Weak UIP reveals one way low-performing
schools fail … to see themselves clearly
|
Fall 2020 |
Enrollment |
% FRL |
|
Aurora Central H.S. |
1,807 |
79.6 |
|
Adams City H.S. |
1,656 |
74.9 |
|
Risley International Academy
(6-8) |
453 |
94.5 |
We know there are educators in these three schools working
hard to meet the needs of their students. We are aware these schools receive
additional grants to support their efforts to improve. And we have some idea of
the considerable time and attention the Colorado Department of Education and
the State Board of Education devote to these schools. All this—and yet, so
little progress. How can this be?
In some cases, as I will argue
(again*) here, it is
because the schools fail to take a hard look at themselves. They do not see
themselves clearly. A prime example: their inability to write a meaningful
self-assessment.
|
*I
first made this point SEVEN YEARS AGO. It is telling that I use the same
school as my example here, using its recent UIP as evidence. AV#109- Why turnaround
schools do not turn around -1/12/2014 One reason
struggling schools fail to make real progress: Aurora Central
High as a case study "The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates The unexamined life of a low-performing school – an omen that
much will remain the same |
The state of Colorado expects these schools to produce a thoughtful self-report, the Unified Improvement Plan, over the summer and early fall. The 2020-21 UIPs were submitted to the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) last October. The public gained access to these reports in April 2021. I examine one such UIP here. You will see why it fails to present a thoughtful self-study of the current state of the school. Though over 31 pages long, there is little about 2019-20. Much copy and paste work from the previous year. And worse: from the previous two years.
This failure reflects poorly on the school and its district. I realize that Aurora Central High School just experienced one of the most difficult school years imaginable.* And, before that, the spring of2020—part of the school year which the current UIP is
|
*The same is true, no doubt, of the other
two schools on YEAR 9 of the accountability clock. Another View has
written about both in the past. But Aurora Central’s UIP is by far the
weakest of the three. At least we hear a new voice, a fresh view, in the UIPs
from Adams City and Risley. Moreover, Aurora Central is the only one without
any leadership change (Superintendent Rico Munn, 2013; Principal Gerardo De
La Garza, 2015) in years. The argument - “we need more time” - rings hollow. See
AV#88 -Aurora Central High – The Case
for State Intervention, Sept.
18, 2012. |
supposed to address—must have been incredibly hard. So I am sure the school leadership and staff are exhausted – or “fried,” as they say. In that light, my criticism of the school’s UIP will seem ill-timed and unkind. We’ve been through hell, ACHS staff might say; give us the summer to recover. So why do I consider it necessary to produce this study? Who does it help?
|
“a plan that has true meaning…” Unified
Improvement Planning was introduced in 2009 to streamline improvement
planning … Colorado schools and districts can improve
student learning and system effectiveness by engaging in a cycle of
continuous improvement to manage their performance. To support this purpose,
the Education Accountability Act of 2009 requires each Colorado district and
school to create an annual improvement plan. The intent is that schools and districts create a
single plan that has true meaning for stakeholders… (CDE[i]) |
|
Colorado Department of Education – UIP “As a
reminder for the 2021-22 school
year, all school and district UIPs will be due for public posting on October 15, 2021.
This is the launch of the new permanent timeline shift.
CDE recommends that planning for the next school year begin this spring, as
your local data becomes available. The state will review plans for identified
schools and districts (i.e., Priority Improvement, Turnaround, …) when they
are submitted in the fall, so feedback will be available much sooner in the
year.” Colorado Charter School Institute – UIP (Bold mine) Spring • Schools begin work on Improvement
Planning • School-specific CSI work sessions as
needed Summer • Schools complete first
draft of UIP July 15 (renewal)/Aug. 15 (non-renewal) August-September • Schools receive
feedback and update UIP October 15 • Final UIP due (Taken from
webinar on the UIP by CSI’s Jessica Welch[ii]) |
Some have lost hope about high schools like Aurora Central and Adams City. One hears this: no one knows how to successfully transform schools as complex and as chronically low-performing as these. Don’t expect much. (An ugly phrase from the Nixon Presidency comes to mind: “benign neglect.”)
We cannot give up. We can and we must expect something better.
Outline of AV#233
Flaws in Aurora Central High School’s UIP 2020-21
1. Cut
and paste - 2019-20.
2. Cut
and paste and cut and paste - from 2018-19 and 2019-20.
3. How
little we learn about 2019-20.
EXAMPLES OF GOOD UIPs – Fresh
thinking. Clear language. (By Risley, another school on year 9 of the
clock, and Gateway High, another low-performing high school in the same
district as Aurora Central.)
Addendum A – 22 Colorado schools on the accountability
clock for 4 years or more
Addendum B – Questions on how the UIP explains its (State
Board recommended) partnership with the PEBC
Addendum C
– Careless writing reflects careless thinking
1. Cut and paste - Fresh thinking? An up-to-date self-analysis?
A good portion of the 2020-21
UIP is merely a copy of what was written in the 2019-20 UIP.
|
2019-20 UIP |
2020-21 UIP |
|
UIP
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The above-listed priorities and major improvement strategies were developed by the ACHS Administrative Team and the ACHS Instructional Leadership Team during the period of April-October 2019. The Administrative Leadership Team convened for two days, specifically to work on this with the support of MIE and the Office of Autonomous Schools (OAS). In addition, the ILT met monthly to provide guidance and feedback on selected priorities and major improvement strategies. Through this guided process, the team analyzed data and used the analysis to instill our SIP priorities and UIP major improvement strategies. These goals are shared with the full staff regularly and the LT has provided feedback on the goals as well as their ongoing monitoring. |
UIP
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The above-listed priorities and major improvement strategies were developed by the ACHS Administrative Team and the ACHS Instructional Leadership Team during the period of April-September 2020. The Administrative Leadership Team convened for two days, specifically to work on this with the support of MIE, PEBC, and the Office of Autonomous Schools (OAS). In addition, the ACHS Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) met monthly to provide guidance and feedback on selected priorities and major improvement strategies. Through this guided process, the team analyzed data and used the analysis to instill our SIP priorities and UIP major improvement strategies. These goals are shared with the full staff regularly and the LT has provided feedback on the goals as well as their ongoing monitoring. Our Parents in Action (PIA) and Student leadership also had an opportunity during monthly meetings to provide ongoing input into the development of the plan. Parents and students had an opportunity to participate as stakeholders in the needs assessment, analysis of the results, identification of needs, and provision of input on strategies and interventions. |
|
Description of school setting and process for Data
Analysis |
|
|
In order to develop the UIP, the 2019-2020 ACHS Administrative Leadership Team, comprised of the ACHS School Principal, Assistant Principals, Coordinator of Professional Learning and Talent Development, and Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) supported the development of the plan. The team analyzed three years of data that included PARCC, CMAS, MAPs, SAT and PSAT, Teaching and Learning Conditions in Colorado (TLCC) survey, Bellig Consulting Diagnostic Review, Mass Insight Education and Research Report on Progress, CDE Progress Monitoring Report, and State Review Panel Report. Additional data reviewed included graduation rates, dropout rates, ACT scores, and student daily attendance. |
In order to develop the UIP, the 2019-2020 and 2020-21 ACHS Administrative Leadership Team, comprised of the ACHS School Principal, Assistant Principals, Coordinator of Professional Learning and Talent Development, and Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) supported the development of the plan. All stakeholder groups analyzed three years of data that included PARCC, CMAS, MAPs, SAT and PSAT, Teaching and
Learning Conditions in Colorado (TLCC) survey, Bellig Consulting
Diagnostic Review, Mass Insight Education and Research Report on
Progress, CDE Progress Monitoring Report, and State Review Panel Report.
Additional data reviewed included graduation rates, dropout rates, ACT
scores, and student daily attendance. |
|
COMMENT: How can we believe these statements, above? “Convened for two days”; “met monthly to provide guidance”; “analyzed three years of data.” When? In 2019-20? Did such an analysis even take place last year, when the end result of this portion of the UIP merely copied the data from the 2018-19 UIP? (See next section.) Can this really be the product of many months of work? (By
the way, the last time ACHS students took the ACT tests was in 2016. Not even
an effort to slip in three new letters: S A T.) |
|
|
The graduation
rate at Aurora Central High School for the 2018-19 school year was 70.1%, an increase of +20%
since 2015. |
The graduation
rate at Aurora Central High School for the 2019-20 school year was 75%,* an increase
of +20% since 2015. |
|
|
(*According to CDE’s annual report on high school graduation,
released Jan. 2021, it was 72.6% at ACHS.) |
|
|
|
|
Student Achievement & Growth Data Trends |
|
|
Using data
taken from the 2018-2019 School Performance Framework, Central earned 35.2%
of 100% resulting in a Priority Improvement Plan rating for 2019. ACHS earned
7.5/30 possible points and a rating of ‘Does Not Meet’ for Academic
Achievement, 19.6/40 possible points and a rating of ‘Approaching’ for
Academic Growth, 8.1/30 possible points and a rating of ‘Does Not Meet’ for
Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness. The overall CO PSAT mean score was
381.8 in Reading and Writing and 375.9 for Math. The overall CO PSAT/SAT
median growth percentile/rate in reading and writing was 43 and 46 in math,
and 49 for English language proficiency (ELP). |
Using data
taken from the 2018-2019 School Performance Framework, Central earned 35.2%
of 100% resulting in a Priority Improvement Plan rating for 2019. ACHS earned
7.5/30 possible points and a rating of ‘Does Not Meet’ for Academic
Achievement, 19.6/40 possible points and a rating of ‘Approaching’ for
Academic Growth, 8.1/30 possible points and a rating of ‘Does Not Meet’ for
Postsecondary & Workforce Readiness. The overall CO PSAT mean score was
381.8 in Reading and Writing and 375.9 for Math. The overall CO PSAT/SAT
median growth percentile/rate in reading and writing was 43 and 46 in math,
and 49 for English language proficiency (ELP). |
|
Post-Secondary Readiness and Graduation Data Trends |
|
|
On the most recent SPF, in the category of Post- Secondary Workforce Readiness, Central earned 2 of a possible 8 points, a rating of ‘Does Not Meet’. On the Colorado SAT in Evidence-Based Reading and Writing, a rate/score of 406.7 earned 1/4 possible points. On the Colorado SAT in Math, a rate/score of 401.1 earned 1/4 possible points. For the dropout rate, the rate was 5.7 and earned 2 of a possible 8 points for an overall … |
The school was identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement due to low graduation rates. On the most recent SPF, in the category of Post- Secondary Workforce Readiness, Central earned 2 of a possible 8 points, a rating of ‘Does Not Meet’. On the Colorado SAT in Evidence-Based Reading and Writing, a rate/score of 406.7 earned 1/4 possible points. On the Colorado SAT in Math, a rate/score of 401.1 earned 1/4 possible points. For the dropout rate, the rate was 5.7 and earned 2 of a possible 8 points for an overall… |
[i] Colorado Department of Education, Unified Improvement
Planning, http://www.cde.state.co.us/uip.
[ii] Colorado Charter School Institute, http://resources.csi.state.co.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/EA_-UIP-and-SAC.pdf.
No comments:
Post a Comment