Bloomingdale High School Redesign Plan Based on Transformation Model Required Activities 2011-2014 BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 1 BLOOMINGDALE PUBLIC SCHOOLS LEA APPLICATION Part I BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 2 BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 3 BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 4 BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 5 BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 6 LEA APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS A. SCHOOLS TO BE SERVED: An LEA must include the following information with respect to the schools it will serve with a School Improvement Grant. From the list of eligible schools, an LEA must identify each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school the LEA commits to serve and identify the model that the LEA will use in each Tier I and Tier II school. Detailed descriptions of the requirements for each intervention are in Attachment II. Note: Do not complete information about Tier III at this time. SCHOOL NCES TIER TIER TIER INTERVENTION (TIER I AND II ONLY) NAME ID # I II III turnaround restart closure transformation BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL X X Note: An LEA that has nine or more Tier I and Tier II schools may not implement the transformation model in more than 50 percent of those schools. BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 7 B. DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION: An LEA must include the following information in its application for a School Improvement Grant. LEA’s are encouraged to refer to their Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) and District Improvement Plan (DIP) to complete the following: Provide a narrative description following each of the numbered items below for each school the LEA plans to serve with School Improvement Grant funds. LINK TO THE PAGE THAT BEGINS THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS. 1. For each Tier I and Tier II school that the LEA commits to serve, the LEA must: o Describe the process the LEA has used to analyze the needs of each school and how the intervention was selected for each school. (Detailed descriptions of the requirements for each intervention are in Attachment II.) The LEA must analyze the needs of each Tier I, II or III school using complete and consistent data. (Attachment III provides a possible model for that analysis.) (Note: Do not complete analysis for Tier III at this time.) o Describe how the LEA has the capacity to use school improvement funds to provide adequate resources and related support to each Tier I and Tier II school identified in the LEA’s application in order to implement, fully and effectively, the required activities of the school intervention model it has selected. (Data and process analysis to assist the LEA with this application may be found in the Sample Application (Attachment III) for each school and in the District Improvement Plan (Attachment IV). In the Rubric for Local Capacity, (Attachment V) local challenges are indicated by the categories “getting started” or “partially implemented.” 2. If the LEA is not applying to serve each Tier I school, explain why it lacks capacity to serve each Tier I school. If an LEA claims lack of sufficient capacity to serve each Tier I school, the LEA must submit written notification along with the School Improvement Grant application, that it cannot serve all Tier I schools. The notification must be signed by the District Superintendent or Public School Academy Administrator and the President of the local school board. Notifications must include both signatures to be considered. The notification must include the following: BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 8 9 A completed online Michigan District Comprehensive Needs Assessment indicating that the district was able to attain only a “Getting Started” or “Partially Implemented” rating (link below) in at least 15 of the 19 areas with a description of efforts to improve. 9 (http://www.advanced.org/mde/school_improvement_tasks/docs/ed yes_report_template.doc 9 Evidence that the district lacks personnel with the skills and knowledge to work with struggling schools. This includes a description of education levels and experience of all leadership positions as well as a listing of teachers who are teaching out of certification levels 9 A completed rubric (Attachment V) scored by the Process Mentor team detailing specific areas of lack of capacity 3. For each Tier I and II school in this application, the LEA must describe actions taken, or those that will be taken, to— Design and implement interventions consistent with the final requirements Select external providers from the state’s list of preferred providers; Align other resources with the interventions; Modify its practices or policies, if necessary, to enable its schools to implement the interventions fully and effectively (Attachment VI is a rubric for possible policy and practice changes); and Sustain the reforms after the funding period ends. 4. Include a timeline delineating the steps to be taken to implement the selected intervention in each Tier I and Tier II school identified in the LEA’s application. (Attachment VII provides a sample rubric for principal selection if the LEA chooses an intervention that requires replacement of the principal.) 5. Describe the annual goals for student achievement on the State’s assessments in both reading/language arts and mathematics that it has established in order to monitor Tier I and Tier II schools that receive school improvement funds. 6. For each Tier III school the LEA commits to serve, identify the services the BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 9 school will receive or the activities the school will implement. (No response needed at this time.) 7. Describe the goals established (subject to approval by the SEA) in order to hold accountable its Tier III schools that receive school improvement funds. (No response needed at this time.) 8. As appropriate, the LEA must consult with relevant stakeholders (students, teachers, parents, community leaders, business leaders, etc.) regarding the LEA’s application and implementation of school improvement models in its Tier I and Tier II schools. o Describe how this process was conducted within the LEA. RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS Item 1 LEA Process Used to Analyze the Needs of Each School and how the Intervention Was Selected This section describes the process used to analyze the needs of Bloomingdale High School and how we selected the transformation model. Bloomingdale High School began the transformation process last spring after participating in a workshop entitled, Increasing Student Achievement on the MME-ACT, presented by Succcessline’s Mark Wahlstrom at the Van Buren ISD. The workshop provided great insight on the construct of MME tests and how ACT structures its assessments including the ACT, ACT-EXPLORE, ACT-PLAN and WorkKeys. Armed with new knowledge, the BHS School Improvement team began the process of identifying problems in the areas of curriculum, instruction and assessment. This effort carried on until the end of the school year. On August 16, 2010, the MDE notified district staff that Bloomingdale High Schools was identified as one of 92 Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools. On August 17, 2010, key district administrators and several BHS instructional staff members participated in an MDE webinar, which discussed the grant. Key district leadership began to discuss options and started to formulate a plan that would include all stakeholders. On August 23, 2010 a community meeting was hosted by the district with almost one hundred participants present from the community. The purpose of the meeting was to disseminate information concerning the status of BHS as part of the Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools BLOOMINGDALE HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL REDESIGN PLAN N OVEMBER 16, 2010 PAGE 10 List and to seek input from the community on what actions might be taken. After the community meeting, the Board of Education convened where formal public comments were taken at the beginning and end of the meeting. The result was that the community was deeply concerned and was willing to make suggestions on the next steps. The Board of Education established a Reform/Redesign sub-committee composed of three Board members. On August 24, 2010 the Superintendent, BHS Principal, BHS Dean of Students, three Board of Education members, the UniServ Field Director, and six teachers from across the district met with the MDE State School Reform Officer and other officials to discuss the School Improvement Grant. Model choices were presented and a sample grant package was provided to the team for review. The district came away with a comprehensive understanding of what the requirements were for the SIG and redesign plan. On September 1, 2010, a district wide presentation was made to all K-12 teachers. The presentation focused on the reform models options available and the process for completing the SIG application. Ideas were solicited from the participants. Feedback was positive and a group- wide acknowledgement that change was necessary. Several motivational comments were made by teachers across the district in support of the redesign initiative. A group of teachers suggested that the district consider hiring Successline Inc to assist in the process of crafting the SIG, CNA and updated School Improvement Plan. The recommendation was based on positive experiences with Dr. Deborah Wahlstrom and her partner Mark Wahlstrom conducting workshops in Van Buren ISD and a recent data coaches program that hosted 193 schools over five ISDs with a total of 223 participants. From August 25 to September 13, 2010, the Board of Education, district leaders, and BHS instructional staff met to discuss model options, required addendums to the education association contract and other critical matters.