In November of the 2021-22 school year, we held our first data dig with Administration and any staff members who would like to be involved. From there we developed four school goals (previously we had none) related to student achievement, engagement/belonging, workforce, and community building. From this our growth stayed the same at 68.9% in Math but a slight improvement in ELA from 50.8% to 54.6%.  We focused more on ELA in the year 2021-22 with our Rise Up Tier 2 Reading intervention.  Our Forward Assessment did increase for both Math/ELA for students in the Proficient Category by 3%. However, these were not the results we were looking for.   There were two main focuses from the information we compiled, we need to improve our PLC structure and focus on tiered intervention for the 31-38% below basic and 34-43% basic on the Forward Assessment in ELA/Math.  

In the school year of 22-23 we focused on these two goals from our Data Dig district-wide (instead of individual schools).  How are we going to improve our PLC structure to improve Tier I and how will we improve student achievement/growth in ELA/Math?  We implemented I-Ready which gave us specific data on student achievement in Fall, Winter and Spring which we utilized to structure Tier 2 Reading/Math Interventions after EACH diagnostic.  All students had built into their schedule an I/E time, which was intervention or enrichment based on their current levels of performance throughout the year. We focused on reading first for students who were significantly behind and placed them in a Tier 2 Reading intervention.  From there we organized students who needed math, students who were 1 grade level behind in ELA/Math, and students who were at or above grade level (enrichment).  This allowed us to continuously improve student learning throughout the school year based on their current levels of performance.  The second part of this was our PLC structure, which needed more guidance and accountability.  Throughout the year we monitored where CLT's currently were in the process, their discussions, and how this interacted with instructional practice and student learning. What we found out was majority of CLT's were still focused on Question #1 and were not reviewing student data and analyzing it to improve student achievement/teacher practice. We worked specifically with our Math Department as a "pilot" to have a progress monitoring tool, pre-post assessment data, and utilizing a data analysis protocol as a first step. Through our collective efforts, continuous improvement culture, and specific structures and guidance our data was outstanding!

Our state report card (Wisconsin) saw a dramatic increase based on our Forward Assessment.  Our report card in 20-21 was at 62.4, 21-22 at 64.6, and in 2022-23 was at 78.2, which exceeds expectations as a school.  We gained almost 13 points in one year. Let's break this down more for clarification.

Achievement stayed relatively the same, increasing 2-5%, however our growth was astonishing.  In ELA our growth went from 54.6 (in 21-22) to 81.2 (in 22-23) and in Math 69.8 (in 21-22) to 100 in (22-23).  You read that right, 100! We increased in ELA by 25 and Math by 30 through our structures in Tier 2 for Reading/Math. In our targeted group achievement went from 12.8 (21-22) to 15.2 (22-23) and growth 65.1 (in 21-22) to 90.7 (in 22-23).   Our scores in the 22-23 school year are the same or higher than 95.5% for Growth and 92.3% for our Target Group Outcomes of 6-8 schools in the state .

This year, 23-24, are continuing the I/E Tier 2 structure rotating them 3 times a year based off of Forward/I-Ready data (triangular data) but are not focused on Tier I Universal Instruction and CLT Data Analysis by focusing on Questions 3 and 4.  All our CLT's have essential standards, unit pacing guide, CSA's planned and on the calendar, and meetings the day after an assessment to analyze the data as a CLT using the data analysis protocol. We have a rotation as an Admin/Learning Support Teacher to be in all CLTs to ensure conversations are guided questions 3/4 and tier 1 universal instruction.  At first, there were misconceptions but being two months into school, this is now a seamless process. We continue to do PD on Academic Conversations, Vocabulary, Intervention, Enrichment, and CLT next steps. We are excited to continue our PLC journey and tying it continuously to our school improvement goals and student learning.

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

Three times a year we do the I-Ready diagnositic for reading/math to program students in specific intervention/enrichment time (45 minutes a day). 

All our CLT's have essential standards, unit pacing guide, CSA's planned and on the calendar, and meetings the day after an assessment to analyze the data as a CLT using the data analysis protocol. We have a rotation as an Admin/Learning Support Teacher to be in all CLTs to ensure conversations are guided questions 3/4 and tier 1 universal instruction. We are the only school in the district that has this specific type of process, our hopes moving forward are to have that guidance for all buildings.

We also have a new program called Embarc where over the summer staff input their classes with their essential standards.  All their assessments are now based specifically on their essential standards when they do their data analysis.  

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

Starting in 2022-23 School year we implemented I-Ready which gave us specific data on student achievement for Reading/Math.  We did three diagnostics in Fall, Winter and Spring, which we utilized to structure Tier 2 Reading/Math Interventions after EACH diagnostic. 

After diagnostic, we program students based on their current level of performance for intervention or enrichment.  All students had built into their schedule an I/E time (45 minutes). We focused on reading first for students who were significantly behind and placed them in a Tier 2 Reading intervention.  From there we organized students who needed math, students who were 1 grade level behind in ELA/Math, and students who were at or above grade level (enrichment).  This allowed us to continuously improve student learning throughout the school year based on their current levels of performance. Teacher's implement a workshop model during this time to break students into similar levels where they focus on specific skill deficits. They use the I-Ready lessons based off of the students' diagnostics which are specifically designed where their current level of performance is.  For our enrichment students we do a variety of enrichment activities such as reading buddies with our elementary students, EINSTEIN project which is STEM based activities, and computer design/programing with our District Technology Integration Specialist.  

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

This year, 23-24, are continuing the I/E Tier 2 structure rotating them 3 times a year based off of Forward/I-Ready data (triangular data) but are also focused on Tier I Universal Instruction and CLT Data Analysis by focusing on Questions 3 and 4.  All our CLT's have essential standards, unit pacing guide, CSA's planned and on the calendar, and meetings the day after an assessment to analyze the data as a CLT using the data analysis protocol. We have a rotation as an Admin/Learning Support Teacher to be in all CLTs to ensure conversations are guided questions 3/4 and tier 1 universal instruction.  At first, there were misconceptions but being two months into school, this is now a seamless process. We continue to do PD on Academic Conversations, Vocabulary, Intervention, Enrichment, and CLT next steps. We are excited to continue our PLC journey and tying it continuously to our school improvement goals and student learning.

Achievement Data Files

• seymour-middle-school-68-eoe-data-8699.xlsx

Additional Achievement Data

In the last year (22-23) our special education data surpassed Wisconsin Average (except for 7th Grade Math).  This is a huge transition for us as last year we did full inclusion with our special education students with no pull out classes.  We provided specialized instruction in the classroom.  In 23-24 school year our Special Education teachers are fully co-teaching with ELA/Math teachers with academic para support in Social Studies/Science for full inclusion. 

Our state report card for Seymour Middle School went from 64.6 (Meets expectations) to 78.2 (Exceeds Expectations).  Our goal will be to continue our growth with our Tiered intervention structure and enhance our CLT meetings for our Tier 1 universal instruction to improve student learning.

Files

• 8th-grade-2023_24-reading-summative-assessment-scores-1-9689.xlsx
• 8th-grade-2023_24-writing-summative-assessement-scores-1-7460.xlsx
• 8th-grade-ela-unit-design-2023_2024.xlsx
• 6th-grade-ela-clt-agenda.docx