Published using Google Docs
2015/16 LRSP Midyear and Endyear Update
Updated automatically every 5 minutes

bsdlogo.jpg

BSD 7 LRSP Midyear Update 2015/16, Presented to the Board of Trustees, January 2016

BSD7 LRSP End of Year Update 2015/16, Presented to the Board of Trustees, August 2016

In September 2015 the Board of Trustees discussed the implementation of the BSD7 Long Range Strategic Plan for the 2015/16 school year. (See 2015/16 LRSP Implementation Framework.)  In this discussion, the goals and focus areas for the current school year were clarified, which helped school teams and district departments draft their action plans for the current school year.  In the months that followed, the Trustees scheduled school visits at each site to hear about the progress on the action plans.  In January and July 2016 the Board received an update regarding status of the 2015/16 LRSP Implementation.  This report is a summary of these updates.  This report is intended to provide Trustees with (1) a review of how the LRSP has impacted student achievement with a focus on data from 2015 and (2) overview of progress on the LRSP Implementation.

  1. Impact of the LRSP:  Goal Area 1 defines academic performance in the following way, “Each student meets or exceeds the high academic standards necessary for college and career readiness.”  An intended outcomes of Goal Area 1 is defined as, “Each student shows sustained, individual, academic growth in all content areas.”  Below are some of the academic impacts related to Goal Area 1 from the 2014/15 school year.
  1. ACT
  1. Taken in spring by all juniors, results from Class of 2015
  2. 428 students from the Class of 2015 took the test.  This represents nearly 100% participation rate.  Nationally, 59% of 2015 grads took the test.
  3. The composite score dropped slightly from the previous year.  The composite in 2015 was 22.8 down from 23.0 in 2014.
  4. Comparatively the BHS composite was higher than the State and National composite score.  MT composite was 20.4, National composite was 21.0
  1. SAT
  1. Optional test, usually taken during 11th or 12th grade
  2. 94 students from the Class of 2015 took the SAT.  This is a decrease of 47 students from the previous year.
  3. As the state is now providing the ACT, free for all students, we have noticed a decrease in the number of students taking the SAT.
  4. The participation rate for the Class of 2015 was 22%
  5. The BHS mean score for critical reading was 602, an increase of 12 points from the previous year. (MT = 561, Nation = 495)
  6. The BHS mean score for math was 581, an increase of 2 points from the previous year.  (MT = 556, Nation = 511)
  7. The BHS mean score for writing was 569, an increase of 3 points from the previous year.  (MT = 538, Nation = 484)
  1. AP (Advanced Placement)
  1.  In 2015, 476 students participated in at least one AP exam, compared with 535 the previous year.  This represents 33% of the total population grades 10-12.
  2. In 2015, 936 AP tests were given, compared with 1086 the previous year.
  3. In total, 83% of all test takers achieved a score of 3 or better on their AP exam.  (MT = 63%, Nation = 60%)
  4. In 2015, there were 176 students who earned the AP Scholar Award.  This award is given to students who receive a score of 3 or higher on 3 or more AP exams. (In 2014 there were 181 AP Scholars.)
  1. Graduation Rate:
  1. The 2014/15 graduation rate for our District was 86.3%.  The rate for the previous year was 88.1%.  
  2. There were 51 students counted as dropouts during the 14/15 school year and 16 students who did not complete within 4 years but continued to work toward a diploma this year.
  3. The average rate for all AA schools was 85.4%.  The graduation rate for Montana was 86.0%.  Nationally the 2015 graduation rate was 82%.
  1. Smarter-Balanced Assessment Results, Spring 2015 (SBAC)
  1. PLEASE NOTE: As per OPI memo Dec. 2015 - “Because some students experienced a testing irregularity during the 2014/15 assessment, results may not be an accurate reflection of student, school or district performance.”
  2. The SBAC was given in the spring of 2015.  District wide, 908 students in grades 3-8 participated in this assessment.  This number represents a 32% participation rate.
  3. Grades 3-5
  1. English/ Language Arts = 72% scored proficient or higher
  2. Math = 65% scored proficient or higher
  1. Grades 6-8
  1. ELA = 61%
  2. Math = 50%
  1. Grades 3-8
  1. ELA = 66%
  2. Math = 58%
  1. State of MT
  1. ELA = 45%
  2. Math = 38%

  1. Progress on LRSP Implementation 2015/16:  Below is the LRSP Implementation Framework, approved by Trustees in September 2015.  Embedded within the Implementation Framework are updates from mid-year, written in red italic, updates from end-of-year written in green italic and links in blue.

Introduction  (Approved September 2015, Updated January 2016, Updated July 2016)

Bozeman Public Schools’ Long Range Strategic Plan process is intended to define our goals as well as our plan for accomplishing those goals.  Each fall, a subcommittee of the Board of Trustees (Sept 2, 2015) meets to discuss the focus initiatives, action plans, and a process for monitoring the implementation of the plans.  The following document is intended to describe the “work plan” for implementing the LRSP for the 2015/16 school year.

  1. Relaunching the LRSP for 2015/16: Objectives & Action Plans

Recommendations:

  1. Use current LRSP goals, objectives, & action planning process for the 2015/16 school year.  
  1. Each school has drafted action plans using Strategic Objectives 1.01 Personalized Learning & 1.02 Instruction and Assessment.  
  2. At the end of the school year, each school and team has analyzed their 2015/16 action plans and provided a “level of implementation” for each identified action.  Here is summary data for some of the most common actions (strategies) with an average “level of implementation.”

  1. Take time this year to refine and gain feedback on the College & Career Readiness Framework for incorporation in the LRSP in 2016.  
  1. We have received feedback and started the revision process on the CCR Framework.  Linked here are two versions for Board discussion: (These are versions from January 2015) CCR Framework - long version, CCR Framework - short version.
  2. In May, with help from Education Northwest, we facilitated four focus groups to gain feedback on our CCR Framework.  The groups were: parents, students, community members, and teachers.  Using this feedback we have continued to revise the CCR Framework.  Linked here are the most current versions; presented to the Board at the July retreat.  BSD7 CCR Framework - Long Version, BSD7 CCR Framework - Short Version

  1. For 2015/16 school teams would focus their attention on:
  1. Strategic Objective 1.01:  Personalized learning for each student to help all realize sustained academic growth in all content areas. (Specific Initiative, MTSS and STAR Growth)
  2. Strategic Objective 1.02:  Utilize content area standards in planning and instruction. (Specific Initiative: Math and ELA Content Standards.)

  1. SO 1.01 - incorporate a growth goal (STAR SGP) for both Math and ELA into action plan. The growth goal should be measurable. (Median SGP and/or percent of students falling within specified growth band.)  
  1. Growth goals have been written for each school in the areas of ELA and Math.  These goals have been discussed with building leaders and superintendent / deputy superintendent during the fall evaluation conference.  Specific strategies are also discussed and reflected in the action plans.  Sample goals:
  1. A K-5 Example: Ninety percent of Hawthorne students will meet or exceed the STAR (Reading, Early Literacy) Student Growth Percentile set at 35 SGP
  2. A 6-8 Example: Ninety percent of students will show on target or high growth towards/in proficiency in math standards as measured by STAR assessment.
  3. A 9-12 Example: Ninety percent of students will show on target or higher growth in reading standards as measured by the STAR assessment and its SGP indicator.
  1. Growth goals were written for each school in the areas of ELA and Math.  The STAR assessment was used to measure the growth goals.  Principals reported on the progress of growth goals at routine meetings with the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendent of Instruction.
  1. HERE is a sample K-5 LRSP 1.01 action plan with growth goal and end-of-year data reported.
  2. HERE is a sample 6-8 LRSP 1.01 action plan with growth goal and end-of-year data reported.
  1. SO 1.02 - Action plans would show steps and strategies related to further implementation of ELA and Math Standards.  
  1. We are in the 3rd year of full implementation of the common core standards in ELA and Math.  While school teams have made significant progress, it is important to continue action planning around this implementation process.  Sample action plans: A K-5 Sample ELA Plan , A 6-8 Sample Math Plan  Progress towards completion of the action strategies is reflected in the third column of each action plan with Level 3 designating the highest level of implementation.
  1. For 2015/16 central office teams would focus on the following strategic objectives (SO):
  1. SO 1.04: Utilize meaningful, job embedded professional development to support student achievement.  Specific Initiative: Professional Learning Communities (K-5).  Significant progress has been made on the implementation plan of PLCs at the K-5 level.  The committee, comprised of administration, teachers, and Board members have met several times and reached some understandings related to the importance of PLCs and best practices for implementation.  A significant challenge has been determining how time will be set aside for PLCs to meet.  Due to the potential budget implications, there is not a firm start date for PLC implementation at this time.  After further discussion, the PLC committee reached consensus we should “put on hold” the implementation as a District until we had a budget strategy for implementation.  The committee also agreed to move forward with limited professional development in the 2016/17 school year  for those PLC teams that were ready.  Here is the PLC LRSP action plan.
  2. SO 1.06: Prepare all students to be College and Career Ready to engage in a global community.  Specific Initiative: College and Career Readiness Framework.  In August, 2015 a focus group convened to analyze and define college and career Readiness.  The group included Board of Trustees, District administration and teachers, and representatives from community partners; MSU, THRIVE, United Way, Bozeman School Foundation and staff from rural K-8 schools, in total more than 50 individuals.  In defining college and career readiness, participants identified both academic and non-academic skills at 6 levels: early childhood, K-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9-12, and postsecondary.  Their ideas have helped to create the BSD7 College and Career Framework.  This framework has been shared with a variety of local, state, and national individuals for feedback. Next steps include refining the framework based on feedback and identifying measures for collection of baseline data.  In May, a special effort was made to gain feedback from focus groups regarding the BSD7 CCR Framework.  This feedback was used to refine the framework for presentation to the Board at the July retreat.  Specific measures were identified for collection of baseline data and development of a District report card.  REVISED BSD7 CCR Framework presented to the BOT in July 2016.
  3. SO 2.02:  Use refined Functional Capacity and Enrollment Projections to make decisions regarding student enrollment, placement and long-range facility needs.  Specific Initiative: High School planning.  The High School Programming process started in November 2015.  The advisory committee includes BSD7 Staff, representatives from the City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Chamber of Commerce, MSU, parents and students.  A community listening session was held in December with more scheduled for the next few months.  Here is the HS Programming LRSP action plan.  A spot on the District website has been established with more information about the process.  The HS advisory committee concluded their discussions in early May 2016.  The following recommendation was delivered to the Board of Trustees for final approval.  It is recommended that the Board proceed with the planning process for a second school (grades 9-12) at the Flander’s Mill site to accommodate future enrollment growth, as supported by the High School Advisory Committee.  This recommendation was supported by a majority vote of the BOT at the June 13 meeting.  Next steps in the process involve the formation of three new committees: Programming, Budget, Transition.  A full description of the timeline and committee can be found in the June 13 BOT Agenda (starting on page 82).
  4. SO 2.04: Maintain adequate and equitable school facilities conducive to effective learning and working. Specific Initiative: SMS & Hawthorne.  The SMS and Hawthorne projects were proposed to voters in November, 2015.  Both initiatives received voter approval.  Designs have been reviewed by the Board and General Contractors have been identified.  Construction is scheduled to be begin in the spring.  Here is the link for the SMS & Hawthorne LRSP Action Plan.  Construction on both of these special projects started in the Spring 2016.  Updates to the Board regarding construction progress will be given over the next 18 months.
  5. SO 3.02: Recognize and increase Educational Partnership opportunities. Specific Initiative: STEM, Food & Nutrition, Education Northwest, MSU.  We continue to create strong partnerships with our community in order to forward our goals and objectives.  As a District we recognize the important role of our community in our work.  Partnerships were highlighted at several of the Board luncheons this fall.  Beyond school based partnerships, here are a few of the District partnerships that we have continued to foster this school year.  
  1. We launched the STEM initiative this past fall with a community focus group that included more than 30 representatives from local banks, tech companies, and others interested in STEM education.  We hope to continue this dialogue as we move forward with incorporating more STEM curriculum at the K-8 level.  This initiative will be critical to implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards, which incorporate a component of engineering and design. Our foundation has also embraced this initiative as a fundraising opportunity for our schools.  We have received much positive feedback regarding our STEM K-8 Initiative.  We have presented our plan to several community partners and have received both monetary and volunteer support.  We have established two new STEM classes at MS and we are piloting a STEM course in grade 5 at Morning Star during the next school year.  In total we have 15 founding community partners.
  2. After the Board took action in the summer on the food service issue we formed the Superintendent’s Commission on food and nutrition.  The commission includes several community partners including representatives from farm-to-school, MSU, Bozeman Health, Gallatin County Health Department, parents and students.  The goal is to provide recommendation to the superintendent for ways to improve not only our food service program but also our efforts towards nutrition education. HERE is more information.  The commission wrapped up their work in April 2016 and presented their findings to the Board in June.  Their work is captured in a final report that can be found in the June 13 BOT Agenda Packet - starting on page 85.
  3. At the District level we continue to engage in strong partnership with Education Northwest, a regional consulting/research agency.  In the past they have helped us with research on our MTSS program.  Most recently they helped to facilitate and provide research for our College and Career Framework.  They have committed to helping us find ways to gain feedback on our framework which include convening specific focus groups. Information about Education Northwest can be found HERE.
  4. In an effort to help our students who are transitioning to MSU after graduation, an emerging partnership has started with MSU.  In December, MSU hosted a researcher from Stanford University who has developed college transition strategies around the idea of “growth mindset.”  As we can typically expect more than 150 BHS students to transition to MSU each year, we are interested in anything we can do to help make that transition successful.  We will continue the conversation around this topic into the new year.  BSD7 Staff has been invited to participate in a special conference around this topic at MSU in November 2016.
  1. SO 3.04: Engage in a collaborative dialogue surrounding topics of educational importance to our community and their impact on the LRSP. Specific Mega Issues: Partnerships (STEM & others), College & Career, Food and Nutrition.  In addition to the mega issues identified at the start of the school year, we also anticipate collaborative dialogue and discussion with the Board and the community regarding the Bridger Program and the future of high school programming.  The Board engaged in thorough discussions regarding the following topics of educational importance: District Food and Nutrition standards (July 2015, November 2015, January 2016, June 2016.)  Creation of a Public Charter School (February & March 2016.)  College & Career Readiness (October 2015, January 2016, July 2016.)
  2. SO 4.02: Promote safety and wellness for students and staff to support responsible, healthy choices. Specific Initiative: wellness.  The wellness advisory committee continues to develop strategies to promote health and wellness for students.  In addition, the staff wellness committee has identified activities that will help promote good practices health for employees.  Here are their LRSP action plans, which have been updated with end-of-year progress towards implementation of program goals.  Wellness Advisory Committee LRSP action plan.  Staff Wellness Committee LRSP plan.