Comprehensive school improvement plan

Spring 2014 MAP/EOC Results

MAP assessments were given in Communication Arts, Mathematics, Science, required EOC assessments and optional EOC assessments. Required EOC assessments were given in English II, Algebra I, Biology and Government. Optional EOC assessments were given in English I, Algebra II, Geometry and American History. Overall, 87% of the score comparisons were above the state, which is above the 2013 comparison of 82%. Only 43% of the district MAP/EOC scores improved from 2013 which is a decrease in the improvement that was seen from 2012 to 2013 which was 48%. While district scores declined, state scores also declined. This is an area of concern but knowing the state scores declined as well indicates a possible issue with the assessments. It is important to remember that even though the scores declined, the APR scores and comparisons to the state and the comparable schools continue to be high. Science and JH Algebra 1 scores are also high even though there was a decline in both areas, and Social Studies scores were in the top 10% of the state for the second year in a row. The charts below show the comparisons of CJ to the state, and five year trending MAP scores for each content area.

Beginning with the data from the 2011-2012 school year, the district has compared itself to 11 other schools of like demographics. This year, for the first time, Branson was added to the list of comparison school districts. These comparison districts are referred to as the “Board Comparison Districts.” Including Branson, these comparisons indicate that Carl Junction, again, ranked 4^th in highest scores. Last year, CJ tied with Willard but this year, we stand alone! Carl Junction moved up in ranking for the first three comparison years from 7^th in 2011, and remained the same this year, bumping out Willard, who we tied with in 2013. Nixa, Ozark, and Webb City have consistently stayed ahead of us but we continue to work to decrease the gap.
We are pleased with our current ranking but not satisfied to stay there. Goals have been written across the district at all MAP/EOC grade levels/content areas to move up at least one quartile to eventually be in the top quartile every year. Teachers will present to the board in October and discuss their current state of reality, their goals and how they plan to meet their goals. This is a great experience for the teachers and school as a whole and I believe it has been an impetus to continue to improve scores. The chart below shows the four-year overall ranking of the 12 districts.

Special Education (IEP) & Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL)

The No Child Left Behind Act required school districts to focus on subgroup populations to ensure that they are improving in academic achievement, not only on a yearly basis, but to close the gap between that subgroup and the population of students not in that subgroup. In addition, the MAP Index score, which DESE uses to analyze school districts, takes into account all students scoring in each achievement level. For these reasons, and because inherently, we want ALL kids to be successful, CJ is focusing on our subgroup populations.

With the APR, all schools in Missouri have the same subgroup populations added into district subgroup results. These subgroups include: Black, Hispanic, ELL, Free and Reduced Lunch, and IEP. Analysis of APR and MAP data indicates that improvement in district subgroup scores is needed. Because the largest percentage of our subgroup population is IEP and FRL students, results from these areas were analyzed. For the FRL score comparisons for improvement from 2013 to 2014, 50% of the comparisons improved, matching the 2013 rate. Sixty-four percent of the comparisons for IEP students showed improvement. This was an increase of the 2013 percentage of 48%. When comparing CJ FRL and IEP students to the state results for the same students, 91% of the FRL comparisons for CJ were higher than the state FRL scores while 59% of the IEP comparisons were higher than the state IEP scores. This shows an improvement in scores in both areas over the percentage from 2013. Since there are numerous charts to review, I have not included them in the report. Please let me know if you would like to see any of the comparison charts. Subgroup achievement, especially the achievement of our FRL students, continues to be a priority in order to improve overall MAP Index Scores and our district APR scores.
Graduation Rate

The 4-year graduation rate improved to 90.87% from 87.9% in 2013. DESE calculates graduation rates for 4 years, 5 years, 6 years, and 7 years and uses the highest graduation rate for APR purposes. The highest graduation rate for Carl Junction was the 6 year rate which was 93% in 2014. Although the graduation rate is above 90%, we still need to continue to improve. Below is a chart comparing the 4 year graduation rate with the board comparison districts. The Carl Junction rate is above the state but ranks 8^th when comparing with the area districts.

Carl Junction R-1 School District

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

2015-2016
Objective 1: District MAP/EOC scores will be in the top quartile when comparing CJ to 13 area school districts.*

Content	2011 Rank	2012 Rank	2013 Rank	2014 Rank
Communication Arts	6^th	5^th	5^th	4^th
Mathematics	8^th	7^th	8^th	7^th
Science	9^th	6^th	5^th	6^th
Social Studies	NA	4^th	2^nd	1^st

1a. Strategy:	RtI strategies will continue K-12.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2
Persons Responsible:	Assistant Superintendent, Building Principals, Teachers, Paraprofessionals
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2015 (Implementation dates for specific action steps are listed below)
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Assess the time frame and the staff used in “Kid’s Block.” (8/1/2015) Add comprehension to the RTI reading focus. (8/1/2015) Use RTI data to recruit/remediate students for summer school. (Spring 2015, ongoing)
1b. Strategy:	Adopt and implement a K-12 research based ELA program, with resources, that is aligned to core area Missouri Learning Standards.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2
Persons Responsible:	Assistant Superintendent, Building Principals, ELA Instructional Coach, ELA Curriculum Team
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2014
Date of Completion:	05/31/2020
Action Step:	Investigate a K-12 reading, writing, and language resource for the ELA program. (Began in August 2014, ongoing) Ensure tangible resources are available for home use by all students. (8/1/2015)
1c. Strategy:	Increase Rigor and Relevance through Quad D lessons.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2, 3
Persons Responsible:	Assistant Superintendent, Building Principals, Instructional Coaches, PD Committee, Teachers
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2015
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Provide content and grade level specific professional development, to assist in implementation of Quad D lessons. (8/1/2015) Provide time during the school day for teachers to collaborate, create, evaluate, and revise Quad D lessons. (8/1/2015)
1d. Strategy:	Align curriculum objectives to Missouri Learning Standards.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2
Persons Responsible:	Assistant Superintendent, Building Principals, Curriculum Leadership Teams
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2015
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Provide time and resources to align curriculum when new Missouri Learning Standards are finalized.
1e. Strategy:	Teacher driven PLC groups will collaborate to review and use assessment data.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2, 3
Persons Responsible:	School Board, Superintendent, Building Principals, Teachers
Date to Implement Strategy:	Spring 2015
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Teachers will use PLC time to act upon data. (Spring 2015) Consider earlier release to extend PLC time. (Spring 2015)
1f. Strategy:	Implement technology across the curriculum K-12.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2, 3
Persons Responsible:	School Board, Central Office Administration, Building Principals, Teachers, IT Department, Students, Parents, Community
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2015
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Implement one-to-one Computers for grades 5-8 within the next 18 months. Implement one-to-one Computers for grades 1-4 within the next 3-5 years. Parent/Student orientation as part of one-to-one implementation. (8/1/2015) Hiring of Technology Coaches, one per building, K-12. (8/1/2015) Hiring of one IT person per building K-12. (8/1/2015) Recruit, train, and utilize technology cadet teachers in K-* technology classrooms to facilitate technology instruction. (8/1/2015) Scope and sequence software programs and applications to ensure consistency throughout the district. (8/1/2015, ongoing) Investigate software programs for intervention and remediation of students. Create and publicize online tutorials for new and existing technology.
1g. Strategy:	Preschool will continue to be offered to help develop the skills needed for kindergarten/school success and developing reading/communication arts readiness for children exhibiting the need for supplemental assistance for academic preparedness.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2
Persons Responsible:	Preschool administrator/Title Coordinator, preschool teachers
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2015
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Assess the need to expand preschool program, especially to address low-income, pre-k students. (8/1/2015) Investigate sources of funding for low-income students. (8/1/2015)
1h. Strategy:		Implement and evaluate the effectiveness of the K-12 math program.
MSIP Standard		1, 2
Persons Responsible:		Assistant Superintendent, Building Principals, Math Instructional Coach, Math Curriculum Team, Math Teachers
Date to Implement Strategy		08/01/2015
Date to Completion		05/31/2019
Action Step:		Collect and analyze data from assessments. (Spring 2015, ongoing) Implement ALEKS program. (Spring 2015-ongoing)

1i. Strategy:	Train students on test-taking strategies.
MSIP Standard:	1, 2, 3
Persons Responsible:	Building Principals, Teachers, IT Department, Students
Date to Implement Strategy:	08/01/2015
Date of Completion:	05/31/2019
Action Step:	Classroom practice of electronic test taking. (8/1/2015) Students and teachers will have access to practice on testing software. (8/1/2015) Assessments will be given online. (8/1/2015) Train individuals on constructed response and multiple choice questions and answers. (8/1/2015)