggestions for the Process- Narrative Response Required
What suggestions do we have for improving our planning process?

The TCSPP process will be improved through collaborative administrator meetings, instructional department meetings,
federal program planning meetings and advisory meetings including the director’s parent and teacher advisory councils
and business and community advisory councils.




                                Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 88 of 95
  ED-5191 August 2007                                                                   RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                       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?

The 2009 TCSPP plan will be implemented under the direction of the assistant superintendent for
instruction in collaboration with the instructional staff.

During the summer of 2009 the following action steps will be implemented for Goal 1:
    • Differentiated Instruction Conference: “Tools for Success,” will be held for 1,100 Rutherford
        County educators on July 28 and 29, 2009 to provide staff development based on scientifically
        based research and best practices to address the needs of all disaggregated groups
    • Summer school will be provided for students seeking credits for graduation
    • A middle/high school transition program will be implemented between Central Middle and Oakland
        High
During the 2009-2010 school year, the following action steps will be implemented for Goal 1:
    • Potential non-graduates will be identified and intervention strategies implemented
    • The automated parent notification system will be used to notify parents of student non-attendance
        and other relevant academic information
    • On-going disaggregated test analysis training will be provided for graduation coaches and other
        staff
    • Special Education Inclusion Gateway classes and sheltered English classes for ELL's in core
        academic areas will be implemented
    • Identify and purchase a system-wide benchmark assessment that will allow teachers to
        track the academic progress of students across time.
    • CTE Advisory Council meetings will be held in the fall and spring to evaluate and revise programs
        and offerings

During the summer of 2009 the following action steps will be implemented for Goal 2:
    •   ASSIST training for new teachers will be provided on July 22 – 24, 2009 for approximately 140
        new teachers
    •   A Differentiated Instruction Conference: “Tools for Success,” will be held in July for 1,100
        educators
    •   Staff development will be provided on new state standards
    •   Recruitment of highly qualified teachers will continue throughout the summer
    •   Human Resources will explore options for an affordable software program that will provide
        demographic and employment data for teachers and support personnel
During the 2009-2010 school year, the following action steps will be implemented for Goal 2:
    •   Sixteen new Literacy/Math Intervention Coaches will be employed to expand and enhance RTI
    •   Professional development will be provided throughout the school year for all employees
    •   Recruitment of highly qualified teachers will continue with attendance at in-state and out-of-state
        recruitment fairs
    •   Financial assistance will be provided for current teachers needing to become highly qualified
    •   Continue to seek local funding for CTE support staff
    •   Training will be provided for administrators and staff responsible for inputting STAR data
    •   Provide a differentiated pay plan for hard to staff positions and National Board Certification



                             Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 89 of 95
  ED-5191 August 2007                                                                  RUTHERFORD COUNTY



During the summer of 2009 the following action steps will be implemented for Goal 3:
    •   Staff development will be provided to address the needs of all disaggregated groups through
        summer academies and other workshops
    •   Funding will support Blackman, Eagleville, and LaVergne staff to attend the High Schools
        That Work Conference in Atlanta
During the 2009-2010 school year, the following action steps will be implemented for Goal 3:
    •   Additional staff and training will be provided to achieve AYP for the ELL subgroup in
        reading/language arts and math
    •   Additional staff and training will be provided to achieve AYP for the special education
        subgroup in reading/language arts and math
    •   PLC formative assessment results will be used throughout the school year to determine needed
        interventions
    •   A new industry certified program will be implemented in CTE in the area of Cosmetology
    •   Expand dual credit/dual enrollment/articulation opportunities with postsecondary
        institutions
    •   CTE hardware and software upgrades will be provided under the direction of the CTE coordinator
    •   Continue to implement Response to Intervention (RTI), Student Assistance Team (SAT), and
        Pre-School programs
    •   Provide academic support for students through Homework Hotline, extended learning time,
        and grade/credit recovery
    •   Expand the use of technology tools and staff development to enhance instruction and increase
        student achievement
    •   Promote social and emotional well being of students through Respect and Protect initiatives


The system-wide leadership team will meet in October to review progress and celebrate the successes of
the implementation. The team will meet again in February.



Evidence of the Use of Data - Narrative Response Required
What is the plan for the use of data?

Formative assessments will be used to monitor and adjust action steps formulated from summative data.
Assessments currently being used are listed. The establishment of Professional Learning Communities in
each school has increased the use of formative assessments in core academic and CTE areas.

   •   ThinkLink - September, November and February
   •   PLC formative assessments – Each six week grading period
   •   Software programs such as Orchard, Cornerstone, Academy of Reading/Math, SkillsBank, A+, and
       FASTTMath
   •   Benchmark assessments provided with adopted textbook series available electronically –
       Throughout the unit of study
   •   School-wide practice writing assessments with frequency determined by each school’s PLC.




                            Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 90 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                  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.

October 14, 2009
February 3, 2010
April 1, 2010


 Member                                    Position                  Role
 Harry Gill                       Director of Schools                CEO of System/Communication,
                                                                     HR
 Don Odom                         Asst. Supt. for Curriculum         Instructional Leader, Professional
                                  and Instruction                    Development, Testing and
                                                                     Evaluation, Attendance, and
                                                                     Accountability
 Jeff Sandvig                     Asst. Supt for Finance             Finance
 Paula Barnes                     Asst. Supt for HR and              HR, Federal Programs, Student
                                  Student Service                    Services
 Kay Nixon                        CTE Coordinator                    Career and Technical Education
 Amy Wise                         Coordinator of Title I             Title I
 Amy Blanton                      Coordinator of Inst. Tech          Technology, Title IID, E-Rate
 Diane Mackey                     Coordinator of ESL                 Title III

 Anne McCraw                      Coordinator of Teacher             Assessment, Title IIA, Title V
                                  Center and Testing
 Shirley Bell                     Coordinator of SPED                Special Education




                        Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 91 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                 RUTHERFORD COUNTY



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?

The Component 1 committee will examine Component 1 of the 2009 TCSSP and make revisions based
on updated community demographics, achievement profiles, service delivery and instructional
effectiveness. The Component 2 committee will survey stakeholders to determine if revisions in wording
of the system’s mission and vision statements are needed. The chairs of all component committees will
meet in October to review AYP and TVASS data and again in December to review report card data. The
Component 3 committee will then analyze the data and prioritize needs based on aggregated and
disaggregated data for academic and non-academic needs. The Component 4 committee will use data
from Component 3 to review curricular, instructional, assessment, and organizational effectiveness and
determine strengths and challenges. In February, the SLT will review recommendations from
Components 1-4 and suggest revisions to the Component 5 committee. Components 5 and 6 will
meet to present final recommendations to the Leadership Team on April 1, 2010.




                         Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 92 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                  RUTHERFORD COUNTY




                                    TCSPP TEMPLATE 6.3
                                               (continued)

             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?


Component 5 will take the recommendations from the SLT and make needed adjustments to action
steps to ensure equity and adequacy in instructional services. In April, The SLT will review adjustments
to the action steps and timelines and approve the revised action plan. Resources will be requested and
appropriated as available.




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?

As revisions are made to the TCSSP plan, successes and newly identified needs will be communicated
to stakeholders.

    •   Presentations at televised Board meetings
    •   TCSSP plan posted on system website
    •   Advisory Councils – Teacher/Parent/Business
    •   Business Education Partnership
    •   System newsletter distributed by email
    •   Collaborative administrator meetings
    •   Instructional staff meetings




                          Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 93 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                              RUTHERFORD COUNTY



                                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 Page 94 of 95
ED-5191 August 2007                                                                                               Rutherford County




                                              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 steps?
                       Yes or No     Yes or No    Yes or No
                                                                                                         Continue to identify potential
Goal 1                                                                                                   non-graduates and provide
                      No            Yes           No
                                                                                                         appropriate staffing and
                                                                                                         interventions

                                                                                                         Recruit highly qualified
Goal 2                No            Yes           No                                                     teachers with a focus on middle
                                                                                                         and high school

                                                                                                         Fully implement the plan with
                                                                                                         revisions made as
Goal 3                No            Yes           No                                                     recommended by the
                                                                                                         Leadership Team based on
                                                                                                         2008 Report Card data




                                                       Tennessee Comprehensive Systemwide Planning Process (TCSPP) – Component 6 Page 95 of 95

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:35
posted:8/17/2011
language:English
pages:95
Description: Submission Templates document sample