Docstoc

Mankato AYP 2010 Plan

Document Sample
Mankato AYP 2010 Plan Powered By Docstoc
					                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                                       2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


I. General Information and Instructions:
Improvement plans are due November 10, 2010.



                     DISTRICT or CHARTER SCHOOL (Multiple Sites)
                           IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION
District Name and Number:                                        Phone:
Mankato Area Public Schools, ISD #77                             507-387-1868
Superintendent/Director:                                         Fax:
Ms. Sheri Allen                                                  507-387-4257
Site Address:                                                    Email:
10 Civic Center Plaza, #2, P.O. Box 8741, Mankato, MN 56001      sallen1@isd77.k12.mn.us
District Improvement Team Members (for additional members, please attach names to plan)
Improvement Team Members                                       Improvement Team Roles
1. Cindy Amoroso                                   Director of Curriculum and Instruction
2. Tracy Brovold                                   Curriculum Coordinator
3. Rich Dahman                                     Middle Level Principal
4. Les Koppendryer                                 Elementary Principal
5. Travis Olson                                    Elementary Principal
6. Will Remmert                                    Elementary Principal
7. Heather Mueller                                 Professional Development Coordinator
8. Gwen Walz                                       Assessment Coordinator
9. John Klaber                                     Director of Special Education and Student
                                                      Issues
10. Greg Stoffel                                      ELL Coordinator
12. Jane Schuck                                       AYP Service Provider
13.                                                   AYP Service Provider
14. Sue Rosenow                                       AYP Service Provider
15.
AYP (In Need of Improvement) Stages 2010-2011 School Year
 *Any district in Continuing In Need of Improvement must complete Appendix B (1.2, 2.1, 2.2)
**Any district in Corrective Action must complete Appendix C (3.1, 3.2)
Please Check the AYP stage that applies:
● In Need of Improvement          □ 1.1    □ 1.2
●Cont. In Need of Improvement X 2.1 □ 2.2
●Corrective Action                 □ 3.1    X3.2

This document meets requirements for the District Improvement and Annual Measurable Achievement
Objective (AMAO) Plans
    X Yes    □ No


                                                                                                           1
                            School Improvement Division
                                                          DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                            1500 Highway 36 West                                                               2010-2011
                            Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                                         IMPROVEMENT PLAN ASSURANCES
Related to the consequences for Title I school improvement, the LEA agrees to the following assurances:

  1. The identified district will create or revise a current improvement plan with input of AYP Coordinators, teachers,
     and parents as outlined in P.L. 107-110, Section 1116.
  2. The improvement plan will be developed and/or revised within 90 days of identification and shall cover a two-year
     period.
  3. The district identified for AYP status will reserve and spend at least 10% of the district’s Title I, Part A allocation
     for professional development activities related to carrying out the initiatives of the improvement plan in the current
     school year.
  4. The district will ensure that all teachers teaching core content classes meet the requirements of highly qualified.
  5. District and school improvement funds/resources will supplement and not supplant state and local funds.
  6. A notice of district AYP status must be provided to all parents/guardians of enrolled students before the beginning
     of the school year.
  7. The district must maintain the improvement plan and related documentation to be available upon request by MDE
     as needed, including compliance requirements.
  8. If updating an In Need of Improvement plan (stages 1.2, 2.1, 2.2) Appendix B of this application must be
     completed; a district in Corrective Action must complete Appendix C.

We hereby agree to the assurances as printed herein and verify that all the information provided in this school
improvement application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

                                                                                       11/1/2010
(Signature of Superintendent/Director)                                                     (Date)




                                                                                       11/1/2010
(Signature of LEA Representative)                                                         (Date)



                                    LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION ACTION

The local Board of Education of _Mankato Area Public Schools________________ (District Name) has authorized

___Sheri Allen_____________________at a monthly meeting on _January 4, 2010_ to act as the Local Education
Agency (LEA) representative in reviewing and filing the attached plan as provided under P.L. 107-110 for school year
2010-11. The LEA Representative ensures the school district maintains compliance with the appropriate federal statutes,
regulations, and procedures and acts as the responsible authority in all matters relating to the review and administration
of this improvement plan. The district ensures that its designee(s) will participate as a member of the improvement team
and work in collaboration with the education service cooperative and/or MDE providing technical assistance through the
AYP Statewide System of Support.

                                                                                       11/1/2010
(Signature of Superintendent/Director)                                                       ( Date)


                                                                                                                               2
                      School Improvement Division
                                                    DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                            2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266




Title I districts identified as not making adequate yearly progress (AYP) for two consecutive years are
required to develop (or revise) and implement an improvement plan based on the eight elements
prescribed under PL 107-110 Section 1116:

Eight elements to be included in the needs improvement plan:
   1. Ensure all students are proficient in core academic subjects by 2013-2014
   2. Establish annual measurable objectives for continuous and substantial progress to achieve proficiency
   3. LEA will incorporate strategies based on scientifically based research to strengthen core academic
       subjects
   4. Ensure the professional development needs of instructional staff are met by providing opportunities to
       participate in high quality professional development
   5. Address the fundamental teaching and learning needs in the district
   6. Promote effective parent involvement strategies
   7. Incorporate extended day and extended school year activities as appropriate
   8. Outline the responsibility of the school, local education agency (LEA), and state education agency
       (SEA) including the technical assistance provided by the LEA

This can be accomplished as follows:
    Districts must develop an improvement plan using the current format and submit the completed and
       signed form to the assigned agency (see page one of this form for instructions)
                                                       ~OR~
    Districts with an existing improvement plan may attach their previous plan and indicate where each
       required element is embedded within the attached plan. The completed and signed form and assurances,
       along with the attached plan, is submitted to the assigned agency (see page one of this form for
       instructions)
                                                      ~AND~
    Use the attached rubrics (appendix A) to guide your school improvement planning

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION:
Please provide a brief description and introduction about your district. This should be the first page of the
improvement plan to give the reviewers a general understanding of your district.

Address the following:
    District demographics
    Area of AYP identification and a brief overview of how it will be addressed in the improvement plan

Executive Summary
Mankato Area Public Schools has engaged in a strategic planning process, which led the
district to develop a Strategic Roadmap that includes five strategic directions. The Strategic
Roadmap for the district is a one-page document that identifies Mankato Area Public
Schools’ Mission Statement, Core Values, Vision 2012, and Strategic Directions. The five

                                                                                                                  3
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                                2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


strategic directions identified by Mankato Area Public Schools as the areas of focus in moving
toward Vision 2012 are:
   A. Developing Structure, Systems and Practice for Excellence in Leadership and Learning,
   B. Aligned, Viable and Guaranteed Curriculum Delivery,
   C. Restructure Resources of Time, Money, People and Facilities while Influencing Funding,
   D. Raise the Capacity for Engagement and Dialogue with Community, and
   E. Raising Achievement for all Students and Closing Gaps for all Students.


Data Analysis
Success System scorecards have been developed in each of the strategic directions and are
being used for accountability at the district and building levels. A Success System scorecard
is a simple and efficient way to focus the differentiation of resources at the district, building,
and classroom level. The combination of the district and school improvement plans creates
the continuous improvement cycle, which is tracked and represented on the district
scorecards. The reporting of progress and impact of the aligned action and improvements
are detailed in the monitoring reports from district and building level administration to the
school board. The assessed outcomes guide the district in its plan for increased student
achievement. The actions within the plan are divided between learning work, implementation
work and standard work. Learning work occurs as the district and buildings research best
practices to be implemented at their respective levels. Implementation work occurs when the
district and/or building has decided to implement what they have learned throughout the
learning work process. Standard work is what is embedded into daily practice.


Site Level Planning
To achieve Vision 2012 in a district of over 7,000 students in 17 school sites, a
comprehensive model resulting in site improvement plans has been implemented. These site
plans can address specific needs, based upon each site’s unique student demographics that
cannot be addressed with a district-wide plan. There are, however, district-level
components that can be implemented in tandem with site level initiatives. Our district plan
identifies those components.


In order to raise achievement for all students and close the gaps for all students (Direction E),
continuous improvement in Directions A through D must be at the forefront of the district’s
actions. Research shows that meaningful professional development (Strategic Direction A)
and well-articulated curriculum (Strategic Direction B) can have a positive impact on student
                                                                                                  4
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                             2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


achievement. The District is putting significant focus and resources into these two
areas. Additionally, we are identifying interventions that can further impact student
achievement.

Identified Areas for Improvement
As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.


In addition to AYP targets in reading and math as measured by MCAs, LEP students are
required to meet targets in English language proficiency as measured by the TEAE and
MN/SOLOM assessments.          These targets are part of the AMAO Improvement Plan. Three
categories for English language proficiency are measured: 1) Progress toward English
Language Proficiency is defined as making adequate annual gains in English proficiency on
the TEAE and MN/SOLOM, 2) Attainment of English Language Profiency is defined by the
number of LEP students reaching proficiency levels on the TEAE and MN SOLOM and 3)
Content Ability is defined as how well ELs are doing in the content areas of math and
reading/language arts (based on MCA – II). Additionally, LEP students are grouped into
cohorts, based on years in the school system: 0 - 2.9 years; 3 - 5.9 years; and 6 or more
years. In 2008-09, the 3 - 5.9 year LEP cohort did not meet progress and proficiency targets
in English language proficiency on the TEAE and MN SOLOM. In Content Ability, the LEP
subgroup was not proficient in reading, but scored in safe harbor for math. In 2009-10, the
3 – 5.9 year LEP cohort did not meet progress and proficiency targets in English language
proficiency on the TEAE and MN SOLOM. Additionally, the 6+ year LEP cohort has gone from
proficient in 2008-09 to not proficient in the attainment of English Language Proficeincy. In
2009-10, Content Ability, LEP students scored in safe harbor for both reading and math.


Improvement Plan Summary
The Mankato Area Public Schools is committed to continued efforts using professional
learning communities to increase student achievement. Additionally, a variety of
                                                                                                5
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                               2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


instructional support positions are in place that are directly targeted at our needs
improvement status. Continuous improvement coaches have been released from classroom
instructional duties and have been assigned to school sites to assist teachers in using data to
inform instruction as well as to support additional curriculum and instruction needs by
working directly with building-level collaborative teams. A curriculum coordinator will
support the development and implementation of a guaranteed and viable curriculum. In
order to identify and implement interventions for non-proficient students, K-12, in all
student groups, an intervention specialist is in place to research, implement, and evaluate
interventions, and will continue in 2010-11.


Our buildings are working very hard to meet the needs of all students, and while Adequate
Yearly Progress only highlights those student groups not meeting the annual targets, we
need to also recognize the many ways in which we are having success and meeting State
targets in Reading, Math, Participation, Attendance and Graduation rates at multiple sites and
grade levels.


District Demographics
The population at risk (and not making AYP) has changed greatly in the past several years.
There has been an increase in the enrollment of students who qualify for free/reduced lunch
and special
education, and in the percentage of ethnic minorities and ELL students. District
demographics are:


                  Student Group              Number of Students     Percent of Total
                                                                      Enrollment
                   All Students                     7,121                 100
                       White                        5,982                 84
                       Black                        570                    8
                     Hispanic                       285                    4
                       Asian                        214                    3
                 Native American                     71                    1
                Free/Reduced Lunch                  2,492                 35
                 English Language                   356                    5
                     Learners

                                                                                                   6
                      School Improvement Division
                                                    DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                           2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                  Special Education                   1139                           16


The Mankato school administrators and staff have worked to strengthen the skill level and
cohesiveness of their reading and math programs K-12, and are confident that results from
this and other work will manifest in greater success for the groups not making AYP as well as
for all children in the Mankato District. Improved methods of tracking the progress of this
group so that gaps are sealed have also been identified.

III. NEEDS ASSESSMENT:

NCLB requires a comprehensive needs assessment for your district. Please address the following:
   Date when comprehensive needs assessment was developed or updated
   Summarize the results of the district needs assessment
   Include a brief determination of why the district’s previous plan did not bring about increased student
     academic achievement (for districts continuing In Need of Improvement)

The Mankato Public Schools have conducted a thorough Teaching and Learning Needs
Assessment focused on “closing the achievement gap.” This needs assessment was initially
conducted through our district’s strategic planning process which was conducted during the
2007-08 school year. That process included teachers, parents, community, school board,
administration and students. Their assessment results were used to produce the district
Strategic Roadmap and Success System. The success system is a thorough scorecard
measuring the Strategic Directions. Results of the 2008-09 school year, based on the
scorecard, were the major tool used to determine the teaching and learning needs in the
district. Results enabled us to determine the learning work, implementation work and
standard work for our district this year in the five Strategic Directions: Professional
Development and Structures/Systems for Learning Excellence; Aligned, Guaranteed and
Viable Curriculum; Restructure of Time, Money, People, and Facilities; Community
Engagement and Dialogue; Student Achievement.


At the completion of the 2009-10 school year, the building principals were surveyed on the
results of each District Improvement AYP Action Plan. Principals were asked to provide
feedback regarding how each action plan was implemented in their building and what
barriers needed to be overcome for the action plan to be successful in the future. Results of
this survey enabled us to update the AYP plan strategies for our district this year.



                                                                                                                 7
                        School Improvement Division
                                                          DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                        2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266


On August 2, 2010, a district leadership team worked with Jane Schuck, Mary Jenatscheck,
and Sue Rosenow, regional AYP advisors, to further analyze and interpret AYP specific data in
determining improvement strategies to increase the achievement of our identified student
groups.


Additional needs assessment came through the analysis conducted for the NCLB/ESEA
Consolidated Application and the district Annual Staff Development Plan and Report process.




IV. ELEMENTS SECTION:
   Please complete each section, addressing the elements and attaching documents as necessary to clarify the
   information. This form is expandable so that as you type pages will add or adjust. Please refer to the
   attached rubric in Appendix A for additional information on element requirements.

   1. Ensure all students are proficient in core academic subjects by 2013-2014
   Identify actions that have the greatest likelihood of improving the achievement of children in meeting Minnesota’s achievement
   standards

   Address the following:

   a) Identify challenges that have prevented the district from making adequate progress.

   b) Identify the fixed targets that are appropriately set for all students to be on track for 100%
   proficiency by 2013-2014 in reading and math.

As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading. The challenges that have prevented the district from making
adequate progress are as follows:

          Alignment of time, calendar and schedules to maximize student learning.
          Lack of aligned curriculum to increase student achievement.

                                                                                                                                    8
                        School Improvement Division
                                                          DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                         2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266


          Professional development is not directly aligned to improvement efforts.
          Approximately 50% of incoming kindergarteners not meeting readiness benchmarks
           (as measured by DIBELS)
          Systematic approach to intervention is incomplete.
          Use of classroom data for instructional decision-making.


   a) Identify the fixed targets that are appropriately set for all students to be on track for 100%
      proficiency by 2013-2014 in reading and math.

The target for all students is to increase the percentage of students proficient in math by
7.38% each year. The proficiency levels of student groups not making AYP have been
analyzed to calculate the needed annual growth to reach 100% proficiency by 2013-14.


The target for all students is to increase the percentage of students proficient in reading by
5.68% each year. The proficiency levels of student groups not making AYP have been
analyzed to calculate the needed annual growth to reach 100% proficiency by 2013-14.


  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: _________________________________


   2. Establish annual measurable goals for continuous and substantial progress to achieve
      proficiency
   Include specific measurable achievement goals and targets for each of the groups of students identified in the disaggregated data
   pursuant to section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v), consistent with adequate yearly progress as defined under section 1111(b)(2)

   Address the following:

   a) Provide annual MCA-II measurable goals for identified student group(s).

   b) Describe the process of tracking goal progress over the two years of the plan.
       ● Identify assessment(s) used to track progress toward these goals
       ● Describe alignment between the various assessments used to measure progress (if using
         assessment(s) other than MCA-II)

As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
                                                                                                                                       9
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                                          2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading. The following are annual measurable goals for continuous and
substantial progress to achieve proficiency in Mankato Area Public Schools:


The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or Exceeds
the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will increase from 35%
in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will increase
from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools
will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools
will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012.

  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: _________________________________




                                                                                                              10
                        School Improvement Division
                                                          DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                         2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266




   3. Incorporate strategies based on scientifically based research to strengthen core
      academic subjects
   Incorporate scientifically based research strategies that strengthen the core academic program in schools served by the local
   educational agency

   Address the following:

   a) Identify scientifically research-based strategies that are clearly stated and aligned to performance
   goals (developed under element number 2).

   b) Describe how the identified strategies will improve student achievement in the cited area(s).

As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.


The following are strategies based on scientifically based research to strengthen core
academic subjects:
   1. Professional development will be directly aligned to the Success System (see Executive
       Summary) through building and district goals and will target formative assessments
       and investigate the use of collegial coaching to raise the achievement of students in
       the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.


   2. Elementary professional development will focus on reading instruction with aligned
       ELOs and formative assessments to raise the achievement of students in the black,
       special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.


   3. Teachers will use data to inform instruction at the student level. Continuous
       improvement coaches have been released from classroom instructional duties and have
       been assigned to school sites to implement this strategy as well as to support
       additional curriculum and instruction needs at the site by working directly with


                                                                                                                                   11
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                             2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


      building-level professional learning communities to raise the achievement of students
      in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups.


   4. We will implement a new 7-12 math curriculum with high fidelity. A secondary math
      coach is in place to work with secondary sites in meeting the needs of identified
      students in raising student achievement through this curriculum and high quality
      instruction to raise the achievement of students in the black, special education, and
      free/reduced lunch student groups.


   5. We will develop and implement a guaranteed and viable curriculum, K-12, for reading,
      math, and all subjects. A curriculum coordinator has been added to support this work
      to raise the achievement of students in the black, special education, and free/reduced
      lunch student groups.


   6. We will identify and implement research-based interventions, based on a three-tier
      model, for reading and math. One intervention specialist is in place to support the
      identification and implementation of interventions for non-proficient students, K-12,
      in all student groups, both elementary and secondary to raise the achievement of
      students in the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.

   7. We will strengthen the 7-12 reading intervention model to raise the achievement of
      students in the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.


   8. Professional development on reciprocal teaching will be provided for secondary
      teachers in reading across the curriculum. A “Reading Instructional Strategies”
      handbook will be provided to all secondary teachers with the expectation that reading
      strategies will be embedded in their instruction to raise the achievement of students in
      the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.


   9. We will increase the participation of families of incoming kindergarteners in district and
      community kindergarten readiness programs to raise the achievement of students in
      the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.

After consulting the research of Hattie, Marzano, DuFours, Reeves, Stiggins, National Council
Teachers of Mathematics, National Staff Development Council, National Reading Panel,

                                                                                               12
                        School Improvement Division
                                                           DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                           2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266


University of Oregon, University of Minnesota, Reading First and others credible in curriculum
and instruction, we are confident that the strategies identified will improve our reading and
math curriculum and instruction, overall, will provide needed differentiation and intervention
for identified educationally at risk students as well as all students, and will strengthen our
ELL, Special Education program models.

  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: __________________________________


   4. Ensure the professional development needs of instructional staff are met by
      providing opportunities to participate in high quality professional development
   Address the professional development needs of the instructional staff serving the agency by committing to spend not less than 10
   percent of the funds received by the local educational agency under subpart 2 for each fiscal year in which the agency is identified
   for improvement for professional development (including funds reserved for professional development under subsection
   (b)(3)(A)(iii)), but excluding funds reserved for professional development under section 1119

   Address the following:

   a) Describe the high quality professional development supported by the 10% set-aside of the district
   Title I funds to meet the needs of the instructional staff.

   b) Explain how the professional development plan will directly address the academic achievement
   challenges that caused the district to be identified.

As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.


The district is utilizing funding to support the professional development needs for the
improvement in math and reading performance. Funds from Title I and Title I ARRA set
aside, Title II, Title III and District and Site Staff Development are being used to support the
improvement efforts. These different funding sources are being coordinated to result in a
comprehensive support system for increasing the achievement of students.
                                                                                                                                     13
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                               2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266




Title I and Title I ARRA Set Aside:
These funds are being used to support three staff development positions. All three of these
positions will be focusing on improving the achievement of students in the LEP, Special
education and free/reduced lunch student groups. The three positions are: elementary math
continuous improvement coach; secondary math coach; secondary intervention coordinator.
All three positions will be working directly with sites and teachers to increase the
achievement of Limited English Proficient (LEP), Special Education and free/reduced lunch
students through delivering embedded high quality professional development. Areas of
professional development are identified in our action plans for Element 3 and relevant areas
are listed below:
          1. Professional development will be directly aligned to the Success System (see
             Executive Summary) through building and district goals and will target formative
             assessments and investigate the use of collegial coaching to raise the
             achievement of students in the black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch
             groups.
          2. Elementary professional development will focus on reading instruction with
             aligned ELOs and formative assessments to raise the achievement of students in
             the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.
          3. Teachers will use data to inform instruction at the student level. Continuous
             improvement coaches have been released from classroom instructional duties
             and have been assigned to school sites to implement this strategy as well as to
             support additional curriculum and instruction needs at the site by working
             directly with building-level professional learning communities to raise the
             achievement of students in the black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch
             groups.
          4. We will implement a new 7-12 math curriculum with high fidelity. A secondary
             math coach is in place to work with secondary sites/teachers in meeting the
             needs of identified students in raising student achievement through this
             curriculum and high quality instruction to raise the achievement of students in
             the black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups.
          5. We will identify and implement research-based interventions, based on a three-
             tier model, for reading and math. One intervention specialist is in place to
             support the identification and implementation of interventions for non-
             proficient students, K-12, in all student groups, both elementary and secondary
                                                                                                   14
                        School Improvement Division
                                                          DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                        2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                 to raise the achievement of students in the black, special education, and
                 free/reduced lunch student groups.
            6. Professional development on reciprocal teaching will be provided for secondary
                 teachers in reading across the curriculum. A “Reading Instructional Strategies”
                 handbook will be provided to all secondary teachers with the expectation that
                 reading strategies will be embedded in their instruction to raise the achievement
                 of students in the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student
                 groups.


All district teachers are members of formal professional learning communities. There are
monthly late starts, district-wide, in addition to building-scheduled PLC times. All PLCs are
required to focus on improving student achievement based on their building data, and must
engage in professional development aligned to achieving their SMART goals. The positions
funded through the set aside will work directly with these PLC members in delivering aligned
professional development.

  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: __________________________________



   5. Address the fundamental teaching and learning needs in the district
   Address the fundamental teaching and learning needs in the schools of that agency, and the specific academic problems of low–
   achieving students, including a determination of why the local educational agency's prior plan failed to bring about increased
   student academic achievement

  Address the following:

  a) Identify fundamental teaching and learning needs as identified from the district needs assessment
  process in the area(s) cited that contributed to the identification of needs improvement status.

  b) Describe teaching and learning needs that will be addressed such as choice of instructional programs
  and materials, use of instructional time, improved use of assessments, etc.

As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
                                                                                                                                    15
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                            2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.


The Mankato Area Public Schools have conducted a thorough Teaching and Learning Needs
Assessment focused on “closing the achievement gap.” This needs assessment was initially
conducted through our district’s strategic planning process which was conducted during the
2007-08 school year. That process included teachers, parents, community, school board,
administration and students. Their assessment results were used to produce the district
Strategic Roadmap and Success System framework. The Success System framework is a
thorough scorecard measuring the Strategic Directions. Results of the 2008-09 school year,
based on the scorecard, were the major tool used to determine the teaching and learning
needs in the district. Results enabled us to determine the learning work, implementation
work and standard work for our district this year in the five Strategic Directions: Professional
Development and Structures/Systems for Learning Excellence; Aligned, Guaranteed and
Viable Curriculum; Restructure of Time, Money, People, and Facilities; Community
Engagement and Dialogue; Student Achievement.


On August 2, 2010, a district leadership team worked with Jane Schuck, Mary Jenatscheck,
and Sue Rosenow, regional AYP advisors, to further analyze and interpret AYP specific data in
determining improvement strategies to increase the achievement of our identified student
groups.


Additional needs assessment came through the analysis conducted for the NCLB/ESEA
Consolidated Application and the district Annual Staff Development Plan and Report process.


Results of the teaching and learning needs assessment identified that in order to increase the
achievement of students in the Limited English Proficient (LEP), special education and
free/reduced lunch student groups in reading and math, there were changes necessary in key
areas:
   •     Professional Development will be directly aligned to the Success System
            o Alignment across district
            o Formative assessment targeting reading and math – Implementation work
            o Collegial coaching – Learning work
   •     Development of aligned reading ELOs
                                                                                                16
                        School Improvement Division
                                                           DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                      2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266


   •   Using data to effectively inform instruction
   •   High fidelity implementation of an aligned 7-12 reading and math curriculum
   •   Development of guaranteed and viable curriculum across all subject areas
   •   Professional development focused on reciprocal teaching for secondary reading
   •   Research-based interventions in reading and math
   •   Monitoring and revising of current reading and math interventions
   •   Increase the percentage of incoming kindergarteners reaching DIBELS benchmark
       through increased community outreach efforts

  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: __________________________________




   6. Promote effective parent involvement strategies
   Include strategies to promote effective parental involvement in the school.

   Address the following:

   a) Identify research-based or best practice strategies used to increase parent involvement, including
   new efforts and enhancements to existing strategies.

   b) Explain how these effective parent involvement strategies will contribute to improved student
   learning in the specifically cited area(s).

   c) If Continuing in Need of Improvement or Corrective Action, describe process to evaluate parent
   involvement strategies.

As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.




                                                                                                              17
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                            2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266


Our needs assessment indicated that an area to be addressed was parent involvement.          The
following efforts are in line with research from Johns Hopkins University and Joyce Epstein.


1. A parent group has been established through the Greater Mankato Area Diversity Council
   called the “Circle of Parents.” The Circle of Parents advisory committee will provide
   parents of diverse students an intentional and active role in their child’s learning
   environment. The goal of the Circle of Parents advisory committee is the intentional
   inclusion of diverse communities within the school district, improved communication and
   connections with the school district, and an increased sense of ownership of the school
   district. Ultimately, this will result in the increased achievement of students from these
   families.


2. Mankato Achieving – College Access Program (MA-CAP) is inclusive of many components
   to help develop first generation college students. The program includes; homework help
   tutorial after school, mentoring, and a summer program with an academic, social and
   cultural focus.


3. Under the direct supervision of the ELL Coordinator, the Home-School Liaison will be
   responsible for facilitating communication between families of English Language Learners
   (ELLs) and school district staff. The Home-School Liaison will:
      Communicate with parents of ELLs to increase parent understanding of school and
       student
      Communicate with English school staff to increase understanding of parents and
       students’ needs in order to increase understanding
      Attend district training and regular meetings with the ELL Coordinator to inform
       expectations of fulfilling the position and assist in informing district of incoming ELLs
      Translate documents that are used regularly by the schools so that families of ELLs
       understand the concepts and information being communicated
      Prepare and facilitate staff development sessions for school staff to share information
       relevant to helping students be successful in school, information about individual
       family circumstances, norms specific to various ethnic groups
      Support Circle of Parents meetings with families of ELLs and school staff by contacting
       families, arranging transportation and childcare, translate and interpret information
       prior, during, and after meetings

                                                                                                 18
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                                 2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266




4. A new birth to age five initiative, “Ready! for Kindergarten” has been implemented. This
   initiative provides free parent classes to enable them to more successfully work with their
   children to meet developmental benchmarks and therefore be better prepared for
   kindergarten. An additional outcome of this initiative is to connect parents to school
   during the preschool years to develop a strong parent-school relationship as early as
   possible. The district supports Greater Mankato Early Learning Initiative by providing
   district space for classes, recruiting district staff as facilitators and providing advertising
   and registration procedures for the program. The Ready! for Kindergarten initiative has
   been expanded to include ELL families in the Adult Basic Education (ABE)/Early Childhood
   Family education (ECFE) Family Literacy classes.


5. The Early Childhood Screening program screens for the purpose of identifying students
   needs at the pre-school level. It also provides parents with referrals to special education
   services in the district or to outside agencies. These services increase the chances that
   students will be ready for Kindergarten.


6. Parent Portal – This web-based tool allows parents to monitor student data, including
   attendance, grades, transcripts and discipline referrals.


7. The district offers entrance conferences for all students and parents, fall and spring
   conferences, in addition to mid-term and quarterly grade reports and IEP meetings to
   ensure that families are being informed about continuous academic progress. The ELL
   teachers are involved with conferences and provide interpreters as needed to ensure
   communication is a two-way process.


8. The Curriculum Advisory Council is the district’s formal group from which it receives
   community feedback regarding curricular issues. It is the formal advisory group for the
   Minnesota Standards implementation, and gives feedback on curriculum adoptions. The
   Council serves as the formal means of involving community in curricular change. They are
   the communication links to the parent groups at their respective school sites.




                                                                                                     19
                        School Improvement Division
                                                           DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                          2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266


9. A Title 1 Parent-Teacher Advisory group will meet in the fall and spring to provide parents
   with the opportunity to have input and give feedback on parent involvement
   opportunities.


10.    Social Worker attendance guidelines have been prepared by district social workers to
   define clear expectations for classroom staff and school administrators as they address
   attendance issues. The plan respects that needs of families and suggests means of
   support for families who struggle to encourage regular school attendance.


11.    Special Education Advisory Council- meets quarterly to receive input from parents of
   students of special needs.


Each parent involvement strategy will be evaluated based on the number of participants and a
participant survey to determine the effectiveness of the program’s activities.

  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: __________________________________




   7. Incorporate extended day and extended school year activities as appropriate
   Incorporate, as appropriate, activities before school, after school, during the summer, and during an extension of the school year

   Address the following if providing extended day activities:

   a) Describe the activities to be conducted before or after school, during the summer, and/or during an
   extension of the school year to meet student needs.

   b) Identify how these activities help students meet the measurable goals set to improve achievement in
   the cited area(s).

   c) Describe how staff are identified and trained to provide effective services and activities to
   improvement achievement within the cited area(s).

                                                                 ~OR~

   Describe the rationale if the district is not providing extended day activities.


                                                                                                                                    20
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                              2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.

Elementary students are provided with two key extended time programs. The first is the
after-school EXCEL program which runs from October through April. In this program,
certified staff members are hired to teach in an after-school program targeting students
struggling academically. The program is developed to fit each individual building. Each site
looks at their data and uses this time to focus instructions and interventions in that area of
Math and Reading. Students are invited when their deficits match the intervention being
planned. At the end of each 8-week session, data is again reviewed before determining the
interventions and which students should be invited to take advantage of what is being
offered.


The second elementary program is our Summer Math Camp and Summer Reading
Academy. These are designed for students struggling in math and reading. Teachers who
teach Summer Reading Academy and Summer Math Camp participate in a training session
that specifically addresses students struggling in reading and mathematics. Topics covered
include the use of data to drive instruction, effective use of best practice, and research-based
strategy instruction. The two objectives of these programs are to strengthen fundamental
skills and to increase performance on the Minnesota Standards. There is a specific program
in our summer program for our ELL and for our Special Ed population. These specific
programs address math and reading skills within the context of additional ELL or Special Ed
needs.


Secondary students are also provided extended time programs. Current teachers who staff
the following programs are trained in the use of additional software that will be
implemented. The first is before-school tutoring. This is available to all students and the
goal is to increase performance on math fundamentals and to increase performance on the


                                                                                                 21
                       School Improvement Division
                                                          DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                                          2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266


Minnesota Math Standards. Second, several summer school options are provided for
students.


  o Credit recovery summer school has the goal of students achieving the math standards
      required for successful completion of the junior high or senior high school course.
  o A math academy summer program is offered to increase students’ performance on
      math fundamentals for students in grades 6-8 who are not proficient in math.
  o An extended time credit recovery option is available during the school year in the
      evening. The goal of this program is to have students successfully achieve the math
      standards required for successful completion of the senior high school course.
  o Targeted reading and math intervention programs are in place for students who are
      identified as not proficient as measured by the MCAII GRAD reading and math
      assessment. The intervention classes will take place in the summer, in addition to
      before school and evening classes.
  o Reading and math summer instruction is available for Special Education K-12 students
      who qualify for extended school year (ESY) programming. This program will address
      specific learning objectives as addressed in the IEP to ensure maintenance of skills in
      identified areas of need from the student IEP.

  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: __________________________________



  8. Outline the responsibility of the school, local education agency (LEA), and state
     education agency (SEA) including the technical assistance provided by the LEA
  Describe the responsibilities of the state educational agency and the local educational agency under the plan, including specifying
  the technical assistance to be provided by the state educational agency under paragraph (9) and the local educational agency's
  responsibilities under section 1120A

  Address the following:

  a) Describe the technical assistance that has been provided and/or is essential to effectively implement
  the district improvement plan.

  b) After consultation with the regional service cooperatives or SEA, identify the technical assistance
  that will be provided specific to the district stage of In Need of Improvement.



                                                                                                                                   22
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                                          2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


As a result of improvement efforts, in 2007-08 all district student groups met adequate
yearly progress in math. In 2008-09 all students met their targets in math with the
exception of special education. In 2009-10 all students met their targets in math. As a
result, the district is on “needs improvement” status for math. 2009-10 marks the third year
special education, and free and reduced price lunch student groups did not make AYP
Reading targets. The LEP student group did make AYP reading targets, but for the first time
since 2006-07 the black student group did not. As a result, the district is on “needs
improvement” for reading.


Technical Assistance is provided by working with the South Central Service Cooperative AYP
Service Providers to:
      Support the district’s improvement initiatives in the areas of LEP, special education,
       and free and reduced. This includes training in SIOP, data analysis, poverty, algebra in
       the middle standard’s alignment, and maximizing reading achievement of special
       populations.

      Support the district’s work with school support teams

      Attend two day retreat to examine test data and develop the improvement plan

      Support the district’s development and implementation of the improvement plans

      Give and receive information relevant to school improvement initiatives

      Enhance a school or district’s existing resources

      Support capacity building for continuous and proactive improvement efforts.

      Communicate state and federal initiatives, goals, and policies relevant to AYP.


  Districts with an existing improvement plan should attach that plan and identify the page where this
  information can specifically be found.
  Page where identified: __________________________________




V. Highly Qualified Teachers - Public Law 107-110, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001:
                                                                                                              23
                      School Improvement Division
                                                     DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                               2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266



All of the teachers in this district teaching core content classes are highly qualified:
    _X__ Yes
    _____ No

If no, a district must identify each teacher in the district that did not meet the federal highly qualified
requirements and answer the questions below:

      Describe the specific plan of action that shall be taken, e.g., classes, content exam, professional
       development, etc. in order for the teacher(s) to meet the federal “highly qualified” requirements.

      Identify the expected date when the teacher(s) must meet the requirements.




VI. DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT ACTION PLAN
Provide or attach the district improvement action plan with a timeline outlining the implementation of the
plan over a minimum of two years. The plan must proficiently address all the elements; however, a quality
plan will focus on a maximum of (3-5) goals (within these elements based on a comprehensive needs
assessment). Utilize the format provided on the next two pages related to the identified student group
area(s). Please use one box per activity.




                                                                                                                     24
                           School Improvement Division
                                                             DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                           1500 Highway 36 West                                                                         2010-2011
                           Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                                                             2010-2011 District Improvement Plan                                                                        7/28/10

                                            Learning Work                                    Implementation Work                                   Standard Work
Strategic Direction A:        A1: Align Professional development directly to     A1: Align Professional development directly to the    A3: PLC operational effectiveness as
Professional Development      the success system through building and district   success system through building and district goals:   measured on PLC Survey
and Structures/Systems for    goals: collegial coaching                          formative assessments                                 A6: Alignment of continuous improvement
learning excellence           A2: Professional learning at site level is         A4: Leadership development for School Board           plans to Strategic Roadmap and Success
                              evident in teacher practice: formative             A5: Leadership development for Administration         System
                              assessments and collegial coaching.                A7: Align working committees and groups with
                                                                                 the Strategic Roadmap.
Strategic Direction B:        B1: Align curriculum in the areas of family        B1: Implement aligned curriculum in health (K-6),     B1: Implement aligned curriculum in
Aligned, Guaranteed, and      consumer science, tech ed, business ed and         social studies, science, English and counseling.      world language (7-12), health (7-12) and
Viable Curriculum             health careers; complete course development        B1: Implement new math and reading                    math (7-12)
                              for English 11 and 12; complete course             interventions                                         B2: Analyze data from common
                              revision for Science physics and chemistry          - Voyager Math- Tier II Math in 6th-8th grade        assessments in world language and health
                              B2: Analyze data from common assessments in         - TransMath- Tier III Math in 6th-9th grade          (7-12).
                              health, (K-6), English and counseling.                   (SPED and LEP)
                                                                                  - Middle Level Reading intervention course
                                                                                  - Creative Curriculum- Birth-Age 5
                                                                                 B2: Analyze data from common assessments in
                                                                                 math and social studies.
                                                                                 B3: Develop 7-12 map of Technology standards
                                                                                 and assessment placement
Strategic Direction C:        C1: Align time, calendar and schedules to          C3:Development of external partnerships for           C4: Priorities for expenditure of funds are
Restructure of Time,          maximize student learning.                         annual grants, and in-kind services                   appropriate
Money, People, and            C2: District referenda compared to other
Facilities                    districts our size.
Strategic Direction D:        D5: Increase % of families and children            D4: Increase the percentage of students attending     D3: Parent satisfaction with
Community Engagement          attending early childhood and school readiness     MAPS                                                  communications
and Dialogue                  programming                                                                                              D7: Community satisfaction with the
                                                                                                                                       quality of education
Strategic Direction E:        E1-4: Ensure that Strategic Direction E 1-4        E1-4: Ensure that Strategic Direction E 1-4 data      E1-9; E11: Ensure that Strategic Direction
Student Achievement           data are understood by students                    are understood by principals and teachers             E measures are in place
                                                                                  - Meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)                E1-9; E11: Ensure that Strategic Direction
                                                                                       reading targets with LEP, Sp. Ed., and FRP      E results are accessible to principals and
                                                                                       Lunch student groups                            Continuous Improvement Coaches
                                                                                  - Meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) math
                                                                                       targets with LEP, Sp. Ed., and FRP Lunch
                                                                                       student groups

                                                                                                                                                                                     25
                       School Improvement Division
                                                         DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                           2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                       The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                       Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                       Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                       The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                       Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                       increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                       The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL               Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                       increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                       The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                       the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                       Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                       The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                       Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                       Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED               Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                       DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                       MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                       TIMELINE
                                                                            District Success System   August 2010
Site Improvement Plan:
1) Identify annual SMART Goal(s) at the site-level;
2) Identify the evidence that will be accepted as attainment of the goal;
3) Choose strategies that will be implemented to address the district and
site-level problems;
4) Identify the data to be collected to monitor progress toward the         Professional              September
                                                                            Development               2010
SMART Goal(s);                                                              Opportunities
5) Identify activities that will support the strategy;
6) Identify people responsible for implementing strategies, collecting
assessment data, and monitoring overall progress;
7) Identify necessary professional development in order to implement
the strategies
                                                                            Feedback loop to
                                                                            collaborative teams, CI
Site Professional Development Plan                                          coaches and principals
1) Review district-wide, building-wide, and grade-level data;
2) Clarify Areas for Improvement;

                                                                                                                    26
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                            2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266


3) Determine: a. What instructional changes should occur, b. What staff
need to know and be able to do to make instructional changes, c. How
we will know when staff has learned it, and d. How we will know when
we are successful.
4) Incorporate the use of formative assessments to help teachers
identify whether or not instructional changes have impacted student
achievement.
RATIONALE

Professional development will be directly aligned to the Success System (see Executive
Summary) through building and district goals and will target formative assessments and
investigate the use of collegial coaching to raise the achievement of students in the black,
special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.




                                                                                                 27
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                          2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                             District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                     The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                     Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                     The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL             Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                     The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                     the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED             Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                   DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                    MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                   TIMELINE
1. Train coaches in ELO development process                              Formal process           September 7,
                                                                         document                 2010

                                                                                                  September 13
2. Develop grade level ELOs by site (K-6) (Led by CI Coaches)            Completed ELOs           – October 31,
                                                                                                  2010

                                                                         Assessments              November –
3. Develop classroom formative assessments aligned to ELOs                                        June 2011

                                                                         Monthly late start PLC   November –
                                                                         session minutes          June 2011
4. Examine data from formative assessment
                                                                         Completed core ELO       January 31,
                                                                         document                 2011

5. Conduct horizontal grade level discussions and reach consensus on
core district reading ELOs
RATIONALE



                                                                                                                  28
                 School Improvement Division
                                               DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                 1500 Highway 36 West                                            2010-2011
                 Roseville, MN 55113-4266


Elementary professional development will focus on reading instruction with aligned ELOs
and formative assessments to raise the achievement of students in the black, special
education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.




                                                                                             29
                      School Improvement Division
                                                      DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                      2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                             District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                     The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                     Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                     The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL             Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                     The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                     the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED             Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                 DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                       MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                 TIMELINE
Analyze data                                                                District Success   Fall 2010
1) Analyze the following data:                                              System
AYP and MCAII/MTELL/MTAS, TEAE, NWEA, DIBELS, ACT, IEPs;
2) Identify questions resulting from data analysis;
3) Identify priority needs to address in the District Improvement Plan
4) Set SMART Goals
5) Develop Action Plans based on the data.
                                                                                               Fall 2010

Incorporate Continuous Improvement Coaches                                  360 Evaluation
1) Provide assistance to the principal (s) and leadership team (s) in the
access, analysis, and interpretation of data.
2) Help integrate DIBELS, NWEA, MCAII and Mastery Manager data into
PLC discussions.
3) Support building use and development of building score cards.
Support and facilitate DIBELS at the building.
                                                                                               Fall 2010

                                                                                                             30
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                                  2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


Sustain Professional Learning Communities
   1) Ensure PLCs engage in professional dialogue regarding         PLC feedback
       instruction and student achievement                          forms, Professional
   2) Provide meaningful feedback to teachers on instruction        Learning
                                                                    Community
                                                                    Assessment (PLCA)
                                                                    results
RATIONALE

Teachers will use data to inform instruction at the student level. Continuous improvement
coaches have been released from classroom instructional duties and have been assigned to
school sites to implement this strategy as well as to support additional curriculum and
instruction needs at the site by working directly with building-level professional learning
communities to raise the achievement of students in the Black, Special Education and
Free/reduced lunch groups.




                                                                                                      31
                       School Improvement Division
                                                      DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                       2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                      The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                      Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                      Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                      The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                      Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                      increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                      The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL              Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                      increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                      The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                      the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                      Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                      The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                      Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                      Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED              Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                   DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                        MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                   TIMELINE
New 7-12 math curriculum will be implemented                                 Common               Fall 09
   Grades 7-9 implementation                                                 assessment data      Fall 10
   Grades 10-12 implementation


Teachers will deliver the materials with high fidelity and high quality      PLC minutes          Ongoing
instruction



7-12 math coach will meet monthly with course-alike teachers to              Materials added to   Monthly
analyze common assessment data from the prior month, identify areas          teacher shared
for remediation, look ahead to the next month’s material, identify areas     folder
that will be difficult, identify strategies to increase learning, identify
common assessment.


RATIONALE



                                                                                                              32
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                             2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


We will implement a new 7-12 math curriculum with high fidelity. A secondary math coach
is in place to work with secondary sites in meeting the needs of identified students in
raising student achievement through this curriculum and high quality instruction to raise
the achievement of students in the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch
student groups.




                                                                                               33
                      School Improvement Division
                                                    DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                       2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                             District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                     The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                     Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                     The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL             Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                     The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                     the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED             Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                 DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                    MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                 TIMELINE
Learning Work                                                            Progress against       September
                                                                         determined timeline    2010- June
Align curriculum in the areas of family and consumer science, tech ed,                          2011
business ed and health careers
                                                                         Evidence of program,   August 2010 –
                                                                         implementation guide   June 2011
Complete course development for English 11 and 12
                                                                         Evidence of program,   August 2010-
Complete course revision for Science physics and chemistry               implementation guide   June 2011

                                                                         Identification of      Monthly PLC
Analyze data from common assessments in health, (K-6), English and       assessments            meetings
counseling.
                                                                         Common assessment      September
Implementation Work                                                      results                2010
Implement aligned curriculum in health (K-6), social studies, science,
English and counseling.                                                  PLC minutes            Monthly PLC
                                                                                                meetings
Analyze data from common assessments in math and social studies          Comprehensive K-12
                                                                         map of technology      September
                                                                                                                34
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                                     2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                                                                        standards           2010 – June
                                                                                            2011
Develop 7-12 map of technology standards and assessment placement
                                                                        Common assessment   September
                                                                        results             2010
Standard Work                                                           PLC minutes
Implement aligned curriculum in world language (7-12), health (7-12),                       Monthly PLC
and math (7-12)



Analyze data from common assessments in world language and health
(7-12)
RATIONALE

We will develop and implement a guaranteed and viable curriculum, K-12, for reading,
math, and all subjects. A curriculum coordinator has been added to support this work to
raise the achievement of students in the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch
student groups.




                                                                                                          35
                    School Improvement Division
                                                  DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                    1500 Highway 36 West                                                          2010-2011
                    Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                           District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                    The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                    Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                    Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                    The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                    Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                    increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                    The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL            Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                    increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                    The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                    the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                    Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                    The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                    Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                    Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED            Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                  DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                      MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                  TIMELINE
   1. Identify students, including Special Ed students, who are not        1 & 2. Data reports   September
                                                                                                 2010- June
      proficient in Math and their specific areas of need (K-12).          will be made          2011
                                                                           available to
   2. Identify students, including Black, Special Ed and FRP, who are      targeted staff.       August 2010 –
                                                                                                 June 2011
      not proficient in Reading and their specific areas of need (K-12).   3. Document of
                                                                           strategies will be    August 2010-
   3. Research and develop instructional strategies to effectively         shared with           June 2011
      match the reading and math needs in the classroom setting.           Continuous            Monthly PLC
                                                                           Improvement           meetings
                                                                           Coaches.
                                                                           4. Buildings report   Ongoing
   4. Develop skills in buildings to match needs of students with          use and
      existing response options.                                           effectiveness of
                                                                                                 Monthly PLC
                                                                           identified            meetings
   5. Engage in learning how collegial coaching can improve student        strategies.
      instruction in the identified student groups.                        5. LEP, Special Ed    September
                                                                                                 2010 – June
                                                                                                                 36
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                                 2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                                                                  and Title leaders    2011
                                                                  will report          Ongoing
                                                                  improved
                                                                  understanding of
                                                                                       Monthly PLC
                                                                  collegial coaching
RATIONALE

We will identify and implement research-based interventions, based on a three-tier model,
for reading and math. One intervention specialist is in place to support the identification
and implementation of interventions for non-proficient students, K-12, in all student
groups, both elementary and secondary to raise the achievement of students in the black,
special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.




                                                                                                     37
                       School Improvement Division
                                                        DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                          2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                      The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                      Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                      Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                      The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                      Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                      increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                      The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL              Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                      increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                      The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                      the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                      Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                      The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                      Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                      Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED              Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                     DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                      MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                     TIMELINE
Intervention coordinator will research effectiveness of available          Recommendation on        September –
                                                                           viable programs for      January 2011
intervention programs                                                      implementation

                                                                           Evidence of              June 2011
                                                                           intervention and
Identify Tier II and Tier III intervention curriculum                      curriculum

                                                                           Final model              June 2011
Revise intervention course model based on Tier II and Tier III
intervention changes.
                                                                           Meeting schedule and     October 2010
                                                                           list of members
A secondary reading task force (SRTF) will be convened to plan and
deliver professional development reciprocal teaching, for use across the
content areas.                                                             Plan for 30 minutes      Monthly,
                                                                           monthly session          October – June
                                                                                                    2011
The SRTF develop monthly 30-minute sessions for delivery at the site
level.                                                                     Evidence of attendance   Monthly,
                                                                                                    October – June
                                                                                                                     38
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                            2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                                                                                     2011


The SRTF members will deliver sessions, as appropriate, at their sites, to           Monthly PLC
support reading across the content areas.
RATIONALE

We will strengthen the 7-12 reading intervention model to raise the achievement of
students in the black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.




                                                                                                   39
                          School Improvement Division
                                                              DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                          1500 Highway 36 West                                                                    2010-2011
                          Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                                   District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                          The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                          Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                          Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                          The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                          Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                          increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                          The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL                  Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                          increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                          The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                          the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                          Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                          The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                          Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                          Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED                  Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                                   DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                                   MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                                   TIMELINE
1. Reciprocal teaching training for teachers of 7th and 8th grades                      Complete attendance at   August, 2010
                                                                                        the session

2. Central High School will have monthly reciprocal teaching in-service before school                            Monthly
                                                                                        Complete attendance at   August – June,
                                                                                        the session              2010

3. Dakota Meadows Middle School will have monthly reciprocal teaching in-service                                 Monthly
after school                                                                            Complete attendance at   August – June,
                                                                                        the session              2010


4. Secondary Reading Task Force will develop a handbook for reading strategies in the                            November –
content area                                                                            Information will be      June, 3 times
                                                                                        provided through the     per year
                                                                                        building reading
5. Pupil Support Coordinator will meet with Secondary Principals to provide             teachers
information and support regarding reading strategies in the content area.
                                                                                        Attendance at the        October, 2010
                                                                                        meeting

6.   Teacher Academy sessions on reciprocal teaching
                                                                                                                                  40
                  School Improvement Division
                                                DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                  1500 Highway 36 West                                                     2010-2011
                  Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                                                                  Attendance roster from   November,
                                                                  session                  January,
                                                                                           March, 2010
RATIONALE

Professional development on reciprocal teaching will be provided for secondary teachers in
reading across the curriculum. A “Reading Instructional Strategies” handbook will be
provided to all secondary teachers with the expectation that reading strategies will be
embedded in their instruction to raise the achievement of students in the black, special
education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.




                                                                                                         41
                      School Improvement Division
                                                    DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                      2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                             District Improvement Action Plan for AYP
                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Mathematics MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 57% in 2010 to 71% in 2011; and 71% to 85% in 2012.

                     The percent of ELL students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
                     Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 35% in 2010 to 51% in 2011; and 51% to 68% in 2012.

                     The percent of Black students who earn achievement levels of Meets the Standards or
AYP GOAL             Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public Schools will
                     increase from 46% in 2010 to 60% in 2011; and 60% to 74% in 2012.

                     The percent of Free/Reduced Price Lunch students who earn achievement levels of Meets
                     the Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 63% in 2010 to 72% in 2011; and 72% to 81% in 2012.

                     The percent of Special Education students who earn achievement levels of Meets the
                     Standards or Exceeds the Standards on the Reading MCA-II in Mankato Area Public
                     Schools will increase from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2011; and 63% to 75% in 2012
INTENDED             Students in the Black, Special Education and Free/reduced lunch groups
AUDIENCE
                                                                                                 DATE or
ACTIVITIES/STRATEGIES                                                    MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                 TIMELINE
Ready! For Kindergarten –                                                Number of students    Fall 2010
Education:                                                               participating
Classes are presented fall, winter and spring.
Franklin elementary – 5 classes each session
Kennedy Elementary – 2010 winter session (5 classes on one evening)
Eagle Lake (2 classes) and Rosa Parks (3 classes)– Fall of 2010
Hoover, Roosevelt, Monroe and Washington - TBD


Additional education sites: Lincoln Adult Basic Education/Family
Literacy (Fall 2010, Headstart)


Corporate:
Current corporate sites: Carlson Craft, ISJ (starting winter 2011)


Low income:
Head Start

                                                                                                             42
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                   2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




DIBELS:
Track the fall DIBELS scores of children whose parents have been to at
least three Ready! for Kindergarten sessions. Their scores would be
compared to
the “All Student” group as an indicator of program success.              Fall 2011 DIBELS   Fall 2011
                                                                         scores
RATIONALE

We will increase the participation of families of incoming kindergarteners in district and
community kindergarten readiness programs to raise the achievement of students in the
black, special education, and free/reduced lunch student groups.




                                                                                                        43
                   School Improvement Division
                                                 DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                   1500 Highway 36 West                                            2010-2011
                   Roseville, MN 55113-4266




Appendix Attachments

Appendix A: Scoring Rubrics

Appendix B: Updating District In Need of Improvement Plan Addendum

Appendix C: District Corrective Action Addendum [§1116(c)(10)(C)]




                                                                                               44
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                        2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                                       Appendix A: Scoring Rubrics

                              A Rubric for District Improvement Plans

The essential requirements in the school or district improvement applications have been incorporated
(general information, executive summary, needs assessment, highly qualified teachers and improvement action
plan)
                      Completed                                            Not Completed

 General and contact information is included           General information is incorrect or incomplete

 Area(s) for identification are included               Area(s) for identification are not included

 Overview of improvement plan for 2010-2011            Overview of improvement plan for 2010-2011
school year is provided                                school year is incomplete

 Demographics are included in executive summary        Demographics are not included in plan

 Elements are addressed and easily located in the      Elements are not provided or are incomplete
plan

 Comprehensive needs assessment summary for            Comprehensive needs assessment summary is not
2010-2011 school year is provided                      provided or incomplete for 2010-2011 school year


 Highly Qualified Teachers section is completed on     Highly Qualified Teachers section is incomplete
the plan

 District improvement action plan is included with     District improvement action plan is not included
all sections completed                                 or incomplete




                                                                                                             45
                       School Improvement Division
                                                     DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                          2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                                A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                        (DISTINGUISHED ← PROFICIENT ← NEEDS REVISION)

1. Ensure all students are proficient in core academic subjects by 2013-2014
           Distinguished                             Proficient                        Needs Revision

 Challenges preventing the               Challenges preventing the           Challenges preventing the
school or district from not making       school or district from not making   school or district from not making
AYP are identified; actions,             AYP are identified                   AYP are not identified or not
including policies and practices,                                             clearly presented
are evident in the plan to address
barriers

 Targets are specific, clear,            Targets are identified for all      Targets are not provided or are
measurable and appropriately             students to be on track for 100%     unclear
identified for all students to be on     proficiency by 2013-2014 in
track for 100% proficiency by            reading and math
2013-2014 in reading and math




                                                                                                                   46
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                       2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                        (DISTINGUISHED←PROFICIENT ←NEEDS REVISION)

2. Establish annual measurable goals for continuous and substantial progress to achieve proficiency
           Distinguished                           Proficient                     Needs Revision

 Annual measurable goals for           Annual measurable goals for      Goals are not measurable
identified student group(s) are        identified student group(s) are
clearly identified via SMART goals     clearly identified


 Goals are documented for              Goals for identified student     Goals are not identified for
identified student groups and plans    group(s) are established and a    targeted student group(s)
for implementation and evaluation      means of tracking progress is
are evident                            provided over 2 years of plan




                                                                                                            47
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                        2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                       (DISTINGUISHED ← PROFICIENT ← NEEDS REVISION)

3. Incorporate strategies based on scientifically based research to strengthen core academic subjects
           Distinguished                           Proficient                      Needs Revision

 Strategies are identified and an      Strategies are identified for    Strategies are not identified
action plan is detailed for            each performance goal
implementation of each identified
strategy


 Strategies are aligned to the         Strategies are aligned to the    Strategies are not aligned to the
performance goals and specific         performance goals                 performance goals
activities and timelines are
provided for each strategy


 Sources of scientifically-based     Sources of scientifically-based    Sources of research are not
research are identified and evidence research are identified regarding   identified
is linked to cited area(s)           cited area(s)




                                                                                                             48
                       School Improvement Division
                                                      DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                           2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                                 A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                          (DISTINGUISHED← PROFICIENT ←NEEDS REVISION)

4. Ensure the professional development needs of instructional staff are met by providing opportunities
to participate in high quality professional development

            Distinguished                                Proficient                       Needs Revision

 All teachers participate in high         Teachers participate in high quality    Little or no description is
quality professional development          professional development                 provided about professional
linked directly to student                                                         development
achievement including cited area(s)

 Title I set aside funds are used         Title I set aside funds are used for    Use of 10% Title I set
for the purpose of providing high         the purpose of providing high quality    aside is unclear
quality professional development          professional development that targets
that targets the needs of                 the needs of instructional staff
instructional staff to address district
identification area(s)

 Schedules provide time for
opportunities to participate in high
quality professional development in
an aligned, planned manner

 Professional development
provides clearly organized, job-
embedded collaboration to improve
classroom practice




                                                                                                                   49
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                           2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                      (DISTINGUISHED ← PROFICIENT ← NEEDS REVISION)

5. Address the teaching and learning needs in the district
          Distinguished                               Proficient                        Needs Revision

 A comprehensive needs                 A needs assessment process is used       A needs assessment
assessment process is used to          to identify teaching and learning needs   process to identify teaching
identify and review teaching and                                                 and learning needs is
learning needs                                                                   incomplete or missing


 Teaching and learning needs are       Teaching and learning needs are          Little or no alignment of
aligned to identified areas for        aligned to identified areas for           teaching and learning needs to
improvement and are supported by       improvement                               identified areas for
scientifically research based                                                    improvement
strategies




                                                                                                                50
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                             2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                       (DISTINGUISHED ← PROFICIENT ← NEEDS REVISION)

6. Promote effective parent involvement strategies
           Distinguished                            Proficient                          Needs Revision

 Strategies are identified that are    Strategies are identified that are    Strategies are not identified or
effective based on research and best   effective based on research and        unclear to promote effective
practice and an evaluation process     best practice (and include a           parent involvement
is evident                             process for evaluation when
                                       completing Appendix B or C)

 Strategies are identified to          Strategies are identified and         Strategies are not identified or
inform families about continuous       linked to improving student            are not linked with improving
academic progress, especially in       learning in cited area(s)              learning in cited area(s)
cited area(s)




                                                                                                                   51
                       School Improvement Division
                                                     DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                       1500 Highway 36 West                                                            2010-2011
                       Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                                A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                        (DISTINGUISHED ← PROFICIENT ← NEEDS REVISION)

7. Incorporate extended day and extended school year activities as appropriate
           Distinguished                             Proficient                         Needs Revision

 Goals are clearly stated,               Goals are provided or align to       Goals are vague or not
measurable and align with                improvement goals                     provided
improvement goals


 Extended day/ year activities           Extended day/ year activities        Activities have no correlation
meet student needs in cited area(s)      meet student needs in cited area(s)   to cited area(s)
and result in student achievement


 Highly Qualified staff is trained       Staff is trained and prepared for    Little or no training is provided
in the area(s) they are servicing for    the extended day program              to staff
the extended day program


REMINDER: For districts not providing extended day activities, please provide rationale in the plan.




                                                                                                                   52
                     School Improvement Division
                                                   DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                     1500 Highway 36 West                                                     2010-2011
                     Roseville, MN 55113-4266




                              A Rubric for District Improvement Plans
                       (DISTINGUISHED ← PROFICIENT ← NEEDS REVISION)

8. Outline the responsibility of the school, local education agency (LEA), and state education agency
(SEA) including technical assistance provided by the LEA
          Distinguished                            Proficient                     Needs Revision

 Evidence of LEA/SEA                   Evidence of LEA/SEA            Little or no evidence of
collaboration and technical            customized coordination and     LEA/SEA support in development
assistance for development of the      technical assistance for        of the plan
plan                                   development of the plan


 Evidence of LEA/SEA                   Evidence of LEA/SEA            Little or no evidence of
collaboration and technical            customized coordination and     LEA/SEA inclusion in the
assistance in the implementation of    technical assistance in the     implementation of the plan
the plan                               implementation of the plan




                                                                                                          53
                      School Improvement Division
                                                    DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                      1500 Highway 36 West                                                            2010-2011
                      Roseville, MN 55113-4266


                    Appendix B: Updating District Improvement Plans
                     Continuing In Need of Improvement Addendums
Updating District Improvement Plan Requirements:                                                 Found on page#
In Need of Improvement (1.2) and Continuing In Need of Improvement (2.1, 2.2)
                                                                                                Pages 7 and 8
Elements 1 & 2: After reviewing the fixed targets in Element 1(b), update goals for
identified student group(s) in Element 2(a) regarding school year 2010-11.

                                                                                                Pages 10 - 12
Element 3: Describe how identified strategies are impacting student achievement
especially with identified student groups. If little or no evidence of increased achievement,
describe proposed strategy changes.

                                                                                                Pages 12 - 13
Element 4: Describe the professional development supported with Title I setaside funds
for school year 2010-2011 (narrative format).

                                                                                                Pages 13 - 15
Element 5: Describe how teaching and learning needs are being addressed. If any
changes or updates please describe as well.
                                                                                                Pages 15 - 17
Element 6: Describe the process to evaluate the parent involvement strategies being
implemented. If strategies are not effectively engaging parents, particularly from those
identified student groups, describe proposed research-based strategies.

                                                                                                Pages 18 - 19
Element 7: Update, if appropriate, extended day activities.

                                                                                                Pages 19 - 20
Element 8: Identify additional services and onsite consultation from the AYP
Coordinators/Service Cooperative that could strengthen improvement implementation
efforts specifically for your district. Please describe in detail.

                                                                                                Pages 20 - 21
Highly Qualified: Are all teachers of core content classes highly qualified? If no, a
district must identify each teacher who does not meet the federal “highly qualified”
requirements. In addition:
          Describe the specific plan of action that shall be taken, e.g., classes, content
            exam, professional development, etc. in order for the identified teacher(s) to
            meet the federal “highly qualified” requirements. Were these teachers or
            positions identified the previous year? If so, please provide an explanation and
            action plan to rectify.
          Identify the expected date when the teacher(s) will meet the requirements.


                                                                                                                  54
                        School Improvement Division
                                                        DISTRICT LEVEL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
                        1500 Highway 36 West                                                                  2010-2011
                        Roseville, MN 55113-4266




             Appendix C: District Corrective Action Addendum §1116(c)(10)(C)

     Public Law 107-110, No Child Left behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 Requirements                              Found on page#

1. Please complete in detail the “District Improvement Action Plan for AYP” template (currently
   used in district improvement plan or a similar tool) to describe how the required 2%
   programmatic setaside (corrective action) will be utilized (this is in addition to the 10%               Pages 23 - 28
   professional development setaside).

    Provide the rationale for choosing the focus of 1) programmatic funds, 2) relevant goals aligned
    to increase achievement of student groups, 3) strategies/activities aligned to identified areas, and
    4) timelines.


2. List any existing district improvement plan elements that have been revised to exit Corrective
   Action stage of In Need of Improvement
     ● Revisit needs assessment
     ● Update improvement goals
     ● Evaluate the implementation of current instructional strategies                                      Pages 6 - 19
     ● Align professional development with cited area(s)
     ● Review and revise district teaching and learning needs
     ● Evaluate the implementation of current parent involvement strategies
     ● Identify additional technical assistance and support from AYP state wide system of support


3. A district may delay implementation of the corrective action plan for a period not to exceed one
   year if:
      The district makes adequate yearly progress for one year
      Its failure to make adequate yearly progress is due to exceptional or uncontrollable                 Did not delay
          circumstances (a natural disaster or a precipitous and unforeseen decline in the financial
          resources of the district.)
    If such a situation has occurred, please describe in detail the rationale for delay in implementing
    the corrective action plan.




                                                                                                                            55

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:24
posted:8/22/2011
language:English
pages:55