A. What data do we collect? The district maintains and analyzes the following data sources toward continuous system improvement: (LRDA1)
*District and Student Demographics
*Athletic and Student Activities Participation rates for grades 6-8 and 9-12
*Multi-year trend line in reading, mathematics and science at grades 3-8, and 11(including disagreggated subgroup data)ITBS/ITED Selected Response Tests
*Multiple measure data in reading, mathematics ad science at grades 5, 8 and 10 (including disagreggated subgroup data)- ITBS/SCASS Constructed Response Tests,and ACT's EXPLORE and PLAN
*Dropout rate for grades 7-12, Graduation rate for grades 9-12, % high school seniors intending to pursue post-secondary education, % high school graduates achieving a score of 20 or higher on the ACT
*Attendance rate for all grades K-12
*Rate of parental attendance at parent/teacher conferences (twice each school year)
*DIBELS reading assessment information for grades K-2 and BRI for grades 3-9
*Suspension, Expulsion, Disciplinary Referral Rates and variety/volume of incidences (SDF1, SDF3)
*Advanced Placement Exam Performance
*Parent Perceptual Data gathered at parent/teacher conferences twice each school year
*Teacher:Student Ratios (class size comparisons)
*Course enrollment trends for grades 9-12
*Course failure rates every 6 weeks for grades 7-12
*Curriculum outcome assessments by grade level for reading math and science grades K-6
*Program completer comparisons from career and technical education state-approved program sequences

These data are used to establish trend lines which are updated and reported in the Annual Progress Report (APR). The status of disagreggated cohort groups are monitored over time on all of the above data sets. The local data driven leadership process has developed a significant variety of indicators beyond those required by NCLB and Chapter 12 of the Iowa Administrative Code.

The district collects, analyzes and utilizes in program development trend line data from the Iowa Youth Survey, which is offered to students in grades 6-8-11 every three years (SDF1, SDF3, SDF4).
*Comprehensive, community wide needs assessment completed by community members, on opinions of needs & concerns of youth & the community

B. How do we collect and analyze data to determine prioritized student-learning needs? Data collection and analysis is a shared responsibility in the Southeast Polk Community School District. Data is analyzed at all levels with the goal of utilizing data to prioritize student-learning needs.

District office administration collects and analyzes district and building level data to guide the district in improving teaching and learning. The Director of curriculum/instruction and the Director of Special Education meet with each building principal to analyze building level data and to create building improvement plans based upon that data analysis. Each school building has a leadership team that is responsible for the analysis of its own data. At smaller buildings the entire teaching staff comprises the team. At larger buildings team composition is representative of the teaching staff. Leadership teams examine ITBS/ITED item analysis information and frequency data, as well as buidlng specific data. This information is shared and discussed at regularly scheduled faculty meetings with a focus on improved student learning.

The district office administration and building principals share analyzed district and building level data with the Southeast Polk Board of Education. Ensuing strategic planning and goal-setting workshops for board and district office administration are an integral piece in the prioritization of student-learning needs across the district.

The central committee of the board is the Southeast Polk District Advisory Committee, or SIAC. The District Advisory Committee is perhaps the strongest and most representative of the district's stakeholder groups. With its standing facilities subcommittee, and its proclivity to establish ad hoc study committees as necessary, the District Advisory Committee serves as the district's window on the community and the community's voice to district administrative and board leadership. The vice president of the Board serves on the District Advisory Committee. ALL major decisions facing the district first work their way through this committee, and are first based on recommendation from this committee. The Committee is comprised of the Iowa Code required membership (first 280.18 and now Chapter 12).
(LC3)

C. What did we learn through this data analysis? Analysis of district and building data, comparison with state student performance trajectories and national achievement data indicates the following:
*There is no difficulty reaching and maintaining testing participation rates beyond goal expectations of both the state and NCLB.
*Performance (proficiency) of students with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) is below the state trajectory in reading and math
*Performance (proficiency) of students eligible for free/reduced school lunches nearly reaches the state trajectory and the gap nearly closed between those elibigle and those not eligible in reading and math
*There is much less differentiation between the IEP and F/R subgroups in the content area of science than in reading and math
*The gap between students with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) and those without IEPs widens as students move from elementary into secondary school
*Reading proficiency appears to be impacted to a greater extent by economic status than does proficiency in math and science
*The proportion of high school students completing the core (4 years of English and 3 years each of mathematics, science and social studies) 100%. Local graduation requirements match the ACT recommended core
*Attendance at school is consistently very high at all grades and at all buildings, including at The Harbor Alternative, where attendance is remarkably high compared to other alternative programs statewide.
*Graduation rates are high for the general population and for all subgroups.
* Dropout rates remain remarkably low from both the comprehensive senior high and its alternative program
*Mathematics is the subject more secondary students struggle with on state tests
*Reading is the subject more elementary students struggle with on state tests

The district's Drug-Free Schools & Communities Advisory Council reviews & analyzes the Iowa Youth Survey results (SDF3, SDF4)
Analysis shows the following increases in risky behavior or perceptions of an unsafe learning environmentbased on results from the 2008 survey of 6th, 8th and 11th grade students:

    45% of 11th graders and 13% of 8th graders reported drinking in the prior 30 days
    34% of 11th graders reported binge drinking in the prior 30 days
    12% of 11th graders reported having used alcohol or other illegal drugs on school property in the prior 12 months
    13% of 11th graders reported having driven a car or other motor vehicle after using any amount of alcohol or drugs in the prior 30 days
    26% of 11th graders and 9% of 8th graders reported smoking on any day in the prior 30 days; 22% of 11th graders reported smoking daily
    35% of 11th graders reported having tried marijuana (ever); 21% reported having used in the prior 30 days
    17% of 11th graders and 6% of 8th graders reported having been offered, sold or given illegal drugs on school property in the prior 12 months
      13% of 11th graders, 12% of 8th graders and 12% of 6th graders report not feeling safe at school
      67% of 11th graders, 77% of 8th graders and 70% of 6thg raders report having had classroom teachers, in the prior three weeks, have to stop teaching in order to deal with a major student disruption or behavior problem
      14% of 11th graders, 10% of 8th graders, and 5% of 6th graders reported having made a plan about how to attempt suicide in the prior 12 months
    15% of 11th graders, 9% of 8th graders, and 7% of 6th graders reported havving tried to kill themselves, once or more times (ever)
    67% of 11th graders reported it would NOT be against their personal values to have sex as a teenager (SDF1, SDF2, SDF4)

D. From the data analysis, what are our prioritized student needs? Based on the data reviewed, the following list of prioritized student needs have been developed: (LC4)

*Improve reading comprehension and vocabulary development for all students, especially for low SES students and students with IEPs - students must read more
*Improve mathematics problem-solving and proficiency for students all students, especially for students with IEP's - students must see relevance in math
*Continue to improve the quality of instruction and the appropriateness of assessment
*Continue to monitor attendance, dropout and graduation rates closely
*Improve ATOD avoidance programming in grades 6-12.

E. How will we develop goals and actions based upon the prioritized needs? The board and administration held workshop sessions with an outside consultant to develop a vision statement and goals for the district. The foundation of the vision and goals is based on student achievement data, staff feedback, and community input. Annually, the board reviews priority work areas and building improvement plans as part of the performance review of the superintendent. (LRDA2) (LRDA3)

The board, in cooperation with the District Advisory Committee -SIAC- will conduct a needs assessment as part of a community attitudes and opinions survey, related to districy services and operations. The survey results will assist the board in developing budget reduction priorities and will provide the framework to prioritize future needs and action plans. (LRDA4)

A. What long-range goals have been established to support prioritized student needs? From recommendations of a broad-based community delphi group and the District School Improvement Advisory Committee, the Board established a set of 8 student exit outcomes.(LC5)

ALL Southeast Polk students will be:(LC6)
*Self-Directed Learners
*Collaborative Workes
*Complex Thinkers
*Community Contributors
*Quality Producers
*Wellness Practitioners
*Global Participants
*Effective Communicators
The 8 Southeast Polk outcomes for students above are a close match to the five 21st Century Skills of the Iowa Core Curriculum/National Core Standards for:
  Health Literacy             Employability Skills
  Financial Literacy           Technology Literacy
  Civic Literacy

The district's long-range goals define student achievement targets which meet locally determined student needs and address state and federal student accountability requirements.

Goal 1 - All students will achieve at high levels in reading, mathematics and science.(LRG1, EIG1, LRG2, LRG3)

The following indicators will measure district progress toward GOAL 1:

*percentage of students in grades 3-8 (ITBS) and in grade 11 (ITED) who score as proficient (at or above 41NPR), including all subgroups
*percentage of students in grades K-2 who are at benchmark on the DIBELS and in grades 3-6 who are overall high performers on the BRI
*percentage of students requiring remedial assistance in the form of reading and/or math intervention
*percentage of students in grades 3-12 earning a 2.0 GPA and higher in core courses
*percentage of students in grades 8 and 10 who are on-track to be prepared for post-secondary study (EXPLORE, PLAN)
*percentage of graduates taking the ACT who are prepared for post-secondary study (ACT)

Goal 2 - All students will use technology to develop greater proficiency in reading, mathematics and science.(FTP1)

The following indicators will measure district progress with GOAL 2:

*the indicators identified for GOAL 1
*the number of 8th grade students who score at the mastery level on the locally developed technology assessment

Goal 3 - All students will find school a safe, respectful and inviting place to experience the joy of learning.(MCGF3, AR6)

The following indicators will measure district progress with GOAL 3:
*K-8 attendance rate calculated by the Iowa Department of Education
*graduation and dropout rates calculated by the Iowa Department of Education
*percentage of student body in grades 6-12 with discipline incidents (SDF5, SDF6, SDF7)
*percentage of students in grades 6, 8, and 11 who report they have used alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs on the triennial Iowa Youth Survey (SDF5, SDF6, SDF7)
*percentage of students in grades 6-8 and 9-12 who participate in school activities
*service learning participation levels by project and by #'s of students and classrooms

Goal 4 - All students will learn in an attractive, high quality physical environment.

The following indicator will measure district progress with GOAL 4:
*securing construction /renovation funds (bond ,sales tax,and grant) to build /remodel necessary facilities

B. What process will be used to determine what we will do to meet the long-range goals? The district's Professional Development Committee (comprised of 13 teacher representatives selected by the education association president and 12 representatives selected by the Director of Curriculum and Instruction) meet each spring, usually in April, to discuss staff development opportunities based on district goals and data identifying student needs for the following school year. This group's work provides for a K-12 alignment of efforts toward district goals.

The district has used the Iowa Professional Development Model process to develop its District Career Development Plan and an instructional support model to guide toward goal progress (theory, demonstration, guided practice, feedback). This instructional support model is designed to improve teaching and student learning. (TQ3)

Building principals meet with the Directors of Curriculum/Instruction and Special Education and the district's AEA Partnership Director each spring to develop specific district-wide and building level professional development targets and an improvement plan based on building and grade level student achievement data and staff implementation data. This improvement plan includes the principal's professional goals based upon the building's needs. Schools with AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) subgroups below the state trajectory design plans with goals to meet the trajectory or for "safe harbor." Those at or above the trajectory set goals for an increase of 3%. At these spring meetings they also build schedules for the delivery and implementation of the professional development targets identified from building and grade level student achievement data and staff implementation data and a district-wide professional development calendar.(AMN1, AMN2, AMN3)

The superintendent utilizes the building improvement plans as a focus for administrative goal setting and principal evaluations. Throughout the school year, classroom and building level data are analyzed and used to guide instruction. In each building this analysis takes place at the individual student, classroom, and building level during problem solving meetings.

Teacher Quality professional development funds allow for an extra day each spring for teachers to meet at buildings with principals and analyze the full array of data points pertaining to their students' achievement. This day is known as Data Day.

Teacher Quality funds also support local summer course offerings for teachers, counselors, and nurses taught by Southeast Polk teachers to increase capacity of implementation with problem-based math, inquiry science and social studies, balanced literacy and vocabulary growth, differentiation of instruction, and collaboration.

C. What is our current practice to support these long-range goals? Instructional Programs/Services Supports Currently Used in the District:
*Student service partnerships, e.g. mental health services & community health services-preK-12
*Student instruction-ATOD & violence prevention
*Youth leadership groups/training
*Conflict resolution/peer mediation
*Title IV: Safe & Drug-Free Schools Program/Services
Central Place, the district family resource center, addressed the needs of student -preK-12 - and family issues, e.g. physical, mental health, basic needs, prevention, pre-K literacy, community education. (SDF6)

Title ll Part D – District is a part of AEA #11 E2T2 consortium concentrating efforts on senior high math achievement. Staff training opportunities have been completed to aid classroom teachers in consistent use of effective math instruction strategies. Senior high teachers and an assistant principal have created a supplemental math intervention course known as IMPACT math which uses Carnegie Cognitive Tutor software with teacher guidance. 5 teachers are assisting groups of up to 6 students throughout the school day to improve their mathematics understanding. (FTP2, FTP3)

Our school district, in cooperation with Heartland AEA, facilitates the B.E.S.T. mentor/mentee program for our first year teachers and a "Dimensions of Learning" foundation for our second year teachers. Three veteran teachers are trainers for this state-rerquired program toward full licensure. (TQ5)

We provide ongoing professional development for teachers and administrators through in-house training on both software applications and new advanced hardware to promote communication, enhance instruction/student achievement, and to record/manipulate achievement data. A series of spring 2010 surveys by the district Technology Committee highlighted a range of teacher technology practice and learning needs. The major part of the March staff development day will continue to be devoted to a collection of technology workshops facilitated by teachers for teachers.

All first and second year teachers, along with their mentors, illustrate/document meeting the eight state defined teaching standards. Other veteran staff cycled for evaluation also document their work related to the standards. Training was provided a few years ago on e-portfolio, and teachers may use it if they choose.(FTP4, FTP5)

Ensure that students with IEP's make progress and there are increased levels of achievement among special education students:
The district provides a full continuum of special education services to ensure student needs are met. Collaboration is the foundation for our services. Buildings have designated times throughout the school year to problem solve and develop action plans to meet student needs. Special education and general classroom teachers meet to review the IEP, and the specific student’s needs including classroom modifications and accommodations during instruction and testing.

Special education teachers participate in the majority of the district’s professional development opportunities. All professional development is centered on student needs as determined through our district-wide assessment data. In addition, professional development for teachers includes reading/language arts skills and strategies; math problem-solving; the IEP as a document and as a process as well as rules and procedures; accommodations; modifications; progress monitoring and using data to make instructional decisions; collaboration and co-teaching; differentiation of instruction; writing and following effective behavior plans, de-escalation, and decreasing the use of seclusion and time-out; transition planning and developing effective transitions for students. Training for special education teachers follows the Iowa Professional Development Model.

Special education aides participate in the following professional development: the role of the special education aide; collaboration with other professionals; the IEP as a document and as a process; confidentiality; behavior management, de-escalation, and handling conflicts; Mandt certification; autism training. In addition, student-specific training is provided for aides whose positions require it. This training is provided by the special education teacher, school nurse, or Heartland AEA.(SPED1)

At-risk programming includes: an alternative program for grades 10-12, an after-school program to assist with skill development and homework completion, guidance counselors at each elementary building, three junior high and two senior high at-risk counselors to provide group sessions and individual assistance, a 9th period credit recovery initiative, participation in the metro area Youth at Risk consortium, year-round independent study courses for credit recovery, reading intervention specialists grades K-9, a math intervention teacher at the junior high, and solid IPDM-based professional development for staff. (AR7)

Iowa Early Intervention funds support part of the district's supplemental reading intervention program at each of eight elementary schools to decrease the teacher:student ratio during reading instruction. The program supports both small group pull-out and collaborative reading interventions for struggling readers grades K-6. Students are identified for service from this district program based on ITBS/ITED, DIBELS, BRI and multi-dimensional fluency scale assessments and classroom assessment of grade level outcomes. (IEI1)

The district has wholeheartedly embraced the Iowa Core Curriculum/National Core Standards. Extensive commitment is evidenced on the part of teachers, building principals and district administration toward implementing the Iowa Core/National Core into the work of teaching and learning. Iowa Core for Literacy is established K-12, and for mathematics K-8 with updates needed toward National Core specifics. Work is underway for mathematics 9-12 Iowa Core/National Core. Iowa Core for science is in place 6-12, with planning in progress toward Iowa Core science K-5 in 2011-2012. 21st Century Skills can be found in 7-12 Health, 9-12 Career and Technical Education, and within literacy, math and science. Social Studies will be the last on district scheduling for implementation.

D. How is our current practice aligned with or supported by the research base? Programs/services through Title IV are chosen based on available research, local student data, & community data. (SDF9)

Southeast Polk uses the Iowa Professional Development Model (theory, demonstration, practice, feedback) to develop its District Career Development Plan and an instructional support model to guide toward goal progress.

The foundations on which the district's professional development plan is built are Marzano's Dimensions of Learning and Tomlinson's Differentiation of Instruction. Each teacher beginning teacher (first or second year)is required to complete the Iowa mentor/mentee training which outlines district expectations. The program serves as an induction model and provides common vocabulary for common work.


The district's Professional Development Committee (comprised of 13 teacher representatives selected by the local education association president and 12 representatives selected by the district Director of Curriculum/Instruction) meet each spring, usually in April, to plan professional development opportunities based upon district goals and data identifying student needs for the coming school year. This group's work provides for a K-12 alingment of efforts toward district goals.

Building principals meet with certificated staff one extra day each school year, which is funded using state Teacher Quality funds, to analyze the full array of data points pertaining to their students' achievement. This day is known as Data Day. Then each building begins to develop an improvement plan for the next school year. Building level data day analyses are turned in to the district Director of Curriculum/Instruction for district-wide analysis.

Building principals (K-5, 6-8, 9-12) meet with the Directors of Curriculum/Instruction and Special Education and the AEA Partnership Director each spring after Data Day and after the PDC has met, generally in late May or early June. At these 3 meetings specific district-wide professional development plans are tentatively laid out for the following school year. Building level professional development targets and an improvement plan based upon buildng and grade level student achievement data and staff development implementation data are developed. Each building improvement plan includes the principal's professional development goals based upon that building's needs. Buildings with AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) subgroups below the state trajectory design plans with goals to meet either the trajectory or "safe harbor." Buildings at or above the trajectory design plans with goals to improve by 3%. The superintendent then utilizes these building improvement plans as a focus of conversations with each principal in late summer or early fall and as a guide to principal evalaution at the end of the next school year.

Throughout the school year classroom and building level data are analyzed and used to guide instruction and problem solving grade level group discussions. In each building this analysis takes place at the individual student, classroom, and building level.

District-wide, K-12 inclusive, summer courses are offered for licensure renewal through Heartland AEA #11 or Drake graduate credit toward the district professional development goals of problem-based math, inquiry science, balanced literacy, differentiation of instruction and collaboration taught by district teachers for district teachers using Teacher Quality funds. Much has been published on the value of school-based staff developers. (TQ7)

We frequently rely on AEA content area specialists as state-approved professional development providers to study science education practices supported by research in training groups know as CAB. (TQ6)

AEA #11 science consultants have been active in the district to engage in large group sessions with teachers K-5 and 6-12 on inquiry-based science instruction to answer the guiding question: "How do we best engage students in investigations that promote inquiry and push them to think, write, and research like scientists?"   Their work is imbedded in the district's Iowa Core Curriculum as teachers work with colleagues to plan, practice and reflect on inquiry-based science instruction to improve student learning.

Levels I, II and III special education teachers participate with general education colleagues in the content area professional development to answer the
guiding question : "How do we best increase the student achievement of students with special needs?"

E. What gaps exist between our current practice to support long-range goals and the research base (include curriculum and instruction)? Iowa Youth Survey results indicate there is a gap between outcomes & practice in grades 7-12, especially in regard to:
Practicing a healthy lifestyle and choosing socially appropriate behaviors.

Research tells us that students have higher academic achievement when they feel safe & connected to school. Research also says delaying of onset of ATOD use increases the likelihood of never using or using responsibly as adults.
Current practice needs to strengthen strategies related to this research. (SDF9)

We have developed grade level or course outcomes in all content areas which are now being connected to the Iowa Core/National Core Standards. K-2 and 3-6 teachers beginning with the 2010-11 school year use Infinite Campus student information/data keeping system to assess students based on these outcomes. Parameters for weighting student work lands more heavily on summative assessment than on homework practice and instructional activities in the classrooms. Grade level content specific rubrics match with the new Iowa Core pieces.

The district has wholeheartedly embraced the Iowa Core Curriculum/National Core Standards. Extensive commitment is evidenced on the part of teachers, building principals and district administration toward implementing the Iowa Core/National Core into the work of teaching and learning. Iowa Core for Literacy is established K-12, and for mathematics K-8 with updates needed toward National Core specifics. Work is underway for mathematics 9-12 Iowa Core/National Core. Iowa Core for science is in place 6-12, with planning in progress toward Iowa Core science K-5 in 2011-2012. 21st Century Skills can be found in 7-12 Health, 9-12 Career and Technical Education, and within literacy, math and science. Social Studies will be the last on district scheduling for implementation.


At all three levels, elementary, junior and senior high, the gap between research and practice is evidenced in the need for appropriate use of classroom formative and summative assessments that match grade level and course outcomes. Improved student achievement hinges on improvement of instruction and classroom assessment that accurately measures student work toward district outcomes and the Iowa Core/National Core Standards.

F. What actions/activities will we use to address prioritized needs, established goals, and any gaps between current and research-based practice? The district career development plan describes efforts aligned with priortized student needs. Selection of professional development targets was based on a wealth of student data. Teacher practices have been reviewed by evaluating administrators who completed the most recent evaluator approval course together as a district group, which allowed tremendous opportunity for important discussions. The career development plan is part of a cycle of professional development efforts targeted at student learning sustainable until desired student gains are met.

In addition to, and combined with, the description of the foundations of Dimensions of Learning/Differentiation of Instruction with collaboration across the district, we have developed the following professional development foci: (PD5)
*Problem-based, Relevant, Authentic Application Mathematics;
*Robust/Academic Vocabulary Development toward Increased Reading Comprehension, and
*Inquiry-based Science and Social Studies.
Each of the three above is organized around a guiding question related to established student achievement needs, based on examples of active pedagogy, and framed by strategies for increased learning. (PD6, TQ1, TQ2)

Early dismissals at the elementary level and late starts at the secondary level allow for collegial practice, sharing and planning. Professional development time and resources are focused on the Iowa Professional Development Model: theory, demonstration, guided practice, and feedback for learning and implementing new content and instructional practices. (TQ3, TQ4, FTP3, LEP1)

The plan's actions align directly with Iowa Teaching Standards # 2, 3, 4, and 7 and their accompanying Criteria:
*Demonstrates competence in content knowledge
*Demonstrates competence in planning and preparation for instruction
*Uses strategies to deliver instruction that meet the multiple learning needs of students
*Professional Development (TQ5)

All teachers will be engaged in training, including those responsible for Title I, Special Education, At-Risk, ELL and TAG. Principals and district office administration who have helped design the activities and will be active participants. Both the AEA (staff development) and Drake University (graduate) provide credit for multiple district professional development initiatives.(PERK1, SPED1, LEP1, TQ8)

Beginning with the 2010-11 school year district and building administrators will refresh their capabilities to thorougly and accurately conduct classroom walk throughs and document their informal observations on checklists toward implementation of district professional development for literacy, math, science and classroom management.

G. How will we support implementation of the identified actions? -Implementation is supported with clear expectations at district, building and classroom levels.
-Resources to support the Career Development Plan's actions include district's state and federal funding sources, AEA resources, and the state service component of the University of Northern Iowa teaching staff.
-Implementation should be, and we hope will soon be, assisted by the restoration of the K-12 language arts and math coordinators, the addition of K-12 science and instructional technology coordinators.   K-12 building principals coordinating with the district Office of Curriculum and Instruction are currently attempting to manage teacher implementation.
-Building principals are ultimately responsible for oversight of implementation.
-The ultimate evaluation of the actions' implementation effectiveness is improvement of learning and increased student achievement.
-Building principals collect and review teachers' individual lesson plans for teaching and learning and conduct classroom walk through's for incorporation and practice with appropriate strategies and implementation of teacher staff development as well as for evidence of the presence of dimensions of learning , differentiation of instruction, and collaboration/c0-teaching.
- Beginning with 2010-11 school year principals will use an observation and feedback checklinst to assist rteachers in thew implementaion of district professional development.
Thus:
*Fidelity of implementation is screened at the building level. Coaching, modeling and practice with colleagues, and feedback from them and from principals helps to ensure implementation succcess.
*As classroom assessments and 4-year plans for grades 8-12 more accurately measure district outcomes the implementation of professional development is also monitored.

A. How will we know student learning has changed over time in relation to our long-range goals? All district students in grades 3-11, except those special education students designated for alternate assessment, are included in ITBS/ITED selected response testing for reading, mathematics and science.
ITBS/ITED selected response tests are administered during the first week of February each winter. (DWAP1)

All students in grade 5 (except special education students designated for alternate assessment) are included in the ITBS/SCASS constructed response testing for reading, mathematics and science. Constructed response testing occurs during the first week of March each spring and is holistically scored by 4th and 5th grade teachers during an inservice day in March. (DWAP6, DWAP7, DWAP8)

All 8th grade students take the EXPLORE test and all 10th grade students take the PLAN test (both from the ACT testing family) the first week of October.

Phonemic awareness, accuracy and fluency are assessed for all students in grades K-2 with the DIBELS diagnostic in fall, winter and spring.
Reading comprehension, accuracy and fluency are assessed in the fall for all students in grades 3-6 using the Basic Reading Inventory and the multiple dimensional fluency scale. Students who are not overall high performers then are assessed using the BRI again in the winter and in the spring to determine struggling reader type, to design specific reading intervention, and to measure progress.(DWAP3)
Reading comprehension for all students in grades 3-11 is asssessed each school year with the statewide ITBS/ITED. Seventh, eighth and ninth graders who are not proficient on the reading comprehension subtest of ITBS/ITED are also assessed further with the BRI to determine need for specific reading intervention.(DWAP4)

Title III funds are accessed via the Heartland AEA # 11 consortium. All English Language Learners are placed using appropriate sections of the IPT. General education classroom teachers administer DIBELS to elementary ELL students in grades K-2 and the BRI to ELL students in grades 3-9. ELL students in grades 3-11 take the ITBS/ITED and the ELDA (English Language Development Assessment) annually as well. (LEP2)

A. What strategies/process will we use to evaluate how well the activities included in Constant Conversation Question 2 (What do/will we do to meet student learning needs?) were implemented? * District administrative, counseling and collaborative instructional teams consistently review available data related to programs and services..
* Student achievement data is analyzed immediately following receipt of new assessment data [IPT, DIBELS, BRI, EXPLORE, PLAN, ACT, ITBS/ITED selected response, 5th grade constructed response, ELDA].
* Teachers conduct holistic scoring of the ITBS/SCASS constructed response tests each spring.
* 6-8 and 9-12 building administrators report out each trimester and semester regarding student failures, discipline instances, attendance.
* Spring Creek, Junior and Senior high teacher advisors and administrators record and report every 6 weeks about classroom assessments via parent report cards and progress reports.
* Elementary teachers and administrators report every 6 weeks about classroom assessments toward grade level outcomes, attendance and student progress toward grade level learning behaviors via parent report cards and progress reports.
* All district data is disaggregated by building, by grade level, by classroom and by demographic subgroup.
* Principals and teachers graph and compare progress toward district goals with state trajectories and state/national percentile ranks.
* District administration and building principals record and report to the District Advisory Committee and to the Board of Education at least annually about student achievement, participation, discipline and attendance data. The district has its own data storage and management system. It also shares in AEA #11 HEART system.

Staff development at both the building and district levels focuses on student achievement and is built from building and district data.  
-Grade level/content area student achievement goals are developed for each building's annual school improvement plan after reviewing student performance on district-wide assessments and classroom learning data.
-Assessment teams @ grades 3-8 organize small testing groups to help students who need extra time, quiet setting, etc.
-Teachers prepare "target lists" of students who, according to DIBELS, BRI and ITBS/ITED assessments, were not proficient in reading, math or science. These lists are used on a weekly basis and assist teachers to impact student learning and student performance.
-Teachers plan interventions, meet regularly to monitor progress, and make necessary adjustments.

K-5 building-based grade level problem-solving groups and 6-12 Student Assistance Teams meet weekly for to plan the specifics of instructional interventions for individual struggling students. (ECSIP1)

This district collects and interprets data about every program and activity on which it conducts/spends district funds.

B. What implementation/student data will we collect, analyze, and use to determine how well each program/service described in Question 2 has been implemented to support our CSIP goals? Gifted and Talented programming is evaluated each spring with a 3-part parent/ teacher/student survey which is compiled by instructional level (K-5, 6, 7-8, 9-12) and district-wide. An advisory council comprised of regular program teachers, gifted education teachers, building principals and district administators meets twice each school year to review/refine the program's student identification process, consider ideas for program development, and design/prepare parent communications. Data on student performance from district-wide achievement measures is considered and goals are created for improved student success. (GT2)

At-Risk programming is evaluated each fall by counselors, principals and district administrators, family resource center staff, reading/math specialists. Specific student needs are raised and ooptions for addressing them are discussed. Each of many on-going pieces of this broad program is highlighted with opportunity for participants (representing many others in the school community) to suggest improvements. Data on dropout prevention, guidance other factors contributing to student at-riskedness is reviewed. (AR4)

Documentation of competency in the Iowa Teaching Standards for all beginning first and second year teachers requires staff and administrative evaluator to focus on the Standards, on student achievement data and on how our staff development commitment impacts student learning. (TQ10, TQ11, TQ12)

The district evaluates the effectiveness of its career development plan with the principals and district personnel department analyzing individual teacher data about the implementation of the Iowa Teaching Standards and the five pedagogies which make up the focus of that plan including:
1) The foundation of "Dimensions of Learning", Differentiation of Instruction and collaboration,
2) Problem-Solving, Authentic Application Mathematics,
3) Balanced Literacy and Vocabulary Growth,
4) Inquiry-Based Science and Social Studies,
5) Alignment of classroom assessment with instruction and with grade level/course outcomes.
All building principals and assistant principals, the Director of Human Resources/Program and the Director of Curriculum/Instruction completed the state-wide teacher evalaution training together at the district as a group.
Teachers and their building principals gather and record data regarding:
1) Participation/Attendance in district professionial training and learning opportunities,
2) Purposeful implementation of that training/learning,
3) Collegial collaborative work between training sessions,
4) Quality, frequency and fidelity of implementation,
5) Formative implementation data--analysis and discussion of team meetings, student data, lesson plans, logs, observtion notes
6) Summative implementation data--examples of imcreased student achievement
Such staff development implementation evidence supports performance review documentation and artifacts and helps teachers to study their own professional practice.

All first and second year beginning teachers are required to complete the AEA B.E.S.T. mentoring program and the local supplemnent, which is rooted in the "Dimensions of Learning" and Tomlinson's Differentation of Instruction.
(TPTR1, TQ9)

Student progress is monitored by administration through numerous avenues such as the following:
Individual student progress monitoring is utilized as determined by the IEP and progress is graphed every three weeks. Teachers use a decision-making rule to determine if they need to changeg instruction. Data is shared with parents at least three times per year. District assessment data including ITBS/ITED or the state's alternate assessment are also used to help determine instructional learning needs. Principals, Heartland AEA personnel, and teachers discuss student data and use it for the basis of instructional decision-making. Student data is the basis for our professional development.

For studnets receiving special education, progress towards goal achievement is monitored closely (weekly or biweekly) and data is used to guide instruction. Collaboration and consultation between general education and special education is a critical component in planning for student success. Performance is reviewed frequently at the individual, classroom, and building level.   Student performance is formally reported three to six times per year through progress reports and report cards. IEP meetings are held at minimum of once per year. Goal attainment, assessments, and program needs are reviewed during regular meetings with AEA representatives and district administration as well as during the administrative council table and with the district's advisory committee-SIAC- and its special education subcommittee. (ESPE1, ESPE2)

Title I parents complete a program survey annually as their children exit the Title I reading and math programs. Results are compiled by building and district-wide. Information from these surveys drives program shape, focus and parent communication. Title I program teachers keep record of students who are graduated from the program, making progress which enables them to read near the average of the classroom where they spend most of their day. (TITL1)

Title II, Part A pays for purchased professional development services related to district learning goals in math, reading, science(TPTR1)

Title II, Part D funding is accessed via Heartland AEA #11 consortium for which a group plan for assessment/evaluation criteria is developed. (FTP6)

District ELL programming is evaluated by the number of ELL students who become proficient in listening to, speaking, reading and writing English as measured by the annual spring I-ELDA and the district-wide DIBELS, BRI, ITBS/ITED. (LEP3)

Current data is sufficient to determine the effectiveness of Title IV-Safe & Drug Free Schools (SDF10)

The district tracks enrollments in career and technical education programs and measures CTE program contributions to improved student achievement in reading and mathematics annually as it records career and tech ed student scores on district-wide assessments. In the state approved tech programs, gender participation is also tracked annually. Senior high counselors and teaching staff are committed to attaining improved gender balance among program completers. (PERK2, PERK3)