In 2007-2008, our school was functioning as a traditional elementary school. Teachers were collegial with each other, but then went into their classrooms and closed their doors. Meeting time was spent on arranging field trips or talking about student behavior. In the spring of 2008, we identified what we believed an exemplary elementary school looked like. We self-assessed, created goals, and then set out to achieve them. The first step in our journey was to create not just professional learning communities, but highly functioning PLCs. Because we were labeled as a school in need of improvement in NH, we were allocated some funds for professional development. We used those funds to send teachers to workshops with Rick and Becky DuFour over a three year period, thereby involving a vast majority of our staff. This created a high level of buy-in. As a staff we recognized the need for consensus, defined it and devised a protocol for achieving it. We also created a model for shared leadership through the addition of team leaders who met regularly. We revised our schedule so that every grade level had a common meeting time which also allowed interventionists to attend PLC meetings and the principal carved out staff meeting time for PLC work on a regular basis. During the first year, the principal sat in on PLC meetings and worked with staff to identify the difference between what is truly PLC work and what is “business” such as planning field trips. Our teams began to understand the difference and PLC meetings became focused on student learning. In addition, our principal held teachers accountable by requiring meeting minutes. Our principal also ensured that new hires understood our commitment to PLCs as an essential part of our practice.

Today the DJ Bakie School is noted for the high level of professional conversation that takes place among the staff. Consideration for what is best for kids is at the heart of each discussion. Consensus-based decision making has been an effective approach used at Bakie School to meet the needs of all learners. A professional visitor to our school recently commented, "You don't just say you have professional learning communities, you actually have them and they are the highest functioning teams I have ever seen."

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

With our focus sharpened on student performance and instructional practices, it became evident that we needed to record our grouping practices and tighten up our own plan for how and when to respond to an intervention. Communication was critical between interventionists, in order to build tiered and not disjointed instruction. A congruent structure for progress monitoring throughout our building began to take shape as a method of sharing instructional practices. Our student data is measured in six week intervals.  At Bakie School, we identified our three tiers of instruction for literacy. As our next step, we extended those tiers to our math instruction and also to thinking about student behavior.  

The Collaborative & Supportive Interventions Team (CSI) at Bakie School meets weekly to review student progress and discuss recent referrals, ongoing support and updates on students who have been discussed at team WIN meetings. Teachers are invited to attend to share student data with the CSI Team at any time. The purpose of this team is to support the supplemental and often intensive interventions that are offered in our school. Our goal is to provide another avenue for exploring instructional opportunities for students with staff. Meeting with the CSI Team is not in any way a “referral” meeting.

We developed a flowchart, outlining the steps to follow when an academic or behavioral concern may require an intervention.  All students start in the classroom, receiving Tier 1 Instruction. When assessments reveal that the student is not meeting the standard, then support is differentiated to meet that need. This plan for support is followed and monitored for 4-6 weeks, after which the teacher shares the outcome of intervention at the WIN meeting. If the plan for intervention was successful, then the teacher will continue to monitor. If the intervention did not yield the desired success, then the student would move on to Tier 2 with more supplemental targeted instruction. These interventions would occur for 6 weeks, 4 times a week.  At the end of this time, the team would meet to review the data and discuss the student’s progress.  It is then determined if the student should continue in Tier 2 or receive a more intensive intervention in Tier 3,  five times a week. It is at this point that concerns about the student may be brought to a CSI meeitng. If student data does not reveal progress after 12 weeks of intensive Tier 3 intervention, then the team discusses possible referral.

Three times a year each grade level PLC particpates in a half-day data meeting. At this meeting multiple points of data are looked at and discussed for each student. Goals are created and entered into a Google doc, followed by collaborative scoring of student work and the sharing of effective practices. It is important to note that we monitor the learning of all students to ensure that all receive the appropriate level of challenge.

 

2. Creating systems of intervention to provide students with additional time and support for learning.

Upon implementation of PLCs in the Bakie community, we began our tiered system of support called WIN (What I Need). This allowed each student the opportunity to receive the intervention specific to their individual needs. Working together, team leaders determined times that would work best with grade level schedules and literacy blocks. Each grade level identified a thirty minute time period that was deemed sacred and 'untouchable'. During that time, interventionists would embark upon that specific grade level to provide the necessary intervention. The interventions were delivered by grade level teachers, special educator, readng specialist, enrichment teacher, the title 1 tutor and paraprofessional support. Upon review of common assessments, students were then flexibily grouped based on needs. The students who demonstrated a more significant need in a skill area would be in a smaller group (2-3 students), while other groups may be larger.

Every six weeks the team members collaboratively looked at the data and flexibily grouped the students. As group members became increasingly familiar with the data, the most effective collection tool became a Google document. This allowed for the ongoing anecdotal record keeping that was deemed essential to progress monitoring. It is worth noting that the schedule that was provided for the Tier 2 interventions allowed for an additional 15 minute flex time for those instances when the 1/2 hour was not enough. Tier 3 interventions were provided beyond the designated 1/2 hr WIN time, as needed. Several data points were used to make those determinations, and the Google document was consistently updated.

3. Building teacher capacity to work as members of high performing collaborative teams that focus efforts on improved learning for all students.

In order to structure high functioning PLCs at Bakie School, we created a group of Team Leaders. Our school administrators, one representative from each grade level, a reading specialist, and a representative from Unified Arts became one cohesive group. This Team Leader group meets on a regular basis several times each month. The meetings include among other topics, discussions about academic goals for the school, work-study practices with a social skills focus, planning for assessments, and best practices for classroom success. Team Leaders then meet with their grade level team or special area team on a weekly basis to disseminate this information, facilitate discussion, look at data, and ask questions of as well as get feedback from all members of the professional staff. It is of great importance that all voices are heard and that the group agree to consensus.

In addition to grade-level team meetings, there are times when vertical teams will meet to align standards, instruction and/or assessments across grade levels. For example, the pre-school, kindergarten, first and second grade teams meet together to validate performance assessments. At the same time, third, fourth, and fifth grade teams meet for the same purpose. There is a high level of trust among staff members that allows them to be vulnerable with each other and take risks with their own learning. The conversation is of the highest caliber as they work together to create effective, valid and reliable performance assessments.There are many other examples of vertical team meetings at Bakie including developing a school-wide continuum of expectations in writing, grammar, conventions, and the school-wide scaffolding of the social studies units of instruction. 

Our PLCs meet one day a week during the school day, twice a month after school, and during early release days. But, because this work is so highly valued by our staff, it is common to find teams giving up their planning or lunch time for additonal PLC time.

Additional Achievement Data

Finding appropriate achievement data for past three consecutive years is a challenge because of the many changes we have undergone with assessment in our district. This transition has been exciting. We are a Tier 1 PACE (Performance Assessment for Competency Education) district in NH which means that we complete performance assessments at all grade levels. For accountabiity purposes, grade 3 takes ELA Smarter Balance and Math PACE, grade 4 takes math Smarter Balance and ELA PACE, and Science PACE, and grade 5 take ELA and Math PACE. We also switched to a fall administration of NWEA. Previously it was completed in the spring. We have included our current data, along with a graph showing the district trend to perform above the NWEA norm RIT. These documents have also been added as attachments.

We just recently learned of some data that was shared that showed that students in NH PACE schools outscored non-PACE schools on the Smarter Balance test. Students with IEPs and girls showed the greatest improvements. This will be exciting data to share when it is fully published.

PACE English Language Arts: 2015 Results

Grade	Percent at Level 1: Does not meet the achievement level	Percent at Level 2: Approaching the achievement level	Percent  at Level 3: Meets the achievement level	Percent at Level 4: Exceeds the achievement level	Sanborn elementary Pace: Percent at Level 3 & 4: Meets or exceeds the achievement level	NH Pace Percent at Level 3 & 4: Meets or exceeds the achievement level
3	11%	31%	25%	33%	58%	55%
4	1%	46%	45%	8%	53%	46%
5	3%	33%	40%	24%	64%	50%

 

 

PACE Mathematics: 2015 Results

Grade	Percent at Level 1: Does not meet the achievement level	Percent at Level 2: Approaching the achievement level	Percent  at Level 3: Meets the achievement level	Percent at Level 4: Exceeds the achievement level	Sanborn elementary Pace: Percent at Level 3 & 4: Meets or exceeds the achievement level	NH Pace Percent at Level 3 & 4: Meets or exceeds the achievement level
3	3%	29%	60%	8%	68%	49%
4	16%	37%	33%	14%	47%	43%
5	4%	30%	48%	18%	66%	54%

 

Smarter Balanced Assessment: Spring 2015

		NUMBER OF STUDENTS AT EACH LEVEL				BAKIE %	STATE %
GRADE	SUBJECT	LEVEL 1	LEVEL 2	LEVEL 3	LEVEL 4	PROFICIENT	NH
4	Math	3	18	14	8	51%	49%
3	ELA	3	20	10	16	53%	55%

 

 

Sanborn Regional School District

NECAP Proficiency Report 2011-2013

D. J. Bakie School

Reading

Year	Proficient w/ Distinction		Proficient		Partially Proficient		Substantially below Proficient
	Bakie	NH	Bakie	NH	Bakie	NH	Bakie	NH
2013	20%	23%	62%	53%	12%	16%	6%	7%
2012	17%	21%	60%	56%	16%	15%	7%	6%
2011	17%	24%	63%	54%	13%	15%	7%	7%

 

Mathematics

Year	Proficient w/ Distinction		Proficient		Partially Proficient		Substantially below Proficient
	Bakie	NH	Bakie	NH	Bakie	NH	Bakie	NH
2013	21%	21%	49%	43%	18%	18%	11%	17%
2012	25%	22%	46%	44%	20%	17%	9%	15%
2011	20%	23%	48%	43%	20%	17%	12%	16%

 

 

Year	Mean scaled score- Bakie	Mean scaled score- District	Mean scaled score- state
2013 Literacy Math	349 348	348 348	348 345
2012 Literacy Math	350 347	348 346	348 346
2011 Literacy Math	347 345	347 345	349 347

 

Spring 2014, Fall 2015, Fall 2016

Grade	Reading				Mathematics
	SRSD BAKIE Spring 2014	SRSD BAKIE Fall 2015	SRSD BAKIE Fall 2016	NORMS NWEA Fall	SRSD BAKIE Spring 2014	SRSD BAKIE Fall 2015	SRSD BAKIE Fall 2016	NORMS NWEA Fall
KINDERGARTEN	156.0	142.1	142.9	142.5	163.9	148.3	143..9	143.7
GRADE 1	175.8	168.4	170.0	160.3	183.7	167.0	163.4	162.8
GRADE 2	172.9	178.3	178.1	175.9	182.3	184.0	173.0	178.2
GRADE 3	195.5	194.3	193.1	189.9	196.9	196.7	197.9	192.1
GRADE 4	204.1	204.0	200.0	199.8	208.3	208.0	206.1	203.8
GRADE 5	210.5	210.1	207.6	207.1	216.1	217.3	214.4	212.9

 

A goal mean shown with bold underline represents an area of relatively strong performance.

Like our sister school, Memorial, in Newton, NH, our school continues to be recognized for its work in competency education and the NG2 iniative (No Grades, No Grades- a NH state focus on blurring the lines so that children move when ready). Bakie School has hosted several teams from around the country who have come here to observe our work with competencies and performance assessments. Bakie School, along with the rest of the Sanborn School District, was the recipient of the W. O'Toole Award from the Nellie Mae Education Foundation in 2015.

Through local affiliations, Bakie School is recognized as a resource for observing high performing PLCs in practice. Most recently, our district was recognized as one of the "30 Schools Worth Visiting." http://gettingsmart.com/2015/11/30-districts-worth-visiting-2015/

Bakie School is one of five NEASC (New England Association of Schools and Colleges) accredited schools in New Hampshire. Each year we receive the Blue Ribbon and Gold Circle Achievement Award from NH Partners in Education in recognition for the high number of volunteers in our school.

Images

• 

Files

• f--p-spring-2016.docx
• plc-14-15.docx
• plc-model-school-data.docx
• rti-flow-chart--7-29-14.doc
• bakie-proficiency-chart-comparisons-2011-13.docx
• response-to-intervention-at-bakie-school-summer-2014.docx