Holmen Middle School (2024)

  1. PLC Story
  2. PLC Practices
  3. Achievement Data
  4. Awards
  5. Resources

Introduction

Holmen Middle School is a large school in a small suburban village outside of the urban La Crosse area with a significant rural population. We are a building of 125 staff members educating over 850 students. In order to meet the needs of a growing population, we have been engaging in the PLC journey for a number of years. 

Phase 1

In the mid-2000s, our district explored the PLC process by sending school improvement teams to a conference hosted by Solution Tree. Although the information was excellent and the intention was good, putting the idea into practice was a struggle. Our largest stumbling block was a lack of consistent administrative leadership in our building with several years of turnover. The middle school had a continuous improvement team; however, it lacked leadership and vision to make the necessary changes to achieve lasting progress.

Phase 2

In 2011, multiple factors contributed to a significant move toward a stronger PLC process in our building: a renewed effort toward strong PLCs by the district, the arrival of a new administrator at the middle school, and the establishment of the Common Core. The district made PLC a priority by sending school improvement teams to trainings, adding PLC questions to the interview process, and providing new hires with a PLC text. Our new administrator strengthened the school improvement team and facilitated its work to identify areas of need that would create the greatest impact. The most effective change was to adjust the HMS schedule, which created monthly meetings to build vertical alignment between grade level subject areas, daily common planning time for grade level content teams, and a daily intervention/enrichment period to address student learning needs. We also began working toward common summative assessments and a stronger universal guaranteed and viable curriculum aligning with the Common Core. Although all of these efforts were steps in the right direction, they ultimately resulted in the creation of silos of understanding and implementation, moderate buy-in by staff, and a “PLC lite” framework.

Phase 3

Starting in 2018, the district realized that creating a strong PLC culture required training all staff, not just leadership teams. As part of a 5-year-plan, the district brought experts like Tim Brown, Julie Schmidt, and Dr. Anthony Muhammad to educate all staff on the foundations of a strong PLC. This resulted in common language, a shift in perspective, and staff belief in the process. Language and perspective shifted from “my students” to “our students;” from “I teach; they learn” to “How can we teach to create understanding;” from “I teach what I like,” to “I teach toward the priority standards based on the data.” As a district and a building, we committed to a new vision and mission where “all means all.” This belief began to drive not only our larger building goals but our daily PLC process. 

Along the way, we addressed the need for systems and strategies to create consistency and efficiency within HMS. Dr. Richard Dewey worked with our Guiding Coalition on the process of the PLC Road Map. This was a pivotal point for our building. The Guiding Coalition then had the understanding and tools to coach building teams to reflect on their own effectiveness and determined the next steps in their PLC journey. To that end, the Guiding Coalition worked to create a data protocol in alignment with the four guiding questions of a PLC. This tool provided all teams with consistent steps to move through the road map in a systematic manner to achieve the goal of student learning. Through the use of our data protocol, teams are working on short cycles of instruction focusing on “fail fast, fix fast” to plan instruction in alignment with priority standards using common formative and summative assessments, analyzing data, and responding to all students’ need to enrich or reteach. This work continues to improve our PLC process resulting in overall improvement of student learning and data.

Our PLC journey is not at an end; however, our 15 year journey has led Holmen Middle School to a place where PLC has become an empowering culture. Our progress is a direct result of our learning in collaboration with Solution Tree and the hard work of our administration, guiding coalition, and staff.

 

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

At HMS, each content area engages in a seven-year curriculum cycle, which follows the Department of Instruction’s process when new standards are released.  During this process our teams are in collaboration with the instructional services team to select priority standards, vertically align the curriculum, and determine depth of knowledge for each level. Continuing work on universal curriculum takes place, in part, during monthly early release meetings. Collaborative teams bring this work to life by meeting weekly/daily discussing the four PLC questions, focusing, at this stage, on “What do the students need to know?” Teachers then establish proficiency criteria. It is at this time that Dewey’s Fail Fast, Fix Fast mantra is implemented in our daily team practices. Utilizing this work around our priority standards, teams are able to implement instruction and formative assessments, analyze data, and respond to student needs in a timely manner. 

HMS has several systems in place to immediately address student's needs whether they be academic or behavioral:

  • Data Protocol - At the universal level, classroom teachers use the Protocol weekly to guide instruction following formative assessment to ensure that 80%(+) of students meet the standard/target.

  • House and Grade Level Meetings - weekly data-driven academic and behavior to create and implement plans for struggling students

  • Student Services Meetings - house teachers meet weekly with student services teams to discuss students who meet academic and/or behavior data thresholds.

  • Tier 2/Tier 3 Meetings - bi-weekly meetings to discuss students who meet the criteria to begin SEL/Behavior interventions and analyze progress of students currently in interventions

  • Parent Meetings - meeting with parents prior to creation of a formalized plan in order to encourage collaboration between school and home

  • Educational Support Team (EST) - structured meeting to establish the parameters of a specified system of intervention; the team includes administration, counselor, school psychologist, parents, universal educator/s

  • Positive Behavior Intervention Supports (PBIS) - monthly meetings to analyze behavior data to determine grade-level needs

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

Holmen Middle School utilizes a tiered system with varied opportunities for students to receive the necessary interventions and/or extensions. In order to reach the whole student, the school provides academic, behavioral, and emotional support. These systems of support are timely and responsive to the changing needs of our students, as reflected in our data. The following list outlines our system:

Systems Prior to Student Engagement

  • Transition Meetings

    • Elementary teachers meet with MS intervention and special education teachers to discuss transitioning students. 

    • HS and MS teachers meet to discuss the transition to HS

    • MS teachers within the building meet to discuss transitions between grade levels

 

Academic Systems

  • Data Protocol - At the universal level, classroom teachers use the Protocol to guide instruction following formative assessment to ensure that 80%(+) of students meet the standard/target.

    • Collaborative teams respond with remedial support or targeted intervention when students do not meet proficiency in a timely manner (prior to summative)

      • Reteach in the universal classroom

      • Reteach in small group

    • Collaborative teams respond with appropriate enrichment for students who have demonstrated proficiency. 

    • PLC Coach meets regularly with PLCs to offer support and strategies for differentiation, enrichment, and extension.

 

  • Teams collaborate with all members to provide students with remedial support or targeted intervention if students do not meet proficiency in a timely manner.  

    • School-wide system for summative assessment, reteaching, and retaking process if students do not meet the benchmark on assessment. 

    • Academy - grade level study hall for all students built in at the end of the day.

    • Flex Study Hall - teachers use this time to create flexible groups for reteaching targeted skills based on formative and summative data.

    • Encore Study Hall - students who struggle to complete work are scheduled into a study hall as an Encore for extra time working on standards following a structured process to help them learn in areas they struggle.

    • Tier 2 Instruction - students are identified for ongoing instruction based on a triangulation of data on a specific deficit area of reading, writing, or math.

    • Tier 3 Instruction - students who do not respond to Tier 2 Instruction move to a more intensive intervention by specialized teachers to address those areas of need; this starts as an alternate day intervention with an increasing intervention schedule based on student growth.

    • Success Center - after school opportunity for students to receive additional help understanding content and completing work.

    • Alt Ed - 7th and 8th grade students who have difficulty succeeding, based on Alt Ed risk factors, in the traditional school setting receive academic support in the form of alternate classes and small group instruction with a highly structured format; as students become more confident in their skills and meet their goals are reintegrated into the universal classroom setting with support from specialized teachers when appropriate.

  • Teams collaborate with all members to provide students with enrichment for students who meet proficiency in a timely manner (before summative) 

    • Classroom teachers provide enrichment opportunities for students in the classroom. 

    • Talented and Gifted (TAG) services - placement based on multiple data sources following state and national standards and reviewed by national leaders for gifted instruction.

    • Certified Gifted Teacher 

    • Accelerated math classes - placement based on triangulation of data and in compliance with state and national Gifted standards.

    • Accelerated ELA classes - placement based on triangulation of data and in compliance with state and national Gifted standards.

 

Behavior Systems 

  • The school-wide system utilized the PBIS framework - a tiered system of behavior intervention

    • At the universal level teachers implement Character Strong as a foundation for behavior and social/emotional learning

    • Advisory - daily time for an additional layer of social/emotional/behavioral instruction

    • Universal PBIS Expectations - taught and reinforced during the first days of school

    • Comprehensive developmental guidance lessons are provided by our counseling staff

    • Placement in interventions based on the threshold

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

In alignment with district initiatives, HMS centers our work around the PLC Roadmap, data protocols, and the Plan/Do/Study/Act Process. 

The Guiding Coalition focuses on continuing to reflect on best practices that positively impact student learning and how to support subject level teams in implementing those processes in their classrooms. Through shared leadership, they connect the bigger picture of school-wide data to the daily work of classroom teachers and content area PLCs, determining which strategies and practices will provide the greatest impact. In the past few years, the Guiding Coalition developed a school-wide data protocol that addresses the four questions of the PLC model and continues to support teachers in the use of this tool. The Guiding Coalition responded to the needs of the teachers in the revision of the protocol so that it is used more efficiently and effectively. By doing this work, teachers remain focused on student learning.

The PLC Roadmap allowed each collaborative team at HMS to identify its placement on the PLC journey and determine the next steps to becoming a high-functioning collaborative team. As a building, we continue to refer back to that Roadmap to assess our progress and create new goals. Ongoing staff development is built around the specific areas that will move teachers forward on the Roadmap.

During scheduled common planning time, collaborative teams use the data protocol to plan rigorous and engaging lessons responsive to student needs and aligning with priority standards and related targets. These teams rely on input from special education, ML, and at-risk teachers to create lessons and assessments that address the individualized needs of students. Each member recognizes their vital role and responsibility toward student learning. Teams develop common formative and summative assessments and determine proficiency. They collect the data and discuss how to collaboratively address student performance while reflecting on their own instructional practices. In response to the data, teams work collectively to move all students toward proficiency and provide enrichment. Teams also write common SLO (Student Learning Objective) goals using the SMART format that align with building goals and contribute to becoming high-functioning collaborative teams.

 

Achievement Data Files

Additional Achievement Data

Over the last 3 years Holmen Middle School has worked hard to focus our collaborative team conversations around formative data and using a data protocol to guide next steps in our universal instruction and tier two support.  Since 2020 - 2021 we have seen an overall increase in our achievement on our state report card from a 72.8 (20-21), to 76.5 (21-22), to 79.0 (22-23).  

Overall as a school we continue to focus on the growth of our students.  Since 2020 - 2021 our Priority Score in the area of overall growth on our school report card has increased.  Since 2020 - 2021 we have seen these overall Priority Score in the area of growth continue to increase on our state report card from a 61.3 (20-21), to 73.6 (21-22), to 80.3 (22-23).

Contributing to this growth has been our schools work to collaboratively focus on the growth of our target group outcomes on our state report card.  Since 2020 - 2021 we have seen these overall growth scores in our target group continue to increase on our state report card from a 65.1 (20-21), to 72.7 (21-22), to 79.3 (22-23).  

One area that has seen tremendous growth is in our math growth score on our school report card.  Since 2020 - 2021 we have seen these overall math growth scores continue to increase on our state report card from a 66.0 (20-21), to 81.2 (21-22), to 94.5 (22-23).

 

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction School Report Card scores:

  • 2020-2021 - Exceeds Expectations 72.8
  • 2021-2022 - Exceeds Expectations 76.5
  • 2022-2023 - Exceeds Expectations 79.0
 
 

Top