During the summer of 2021 K-5 certified staff members were provided a stipend to read the Learning By Doing Book which helped to provide a consistent framework for understanding the PLC process. Additionally a course was built within the learning management system of the District as a tool for sites to use as they worked through the various components of laying a foundation for the PLC at Work process. 

This process took a full year.  The second year, our teams worked on answering the four essential questions of Professional Learning Community.  The principal walked the teams through analyzing data and the district provided templates to house the data.  

Our MTSS process was also revised and tightened up to align with our Professional Learning Community practices.

Our school rewrote our mission statement and we developed our collective commitments as a school.

During the 2019-2020 school year all of our district’s elementary schools collaborated to develop and implement a common master schedule that provided consistent and dedicated time for our teams to engage in the work of PLCs. Through this process, we (certified staff and administrative staff) agreed to the amount of time we wanted to dedicate to grade-level collaborative meetings on a weekly basis as well as when during the school day/week would be best to host those collaborative meetings. This work included the coordination of master schedules among all eight of our elementary schools in order to ensure appropriate and equitable learning opportunities for all of our students. Through the work of building collaborative master schedules, our teams developed a commitment to embedding collaborative time within the teacher work day. Additionally, the IMPACT schedule process also cemented the “big rocks” within the master schedule at each elementary school. 

• 90 min. Collaborative Time (45 min. X 2)

• ELA Core 90 min.  + Walk To 30-45 min.

• Math Core 60 min. + Walk To 30-45 min.

• ELA/Math Tier III

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

Board Policy/Curriculum Improvement Matrix/Priority Standards

The District utilizes Policy 2120 – Curriculum and Assessment to guide curriculum adoption, selection of instructional resources to support the educational program, and the assessment of the progress of all students in achieving content standards and content-specific grade-level learning progressions in each content area.  This work is completed on a schedule mandated by the state of Montana. Other policies associated with this work are 2131 – Bozeman Comprehensive Assessment System, 2311 – Instructional Materials

A motto used in the Bozeman Public Schools is “All means all.”  In order to implement a guaranteed curriculum, all stakeholders must understand the essential content that all students need to know, understand and be able to do.  Thus, the District utilizes a transparent standard operating procedure for curriculum adoption/revision/continuous improvement while providing meaningful professional development and support for research-based best practices in teaching.  This is a cyclical process that standards review and adoption based on research, vertical and horizontal alignment, primary/core resource alignment, assessment alignment, implementation with fidelity, monitoring and feedback, and data review.  Fundamental to each aspect of this process is the ongoing support provided by central office/curriculum office/school leadership, which includes professional development for administrators, site-level capacity building, professional development for educators, and professional learning for stakeholders.

Consistent understanding the essential content by all instructional staff is critical.  Working in committees and facilitated by the curriculum office, our teachers identify the most important parts of the curriculum that students must learn to prepare them for academic success in that subject.  The District has completed significant work on priority standards in the past three years.  BSD7 priority standards identify what students should know and be able to do by the end of the school year. All standards are used to guide instruction; however, priority standards guide teachers and focus student learning on critical concepts. Each standard also has a “proficiency descriptor” which explains, on a four-point rubric, what the student knows and is able to do for each proficiency level.  The district provides then written guidance to instructional staff, including scope and sequence, priority standards and proficiency descriptors. At the school level, teachers work in teams to ensure this is implemented in the classroom.

 A viable curriculum means that teachers have adequate time to teach the content and that students have adequate time to learn the content. 

TOSAs

As a school district we use Teachers On Special Assignment (TOSAs) to provide support in regards to curricular materials vetting, adoption, professional development, and implementation.  Our team of TOSAs, in collaboration with our Deputy Superintendents have worked to guide three resource vetting committees to adopt core resource materials for K-5 math, K-2 Reading/ELA, and most recently 3-5 Reading/ELA.  The vetting process includes: 1) reviewing the learning standards for each content area, 2) creating a rubric that aligns with our district’s mission, vision, and Long Range Strategic Plan to evaluate possible resources, and 3) providing multiple avenues for input from all levels of stakeholders.  Once the vetting process is completed, the TOSAs work to prepare a recommendation to the Board of Trustees for formal adoption.  Once a resource has been adopted, the TOSAs work to develop a plan for professional development and work with building leaders to determine the best way to evaluate the fidelity of implementation. They serve as instructional coaches to support our administrators to lead the work in their respective buildings.

Site Level (Irving)

PLC teams meet twice weekly analyzing data to determine which students need intervention and how students currently receiving interventions are progressing (using data).  If students are not making progress, the intervention is changed (change the person administering the intervention and/or the intervention itself).  These analyses are done on a weekly basis.

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

IMPACT Schedule 

As mentioned before, during the 2019-2020 school year all of our district’s elementary schools collaborated to develop and implement a common master schedule that provided consistent and dedicated time for our teams to engage in the work of PLCs.  This work included the coordination of master schedules among all eight of our elementary schools in order to ensure appropriate and equitable learning opportunities for all of our students.  This common master schedule allowed for designated times for core instruction as well as additional Tier II and Tier III supports during each school day to deliver multi-tiered levels of support. 

Resource Mapping 

Beginning in September 2022, the District began the process of resource mapping, i.e., engaging school teams, as well as central office, in a review of “what is” so that as a district, we can make thoughtful and intentional decisions about “what can be done” to meet identified needs.  The resource mapping work is based on Leading Equity-Based MTSS for All Students by McCart and Miller (2019). 

Resource mapping is being conducted in the following areas:  personnel (to understand the human capabilities within our school and our system), facilities (to generate innovate ideas that maximize all available space), curriculum and instruction (to take stock of all of our curricular, instructional and other resources and supports for academic, behavioral and SEL), time allocations and requirements (to understand time factors that influence options for scheduling teaching and learning), and data sources (to understand the sources of data that help us make decisions related to improving outcomes), and additional resources (to make sure we don’t overlook hidden treasures that could help to support students).

Policy 3610 

During the 2021-2022 school year the District underwent a community conversation process regarding equity that resulted in student success policy #3610. The policy collectively puts the District on the hook for high levels of student learning. The following bold commitments are made within the policy:

• Providing all students with access to resources, opportunities, supports and interventions to maximize the success of each student.

• Assuring that all BSD7 staff members, with deliberate effort, continue to examine and eliminate beliefs, policies, practices, and teaching that may perpetuate disparities in achievement. 

• Raising the achievement of each student while eliminating any identified or perceived opportunity or achievement gaps.

• Filtering programs, initiatives, and budget supports to maximize student success.

In addition to policy #3610, the District adopted an associated decision making filter in Board procedure #3610 that filters decision making through three important lenses:

1. Does (insert Item/Topic/Decision) directly help close identified achievement gaps?

2. Does (insert Item/Topic/Decision) directly tie to established district goals?

3. Does (insert Item/Topic/Decision) have a substantial research base of support? 

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

IMPACT Schedule

In all 8 of our elementary buildings our grade-level teams and teams comprised of our specialist teachers meet to review student data, determine appropriate interventions and extensions, and evaluate the effectiveness of their instructional practices.  Since all elementary master schedules have designated times for core instruction as well as additional Tier II and Tier III supports our collaborative teacher teams have a clear understanding of the timeframe they have during each school day to deliver multi-tiered levels of support.  The master schedules can also be flexed per school to match the unique needs of a given site.

Learning By Doing

Bozeman Public Schools uses Learning By Doing as the core foundational resource to guide the work of the collaborative teacher teams and building level leadership teams. The District created an associated course on the District learning management system to help guide teams through the resource. Additionally, the District has pulled the continuum rubrics from each chapter in Learning by Doing into an online form that collaborative teacher teams use to show their progress and set goals for future areas of growth, the work is never done! 

TOSAs 

As mentioned previously, our school district uses TOSAs to provide support for implementing district-level initiatives at our buildings and in our classrooms.  As a part of their work, our TOSA team will collaborate with teams of teachers and/or individual teachers to improve instructional practices as well as promote strategies that truly focus on student learning.  The strategies our TOSAs focus on when working with teachers include (but are not limited to) effectively measuring response to interventions, scaffolding learning experiences, classroom discussions, and building on prior background/knowledge.  All of these strategies focus on improving learning for students and have a higher than average effect size on student achievement according to John Hattie (Hattie effect size list - 256 Influences Related To Achievement, March 2018)

Site Level (Irving)

Our PLC teams meet twice weekly, as built in our master schedule, and focus on the four essential questions - 

What do we expect students to learn?
How will we know if they’ve learned it?
What will we do if they haven’t yet learned it?
What will we do if they already know it?

Achievement Data Files

• irving-elementary-data-563-2-8413.xlsx

Additional Achievement Data

Mid-Year Data

76% of 1st-5th grade students are proficient or above on STAR Math (Mid Year)

51% of Kindergarten students are proficient or above on Acadience Literacy Assessment (Mid Year)

63% of 1st grade students are proficient or above on Acadience Literacy Assessment (Mid Year)

57% of 2nd grade students are proficient or above on Acadience Literacy Assessment (Mid Year)

83% of 3rd grade students are proficient or above on Acadience Literacy Assessment (Mid Year)

65% of 4th grade students are proficient or above on Acadience Literacy Asssessment (Mid Year)

54% of 5th grade students are proficient or above on Acadience Literacy Assessment (Mid Year)

End of Year Data

Literacy

Kindergarten - 57% at benchmark or above (growth of 10% since the fall benchmark)
First Grade - 81% at benchmark or above (growth of 13% since the fall benchmark)
Second Grade - 68% at benchmark or above 
Third Grade - 90% at benchmark or above (growth of 24% since the fall benchmark)
Fourth Grade - 70% at benchmark or above (growth of 16% since the fall benchmark)
Fifth Grade - 67% at benchmark or above (growth of 15% since the fall benchmark)

Math

First Grade: 71% of students that were below benchmark in the winter made SGP growth of 50 or higher from winter to spring.90% of students that were benchmark or above in the winter made SGP growth of 25 or higher from winter to spring.

Second Grade: 44% of students that were below benchmark in the fall made SGP growth of 50 or higher from fall to spring.
62% of students that were benchmark or above in the fall made SGP growth of 25 or higher from fall to spring.

Third Grade: 100% of the students that were below benchmark in the fall made SGP growth of 50 or higher from fall to spring.
94% of students that were benchmark or above in the fall made SGP growth of 25 or higher from fall to spring. 

Fourth Grade: 75% of students that were below benchmark in the fall made SGP growth of 50 or higher from fall to spring.
92% of students that were benchmark or above in the fall made SGP growth of 25 or higher from fall to spring. 

Fifth Grade: 82% of students that were below benchmark in the fall made SGP growth of 50 or higher from fall to spring.
83% of students that were benchmark or above in the fall made SGP growth of 25 or higher from fall to spring.

School average for meeting Student Growth Percentile (SGP) target by the end of the year:

SCHOOL AVERAGE: 74.4% for students that were below benchmark in the fall
SCHOOL AVERAGE: 84.2% for students that were benchmark or above in the fall

First Grade: 85% of students are benchmark or higher (growth of 5% since middle of the year) - first grade took the assessment for the first time in January.
Second Grade: 73% of students are benchmark or higher. (growth of 13%)
Third Grade: 97% of students are benchmark or higher. (growth of 40%)
Fourth Grade: 69% of students are benchmark or higher. (growth of 17%)
Fifth Grade: 58% of students are benchmark or higher. (growth of 33%)

*Kindergarten does not take this math assessment

We have not received any awards related to the PLC process to date.

Files

• irving-impact-schedule-22-23-draft.xlsx