We have built a successful PLC through a shared commitment to learning for all students, which includes a collaborative culture that is focused on results.  A number of years ago we had a shared commitment to learning for all students, however, we were lacking a collaborative culture that is focused on results.  This lack of collaborative culture and not focusing on results was evident in our student achievement results from state testing.  Many staff members did not have access to these results.

One of the first steps we took to turn our culture into a collaborative, results centered one was to form a school improvement team.  This idea of a school improvement team came from a discussion with Becky Dufour during one of the PLC Institutes the Principal attended over the summer in San Antonio.  Our school improvement team consists of one teacher from each grade level, one teacher from our SPED department, one teacher from our ELL department, one teacher from the specialists and one para.  At first the team decided to initially meet once a week, and now we meet once per month.  To keep our meeting organized and focused on student results we use the AllThingsPLC Team Feedback Sheet.  One of the first tasks of our team was to re-evaluate our master schedule and to make improvements so we had grade level plan time everyday.  Then we used the Data Picture of Our School resource to begin the discussion and creation of school-wide SMART goals.  We now begin every school year with a data retreat that involves the entire staff.

Each member of the school improvement team takes information from school improvement team meetings to their grade level teams.  Grade level teams have time to meet every day for about forty minutes and they meet twice a month for over an hour.  Grade level teams consist of grade level teachers, paras that provide instructional support for the grade level, a SPED teacher that works with the grade level, and the ELL teacher that works with the grade level.  The Principal, Instructional Facilitator and Counselor briefly attends each grade-level team that meets twice a month after school.  Every time a grade-level team meets they complete a Team Feedback Sheet and Data Analysis Protocol and turn it into the Principal.

Students and teachers track data on a weekly basis for Reading and Math, a monthly basis for behavior, and a quarterly basis for writing.  Data is based on SMART goals set by grade-level teams and are aligned to school and district goals.  We track data by school, classroom and student.  All staff members and students assist with the data tracking and graphs are displayed throughout our school.  Growth towards individual, class and school goals are celebrated and recognized on a regular basis.

We have come a long way in only a few years and we are excited to see what we can accomplish in the future.  Our school has adopted the following quote by Helen Keller, “Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.”

 

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

Before we were able to monitor student learning on a timely basis, we needed to clarify what students must learn.  We aligned essential learning vertically, to state standards, and our district curriculum/pacing guides.   Finally we created formative assessments for the essential learning we identified.  We started small and only concentrated on a few Essentials first.  Most of this work was completed in our collaborative grade-level teams.   Our School Improvement Team also provided input on our school’s common assessments to ensure vertical alignment and created an assessment calendar to ensure the assessments were administered at about the same time.  Staff needed and received the resource of time to accomplish these tasks.            

One of the most effective strategies we have implemented to monitor student learning is to include students on their progress monitoring and goal setting.  Before every common assessment is administered, every teacher conferences with each student.  The student and teacher review the student’s past performance, goal line and the student sets a goal during the conference.  After the student completes a common assessment, the student adds the results to their progress-monitoring graph and everyone celebrates when a student meets his or her goal.

In order for students to monitor and celebrate their learning all staff members are provided on-going training.  In addition, we have developed a common language of progress monitoring.  For example, teachers were trained in how to set up graphs, using and creating aim lines, and how to conduct conferences with students before and after a common assessment.  The monitoring of student learning is always completed on a timely basis because we have included all staff and students in the progress monitoring process.  Therefore, students are excited to complete common assessments, to see their growth, and share with their peers and staff members.  Most importantly, students are self-motivated and excited to learn.

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

The first step we took in strengthening our system of interventions to provide students with additional time and support for learning was to ensure a common understanding of the term “system of interventions."  We created this common understanding through a book study and discussion of information found in “Pyramid Response to Intervention:  RTI, Professional Learning Communities, and How to Respond When Kids Don’t Learn” by Austin Buffum, Mike Mattos and Chris Weber.  Using the information and our discussions we created an intervention plan and decision rules that met the needs of our school to guide our intervention process.

After we built consensus and ownership for our systems of interventions, our School Improvement Team began to analyze our master schedule to see how we could build in an intervention time everyday for every grade level.  This intervention time was needed for our Tier III interventions.  Because of everyone’s flexibility, we were able to build in a 30-minute intervention time everyday for each grade level. Once we had our intervention plan and master schedule we were able to start with our interventions.  Not only did we focus on interventions for students we also provided support for teachers in the form of weekly MTSS meetings, professional development, and daily collaborative PLC time.  Our interventions are monitored for effectiveness during PLC time, fidelity checks and analyzing common assessment data.

 

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

Our PLC teams have grown to be high performing, collaborative teams focused on continuously improving student learning.  This improved efficiency would not be possible without planned collaboration time and various organizational resources.

We are organized in several teams working interdependently to promote a focus on student learning: School Improvement Team, Core School Improvement Team, grade level professional learning community teams, the Writing Team, and the Multi Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) Team.  Our school improvement team is an example of dispersed leadership and vertical teaming.  One person from each grade level, ELL, SPED, a Para and the Principal form the School Improvement Team.  Our Core School Improvement Team consists of one teacher to represent grades K-2, one teacher to represent 3-5, two Instructional Facilitators, an English Learner teacher, a Special Education Teacher and the Principal.  Grade level teams meet with everyone who works with a given grade level of students, not just the general education teachers.  Another vertical team is our Writing PLC Team; we have K-2 and 3-5 work together to ensure alignment of writing instruction, curriculum and assessment.  Finally our MTSS Team is composed of our school psychologist, Instructional Facilitators, Principal, and any classroom or specialist teachers that work with the child.

Every Wednesday our district has early release for students.  Students are dismissed an hour early, and staff is able to use this time for our grade-level teams, writing teams, and professional development.  Our School Improvement Team meets once per month in the afternoon, and our MTSS Team meets every Wednesday morning before school.  We use sub release time to meet as a Core School Improvement Team so we can meet for longer periods of time less frequently.

Our teams keep focused with the use of norms, timelines, calendar of activities, the Critical Issues for Team Consideration and various templates.  Every team has their own set of norms they review regularly.  At every PLC and School Improvement meeting a Team Feedback Sheet and Data Analysis Protocol are completed, and each team member receives a copy.  The notes and agendas are regularly monitored by the Principal. In addition, the Principal also creates a timeline for the completion of team products, assessment calendar, and calendar of events and team meetings.  The teams reflect on their effectiveness through the use of the Critical Issues for Team Consideration.  Most importantly, teams are the focus of recognition and celebration, not individuals.

Additional Achievement Data

Lincoln Elementary
Percentage of students meeting End of Year benchmark: Lincoln/District Scores
	DIBELS Kinder	DIBELS 1st		DIBELS 2nd
Year 10 – 11	64/57	52/57		68/59
Year  11 – 12	75/66	57/58		45/58
Year  12 – 13	86/74	59/65		56/62
Year  13 – 14	96/79	76/65		67/73
Year  14 – 15	98/85	92/74		83/72
Year  15 – 16	98/84	80/75		88/73
Year  16 – 17	84/77	69/69		63/71
Percentage of students passing: LI Scores/State Scores
Grade:  3	Math	Reading		Writing	Science	English Language Arts	Other                 (DIBELS compared to District)
Year 09 – 10	No Test	32/68		No Test	No Test	No Test	Old Test
Year 10 – 11	49/67	43/71		No Test	No Test	No Test	43/56
Year  11 – 12	54/72	72/77		No Test	No Test	No Test	52/62
Year  12 – 13	69/74	67/78		No Test	No Test	No Test	69/70
Year  13 – 14	76/76	92/79		No Test	No Test	No Test	69/65
Year  14 – 15	82/78	89/82		No Test	No Test	No Test	72/78
Year  15 – 16	81/78	95/84		No Test	No Test	No Test	75/73
Year  16 – 17	75/75	NA		No Test	No Test	39/53	68/65
Percentage of students passing: LI Scores/State Scores
Grade:   4	Math	Reading	Writing		Science	English Language Arts	Other             (DIBELS compared to District)
Year 09 – 10	No Test	48/70	Old Test		No Test	No Test	Old Test
Year 10 – 11	53/68	39/75	Old Test		No Test	No Test	17/59
Year  11 – 12	46/72	54/77	Old Test		No Test	No Test	34/57
Year  12 – 13	53/73	66/79	60/68		No Test	No Test	64/68
Year  13 – 14	89/78	91/78	62/69		No Test	No Test	70/72
Year  14 – 15	67/77	82/81	62/69		No Test	No Test	71/72
Year  15 – 16	71/78	82/85	Changed Test		No Test	No Test	67/74
Year  16 – 17	62/76	NA	No Test		No Test	50/56	63/63
Percentage of students passing: LI Scores/State Scores
Grade:   5	Math	Reading		Writing	Science	English Language Arts	Other             (DIBELS compared to District)
Year 09 – 10	No Test	53/67		No Test	No Test	No Test	Old Test
Year 10 – 11	63/66	51/70		No Test	No Test	No Test	38/54
Year  11 – 12	50/75	39/76		No Test	21/66	No Test	22/64
Year  12 – 13	65/75	54/78		No Test	35/68	No Test	43/60
Year  13 – 14	78/77	78/77		No Test	74/72	No Test	71/72
Year  14 – 15	65/76	87/83		No Test	72/73	No Test	67/67
Year  15 – 16	68/77	90/85		No Test	66/73	No Test	54/71
Year  16 – 17	68/76	NA		No Test	52/72	27/51	52/71

DIBELS scores overall have steadily increased over the past several years.  We have seen a slight drop in the scores for the 16-17 school year, as has the whole district.  We believe this is due to the adoption of a new reading curriculum.  As our staff members become more adept over time, we believe these scores will improve again as well.

 State test scores have also steady increased and remained high in reading, with all grades above 80%.  The English/Language Arts portion of our state test was new in the 2016-17 school year and we scored comparatively to other schools in our district.

 While we always hope to improve, we believe that our school of approximately 50-60 students per grade level and our mobility rate of 16%, may make swings of 5-10% occur more often than we would like.

 We noticed a decline in Math scores this year.  We have now adopted a new Math curriculum and are looking forward to seeing improvement in this area.  Along with that, we have utilized both grade level and cross grade level similar responsibility team PLC’s to address this weakness.

 

 

In 2008, Abraham Lincoln Elementary was nationally recognized as a Blue Ribbon School.  

In 2014, Abraham Lincoln Elementary was nationally recognized as a Model Professional Learning Community School by AllThingsPLC.

Images

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Files

• 3rd_writing-plc_tfs_10-22-14.pdf
• 3rd_writing-plc_dap_10-22-14.pdf
• lincoln-school-assessment-schedule_14-15.xls
• 17-18masterschedule-docx.pdf