Cabinet

__**[|Title I School Improvement Plan Site]**__

__**[|Disaggregated Data for 2011-2012 website Sub-Group Analysis]**__

SWDs-4/12 33.3% in 09-10 compared to 8/11 72.7% in 10-11 Increase: 39.4%
 * 3rd Grade Reading**
 * 2011-2012 61.5% decrease (72.7 to 61.5) same number of student proficient but two more students took test 8/11 vs. 8/13**

SWDs-4/12 33.3% in 09-10 compared to 9/13 69.2% in 10-11 Increase: 35.9%
 * 4th Grade Reading**
 * 2011-2012 -70.6% increase (69.2 to 70.6) more students took test in 2011-2012 13 to 17**

SWDs-4/9 44.4% in 09-10 compared to 8/11 72.7% in 10-11 Increase: 28.3%
 * 5th Grade Reading**
 * 2011-2012 66.7% decrease (72.7 to 66.7) one less student passed EOG**


 * __Math Action Plans__**

SWDs-8/12 66.7% in 09-10 compared to 9/11 81.8% in 10-11 Increase: 15.1%
 * 3rd Grade Math**
 * 2011-2012- 69.2% decrease 12.6% (81.8 to 69.2)**

SWDs-11/12 91.7% in 09-10 compared to 10/13 76.9% in 10-11 Decrease: 14.8%
 * 4th Grade Math**
 * 2011-2012- 88.2% increase 11.3% (76.9 to 88.2)**

SWDs-4/9 44.9% in 09-10 compared to 9/11 81.8% in 10-11 Increase: 36.9%
 * 5th Grade Math**
 * 2011-2012-81.8% decrease 6.8% (81.8 to 75)**


 * __Science Action Plans__**

SWDs-5/9 55.6% in 09-10 compared to 9/11 81.9% in 10-11
 * 5th Grade Science**
 * 2011-2012-66.7% decrease (81.8 to 66.7/this was only one student difference) 9/11 for 2010-2011 and 8/12 for 2011-2012**

__**[|Title I Handbook]**__

__**Superintendent Data Overview**__

Craven County Schools increased in number of schools that either met/high growth Well Played: Budget, personnel restrictions, expectations increased from the federal, state and school (high) expectations District data flat over time Very difficult to maintain excellence and high proficiency and growth Math is our strong point-growth Science is flat What are we going to do to get to the next level? Grade 3-4 Cohort Data: Grade 4-5 Cohort Data:

High School Graduation rate is higher than ever in Craven County and North Carolina. Above the state by 5 points. Evening schools at the high schools are making a huge impact. 85% of students are graduating after four years. Share this with the community. Regression to the mean: High performing schools maintaining excellence. Growth 6 consecutive years

EOCs flat at a high level Data presented in trend data format. Mirror this.

We now have brand new accountability model with 20 MSLs

Next Steps: Continue improving without re-tooling what is working Mistakes will help us grow. Be brave enough to try new things and learn from them. We have to try something different. It is not about punishment. You need to make sure you take care of your pool or it will be stagnant.


 * Great by Choice**

Why do some thrive in uncertainity, chaos and instability and other's don't?

Leadership Matters-posted on Google space/leadership notes

We are only as good as our people

Fanatic Discipline Empirical Creativity Productive Paranoia Level 5 Ambition-cause greater than yourself Paralysis by Analysis-Make it Happen!

-Clear performance markers -Self imposed constraints -Appropriate to enterprise -Proper timeframe -Achieved with high consistency
 * 20 Mile March**-consistency, planning, values and goals.

"Reminder of Key Things that get Forgotten"-Atul Gawand TED talks

Cowboys are like Pit Crews-Atul Gawand, complexity and specialization, complexity requires group success, We all need to be pit crews Principal expectations and Assistant Principal expectations of what we expect to see in the classroom


 * SMaC**-Specific Methodical and Consistent, turning strategic concepts into reality

All the other school systems are in the same situation that we are in. Good or great by choice.

Pieces and Parts. Things that make you go HMMM!

Standard I-V (Standard III is the lowest). Data point (pull report) Joan Bjork. Teachers recognize the Interconnectedness of content area and disciplines This is an opportunity. We need to be distinguished here within our teaching because this speaks to Common Core High Schools-High Proficiency level but achievement gaps are there We are in a good spot but we need to focus on areas of growth. One piece of information on one day. We need to look at patterns over time.
 * NCEES Standards 2011-2012**
 * Staff absences** day of the week (Friday). We need to be at school to deliver distinguished instruction with highly qualified staff
 * Student attendance** (by sub-group, attendance problems = performance problems)
 * Achievement Gaps** Reading/Math /Science over trend data
 * Pivot Table Growth**-District, School, Grade, Teacher and Student (below (negative growth), within (negative/positive growth) and above expectations (positive growth), more kids below than above losing ground. Feed PLC: So What?
 * We do not know what to expect at the end of the year. We are starting at a great point**


 * What do we see and what do we want to see?**

Instructional Leadership-expectation from the Superintendent __**Non-negotiables-**__
 * Student focused decisions**

Reading-especially K-2 I(Instruction, schedule, staffing and support) Continue transition to Common Core and MSLs Reduce Achievement Gaps Less worksheets more project based Spend real time in classrooms, PLCs, IEPs, doing real coaching, real conversations, real support and real evaluations Student growth-proficiency misleading AMOs based on making incremental movements Adapt
 * Leadership Expectations**

Paperless-Google and Groupwise Keep your calendar in Groupwise Evaluate what you are doing, how well it works and what you spend on it-gonna get tight-people or programs. Be able to articulate why you need certain programs IMPACT model with MTAC/Interconnectedness piece Rounds High levels of student instruction and success Evaluation will be based on the individual and the individual school-will be scheduling conversations in next several weeks Goal is growth and success-good instruction and instructional leadership will drive performance increases Don't get there-be able to explain why and what you are going to do about it

Can't base evals and targets on testing data. Data will not be out until October/Promotion: How do we decide/Norms will be re-established:Scores will be dropped EOM input and participation

__**[|NC Teacher Working Conditions Survey 2012]**__

__**[|NC Teacher Working Conditions Survey-Summary Results 2012-BME and NC Comparison 2012]**__

__**[|NC Teacher Working Conditions Survey Comparison Results for 2010-2012]**__

[|How do NC Schools Measure Up?]


 * North Carolina Cited in Harvard Publication - ** In //Achievement Growth: International and U.S. State Trends in Student Performance//, North Carolina was one of six states cited for the most achievement gains for every incremental dollar spent over the past two decades. The other states were Michigan, Indiana, Idaho, Colorado and Florida. The document was produced by Harvard’s Program on Education Policy and Governance & Education

__**2010-2011 EOG Growth**__


 * 53.4% Reading**
 * 66% Math**
 * 60% Overall**

__**2011-2012 EOG Growth**__


 * 56.9% Reading (up 3.5%) MET**
 * 65.9% Math (down .1%) HIGH**
 * 62.41 Overall (HIGH) Increase 2.41%**

__**4th grade Reading overall-64.61% (High Growth)**__
 * Teacher A-4th grade 48.84% (not met growth)**
 * Teacher B-5th grade 70%**
 * Teacher C-75.9%**


 * __5th Reading overall-49.26%__ (not met growth)**
 * Teacher A-50%**
 * Teacher B-43.24% (not met growth)**
 * Teacher C-54.55%**


 * __4th Math overall-62.73%__ (HIGH)**
 * Teacher A-65.11% HIGH**
 * Teacher B-56.41% MET**
 * Teacher C-66.66% HIGH**


 * __5th Math overall-69.07%__ (HIGH)**
 * Teacher A-63.3% HIGH**
 * Teacher B-64.86% HIGH**
 * Teacher C-78.72% HIGH**
 * 4th Grade Growth ratio 2010-2011 for Reading 1.2 Met growth**
 * 4th Grade Growth ratio 2011-2012 for Reading 1.692 Met HIGH growth**
 * 4th Grade Growth ratio 2011-2012 for Reading 1.692 Met HIGH growth**


 * 5th Grade Growth ratio for 2010-2011 for Reading 1.077 Met growth**
 * 5th Grade Growth ratio for 2011-2012 for Reading .93 Growth NOT met**
 * 4th Grade Growth ratio for 2010-2011 for Math 2.081 Met HIGH growth**
 * 4th Grade Growth ratio for 2011-2012 for Math 1.561 Met HIGH growth**
 * 4th Grade Growth ratio for 2011-2012 for Math 1.561 Met HIGH growth**


 * 5th Grade Growth ratio for 2010-2011 for Math 1.964 Met HIGH growth**
 * 5th Grade Growth ratio for 2011-2012 for Math 2.394 Met HIGH growth**


 * [|Co-Hort Breakdown for 2011.2012 EOGS Reading and Math]**


 * [|Preliminary EOG results 6.7.12]**

3rd Reading-83.33% up 4.46% 4th Reading-81.98% up 3.24% 5th Reading-80.73% down 5.79%
 * Before re-test**

3rd Math-96.91% up 9.95% 4th Math-91.07% down 2.01% 5th Math-94.55% up .22%

5th Science: 82.61% down 4.7%

87.3% composite

[|Sub-Group breakdown for district and BME]

[|Comprehensive Needs Assessment 6.7.12]

Standards Six and Eight can now be found in the online educator evaluation tool. The State Board of Education has approved the language for the new standards on student growth, the rating categories, and the 2011  2012 weighting of the components in the standards. Please note the following: · For 2011  2012, a school executives eighth standard rating is based on school-wide growth as calculated with EVAAS. A teacher in a subject area or grade with an EOC, EOG, or CTE Post-Assessment will have a sixth standard rating with 70 percent weight on that teachers individual EVAAS value-added score and 30 percent weight on the school-wide growth score from EVAAS. A teacher in subject area or grade without an EOC, EOG, or CTE Post-Assessment will have a sixth standard rating based on the school-wide growth score from EVAAS. · The Department of Public Instruction will complete the sixth and eighth standard ratings after the results of the 2011  2012 testing program have been finalized and approved by the State Board of Education, and the EVAAS value-added scores have been calculated. This population should take place in mid-August 2012. · After that time, educators who access their summary rating form from 2011  2012 will see the sixth or eighth standard rating completed on the form. · The information above is related to the yearly sixth and eighth standard rating. More information about educator status and the three-year average of teacher value-added scores will be released soon.
 * STANDARD 6 and 8 for Teacher and Administrator Evaluations 9.7.12**


 * [|Disaggregated Data for 2008-2011 Thanks Stacey! 6.6.12]**


 * [|Needs Assessment Document for Faculty Meeting 6.6.12]**


 * A. What are the most significant aids and/or barriers to raising student achievement and progress across the school? Table 1**


 * B. What are your notable strengths? Table 2**


 * B. What are it's main priorities for improvement? Table 3**


 * C. How effectively does the school address achievement across all subroups? Table 4**


 * C. How effectively does the school address attendance issues? Table 5**


 * C. What is the school doing to bring about further improvement? Table 6**


 * D. How does the school ensure the budget allocations and other funding are best used to meet identified needs? Table 7**


 * D. How does the school use data analysis to effect continual improvement? Table 8**


 * D. What is the school doing to bring further improvement? Table 9**


 * E. How effective is the school in providing quality professional development, which meets the identified student learning and staff needs? Table 10**


 * E. How good are the school's strategies for ensuring effective coaching and support for, and collaboration between, staff (including new teachers)? Table 11**


 * E. What is the school doing to bring about further improvement? Table 12**


 * F. In relation to the school's work to engage parents and communities, where and in what ways are these areas strongest and most in need of improvement? Table 13**


 * F. What is the school doing to bring about further improvement? Table 14**


 * G. What are your goals for improvement for the 2012-2013 school year? ALL tables**


 * H. Describe how this needs assessment was conducted? Who was involved? Completed by Title I and Administration**


 * [|New Type of 45 day plan found by Ashley Fillingame]**


 * [|Jim's Online Education Module Picture (Very Funny)]**


 * [|Excellent Public Schools Act-Phil Berger (Merit Pay)]**


 * [|Friendly Common Core Link 4.25.12 Wallace Michelle Lee]**
 * [|Getting Ready for the Common Core in Action Curtis Gatlin]**


 * [|AYP worksheet for ESEA new targets for sub-groups Sandy Carlaccini 4.26.12]**

http://issuu.com/ktenkely

media type="custom" key="10211005" LEA 4th Reading 2009 (0.3 Yellow) 2010 (0.4 Green) LEA 5th Reading- 2009 (0.4 Green) 2010 (.3 Yellow) 2011 (-.5 Red) 3 Year (0.0 Yellow) Yellow=Progress is not detectably different from the average school in the state
 * [[file:bmeadministration/Craven Exit Report.pdf|Craven County Exit Report 2012]]**
 * [|Uploading Title I documents into the SIP]**
 * [|AdvancED Document for Craven County Schools]**
 * [|March 8th, 2012 BME AMAOs Targets and Safe Harbor 2012-2013]**
 * November, 14 2011**
 * [|1st Nine Weeks Math Data Analysis CCS]**
 * October 7, October 2nd, 2011**
 * [|Parent Advisory Committee Guidelines for Title I]**
 * [|EOC Composite Comparative Data with other LEAs]**
 * September 30th, 2011 How to Link for Cabinet members**
 * [|How to Hyperlink in OpenGoo]**
 * Needs Assessment Data for Title I Below: September 23rd, 2011**
 * [|Disaggregated Data for grades 3-5: Sub-Groups from 2008-2011]**
 * [|Cabinet Meeting Agenda for Wednesday, September 21st, 2011]**
 * Tuesday, September 20th, 2011**
 * [|EC Reading Growth by School for 2010-2011: BME highest growth gains in Craven County]**
 * Cabinet Vote**
 * [|Organizational Review-Opening Meeting Powerpoint]**
 * 8.16.11**
 * [|EVAAS Website]**
 * EVAAS At-Risk data shared with Asst. Principal, 5th grade Teachers, LD Resource, and Title I Teachers**
 * District and School Wide data will be shared at the cabinet level also**
 * BME Science- 2009 (2.4 Green) 2010 (.7 Yellow) 2011 (1.5 Green) 3 Year (1.5) Green=Progress is significantly above the average school in the state**
 * LEA: 3 Year is (-.3 Yellow)**
 * BME 4th Reading - 2009 (0.9 Yellow) 2010 (1.0 Green) 2011**
 * BME 5th Reading-** 2009 (0.3 Yellow) 2010 (.3 Yellow) 2011 (0.1 Yellow) 3 Year (0.2 Yellow) Yellow=Progress is not detectably different from the average school in the state


 * BME 4th Math - 2009 (0.2 Yellow) 2010 (-1.0 RED) 2011 (Opportunity for Improvement)**
 * BME 5th Math-** 2009 (1.7 Green) 2010 (.7 Yellow) 2011 (0.8 Yellow) 3 Year (1.1 Green) Green=Progress is significantly above the average school in the state
 * LEA: 3 Year is (.1 Yellow)**

LEA 4th Math 2009 (-0.3 Yellow) 2010 (-.5 Red) LEA 5th Math- 2009 (0.6 Green) 2010 (0.0 Yellow) 2011 (-.5 Red) 3 Year (0.1 Yellow) Yellow=Progress is not detectably different from the average school in the state


 * 8.15.11**
 * [|E-Goldbook: EOG Data for Brinson and Craven County Schools]**

[]
 * Principal Expectations from the Superintendent**

[]
 * Cabinet Report Out Schedule**

[]
 * Cabinet Agenda for 2nd Wednesday**


 * Cabinet Agenda for 3rd Wednesday**

[]
 * Grade Level Chair Agenda for 4th Wednesday**

[|Brinson School Improvement Plan 2011-2012]


 * 3-5 Reading Action Plans**

Directions to get your report: Choose School System, Choose Subject, Choose Grade, Choose Type of Assessment (All)
 * __Disaggregated Results (Sub-Group Action Plan)__**

[|3rd Grade Reading] SWDs-4/12 33.3% in 09-10 compared to 8/11 72.7% in 10-11 Increase: 39.4%

[|4th Grade Reading] SWDs-4/12 33.3% in 09-10 compared to 9/13 69.2% in 10-11 Increase: 35.9%

[|5th Grade Reading] SWDs-4/9 44.4% in 09-10 compared to 8/11 72.7% in 10-11 Increase: 28.3%


 * __Math Action Plans__**

[|3rd Grade Math] SWDs-8/12 66.7% in 09-10 compared to 9/11 81.8% in 10-11 Increase: 15.1%

[|4th Grade Math] SWDs-11/12 91.7% in 09-10 compared to 10/13 76.9% in 10-11 Decrease: 14.8%

[|5th Grade Math] SWDs-4/9 44.9% in 09-10 compared to 9/11 81.8% in 10-11 Increase: 36.9%


 * __Science Action Plans__**

[|5th Grade Science] SWDs-5/9 55.6% in 09-10 compared to 9/11 81.9% in 10-11 Increase: 26.3 %

__**Adequate Yearly Progress Results**__

[|2011 Adequate Yearly Progress Results]

[|2011 Craven County AYP Results]

__ [] __ __ [] __ __ [] __ __ __ __  __ __  __ __  __ __ Growth Ratios __ __ 09/10: Math 4th: 1.714 as compared to 10/11: 2.081 INCREASE __ __ 09/10: Math 5th 2.741 as compared to 10/11: 1.964 decrease __ __ 09/10: Reading 4th: 1.714 as compared to 10/11 1.2 decrease __ __ 10/11: Reading 5th: 1.279 as compared to 10/11 1.077 decrease __ __ Co-Hort Growth Ratios __ __ Math 4th 1.714 last year to Math 5th 1.964 INCREASE __ __ Reading 4th 1.1714 last year to Reading 5th 1.077 decrease __ __ EOG Results before Re-Test __ __ 3R: 3rd __ __ 3M: 5th __ __ 4R: 5th __ __ 4M: 3rd __ __ 5R: 2nd __ __ 5M: 1st __ __ 5SC: 2nd __
 * Official Release of ABCs, AYP and EOG Results**
 * ABC Results**:
 * ABC Disaggregated Results:**
 * AYP:**

[|2011.2012 Student Survey Results 4.26.12]
 * Safe and Inviting BME Results**

[|Parent Survey] [|2011.2012 Parent Survey Results 4.26.12]

[|Teacher Survey] [|2011.2012 Teacher Survey Results 4.26.12]

[|Teacher Assistant Survey]

[|2011.2012 District Teacher Assistant Survey Results 5.4.12]

[]
 * Safe and Inviting District Survey Results**

[|NC Teacher Working Conditions website 3.9.12]

[|NC TWC School District State Comparisons 6.15.12]

[|NC TWC 2010 2012 Comparison 6.15.12]

[|NC TWC 2012 Question by Question Breakdown 6.15.12]