Annual Report Questions

Question

Context/Guidance

1. As you review your progress markers/overall reflection responses and reflect on plan implementation, how do you see your progress contributing to the Outcomes and Strategies in your plan and your Longitudinal Performance Growth Targets (LPGT)/Local Optional Metrics (LOM)?

Discuss at least one Outcome where you have seen progress in implementation.

Gresham-Barlow:

The Integrated Program plan has provided an opportunity for focused work to build systems, provide professional development, and purchase materials to support student learning. GBSD saw gains in our graduation rates for Students with Disabilities (up 13% in 2022-23) and English Learners/EML’s (up 9% in 2022-23). In addition, 9th Grade on Track (up 1.9% in 22-23) is trending up and growth is expected to continue when the finalized graduation rates and 9th grade on track data are released for 2023-2024.  GBSD experienced gains in Regular Attenders (up 3% in 23-24). Statewide testing for 3rd Grade Reading is down 3% in 23-24, but growth is being seen on other measures. GBSD would like to highlight two Outcomes from the Integrated Programs in 2023-2024.

  Inclusive Culture -

• Increased family outreach and engagement, through parent-teacher connections to support academic outcomes for students
• Engagement with culturally specific partners to enhance services and build stronger relationships with focal populations
• Formation of student groups in schools to promote student agency and involvement in decisions impacting their education
• Efforts to gather authentic student voice and empower student groups as part of equity initiatives
• Training and professional development for administrators, coaches and counselors

  Equity-Driven MTSS -

• Efforts to develop stronger teaming structures to support building-level MTSS work
• Focus on Tier 1 core instruction and unit planning to support diverse learners
• Use of data tools to assess school-level needs and inform instructional practices for focal student groups
• Ongoing professional development and partnerships to support MTSS work, including collaboration with the SWIFT Education Center
• New data dashboard introduced to track progress across schools

Overall, these actions demonstrate a holistic and interconnected approach to achieving our goals. By aligning our strategies across community engagement, equitable practices, data-driven supports, and student voice, we are setting the foundation for sustained progress toward our Longitudinal Performance Growth Targets. This systematic and inclusive approach ensures that our students, families, and staff are not only beneficiaries but active contributors to the growth and transformation of our educational community.

Gresham Arthur Academy

The progress we have seen over the 23/24 year is related to two outcomes:

-Small-sized instructional groups allowed students to be appropriately placed at their skill level for math and ELA. This specifically allowed us to focus on our ELL students with more small-group instruction to help them with math and ELA concepts in English. This instruction occurred typically twice per day: they were taught in a small group for their main math lesson and ELA lesson and then later in the day, they received small group intervention in both as well. Also, small groups allowed us to work at a faster pace for any students who may need that challenge.  

-Having a full-time SEL Specialist to support staff and students has decreased the amount of “Think Time” sheets (similar to behavior referrals) we gave to students during the more unstructured times of the day (lunch, recess, lines, group work).    

Lewis & Clark Montessori

There is a clear connection between the Longitudinal Performance Growth Targets (LPGT), particularly in student engagement. This aligns with Local Optional Metrics (LOM) focused on teacher readiness and student outcomes. Data gathered from student performance indicates a positive trend toward achieving the targeted growth metrics. Significant progress has been made in integrating increased Student Support Services within school leadership. This program is now led full-time by a member of the leadership team. One notable outcome was the creation of individualized plans for support, mentorship, and data tracking based on the specific teacher’s needs and style. This outcome emphasizes equipping educators with the knowledge and skills necessary to eliminate the number of students who function without guidance.

2. Where have you experienced barriers, challenges, or impediments to progress toward your Outcomes and Strategies in your plan that you could use support with?

Discuss at least one Outcome where you have seen challenges or barriers to implementation.

Gresham-Barlow

The district is refining administrative roles, financial strategies, and grant management systems to streamline work and improve implementation efforts to enhance grant-related work and ensure efficient resource management.  Ongoing reflection on progress, fidelity checks, and staff onboarding are integral to maintaining strong implementation of district initiatives over time. Implementation of additional requirements, such as those in Senate Bill 3, put CTE electives and other strategies at risk due to competing FTE needs.

Gresham Arthur Academy

The challenges we have seen mainly centered around attendance. The percentage of students considered regular attenders was only 85% for the year. We are a school of mastery, we assess mastery daily and the mastery data drives how quickly we can get through lessons, concepts and programs. When students are absent, not only do these academic decisions become incredibly complex, it becomes very difficult for students to learn concepts. Without students at school, we have not been able to progress toward our goals as well as we assumed we would. Our plan for the 24/25 school year is to focus on attendance, using our SEL Specialist and principal to promote the “Every Day Matters” focus. We have a new Attendance and Missing Work Policy that was implemented during quarter 4 of the 23/24 school year (we wanted to ease families into the new policy and get feedback if changes are needed) and the policy will be fully implemented during the 24/25 school year.    

Lewis & Clark MontessoriLCMCS continues to face the need for more than one FTE to serve as a classroom coach (outcome B). With three separate levels of the program (Primary, Elementary, and adolescent), a single person is stretched very thin to complete observations, provide feedback, model teaching strategies, and so forth. Typically, in a Montessori environment, one coach would be assigned to each level.