LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
 
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
 
 
 
 
 
12/06/2009 -  12/11/2009
 
 
 
 
l
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
At-a-Glance

The charts below indicate the percentage of indicators in each standard for the following four performance levels:

4 - Exemplary level of development and implementation
3 - Fully functional and operational level of development and implementation
2 - Limited development or partial implementation
1 - Little or no development and implementation

Standard 1 - Curriculum
Total Indicators : 7
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 86%
   1  - 14%
Standard 4 - School Culture
Total Indicators : 11
   4  - 0%
   3  - 9%
   2  - 64%
   1  - 27%
Standard 7 - Leadership
Total Indicators : 11
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 73%
   1  - 27%
Standard 2 - Classroom Evaluation/Assessment
Total Indicators : 8
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 62%
   1  - 38%
Standard 5 - Student, Family and Community Support
Total Indicators : 5
   4  - 0%
   3  - 20%
   2  - 80%
   1  - 0%
Standard 8 - School Organization and Fiscal Resources
Total Indicators : 10
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 90%
   1  - 10%
Standard 3 - Instruction

Total Indicators : 8
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 62%
   1  - 38%
Standard 6 - Professional Growth, Development, and Evaluation
Total Indicators : 12
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 33%
   1  - 67%
Standard 9 - Comprehensive and Effective Planning
Total Indicators : 16
   4  - 0%
   3  - 0%
   2  - 94%
   1  - 6%
l
9 STANDARDS AND 88 INDICATORS FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT - LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT - WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Standard 1 - Academic Performance - Curriculum
Curriculum
1.1a Curriculum is aligned with Arkansas Academic Content Standards and Student Learning Expectations.
1.1b District initiates facilitates discussions among schools regarding curriculum standards
1.1c District initiates facilitates discussions to eliminate unnecessary overlaps
1.1d Evidence of vertical communication, intentional focus on key curriculum transition points
1.1e School curriculum provides specific links to continuing education
1.1f Systematic process for monitoring, evaluating and reviewing curriculum
1.1g Curriculum provides access to an academic core
Standard 4 - Learning Environment - School Culture
School Culture
4.1a Leadership support for a safe, orderly and equitable learning environment
4.1b Leadership creates experiences that all children can learn
4.1c Teachers hold high expectations for all students
4.1d Teachers, staff involved in decision-making processes regarding teaching and learning
4.1e Teachers accept their role in student success
4.1f School assigns staff...opportunities for all students
4.1g Teachers communicate regularly with families
4.1h Evidence that the teachers and staff care
4.1i Multiple communication strategies...to all stakeholders
4.1j Evidence that student achievement is highly valued
4.1k The school/district provides support...needs of all students
Standard 7 - Efficiency - Leadership
Leadership
7.1a Leadership has developed and sustained a shared vision
7.1b Leadership decisions focused on student academic data
7.1c All administrators have a growth plan
7.1d Evidence that the leadership team disaggregates data
7.1e Leadership ensures all instructional staff...access to curriculum related materials
7.1f Leadership ensures that time is protected...instructional issues
7.1g Leadership plans and allocates resources
7.1h School/district leadership provides policy and resource infrastructure
7.1i Process for the development and the implementation of the local school board of education policy
7.1j Local school board of education/school have intentional focus on student academic performance
7.1k Principal demonstrates leadership skills in academic performance, learning environment, efficiency
Standard 2 - Academic Performance - Classroom Evaluation/Assessment
Classroom Evaluation/Assessment
2.1a Classroom assessments frequent, rigorous, aligned with Arkansas' Academic Core Content Standards
2.1b Teachers collaborate in the design of authentic assessment
2.1c Students can articulate what is required to be proficient
2.1d Test scores are used to identify curriculum gaps
2.1e Assessments designed to provide feedback on student learning for instructional purposes
2.1f Performance standards communicated, evident in classrooms, observable in student work
2.1g ACTAAP coordinated by school and district leadership
2.1h Samples of student work are analyzed
Standard 5 - Learning Environment - Student, Family and Community Support
Student, Family and Community Support
5.1a Families and the community are active partners
5.1b All students have access to all the curriculum
5.1c Reduce barriers to learning
5.1d Students are provided opportunities to receive additional assistance
5.1e School maintains an accurate student record system
Standard 8 - Efficiency - School Organization and Fiscal Resources
Organization of the School
8.1a School is organized...use of all available resources
8.1b All students have access to all the curriculum
8.1c Staff are allocated based upon the learning needs of all students
8.1d Staff makes efficient use of instructional time
8.1e Staff...planning vertically and horizontally across content areas
8.1f Schedule aligned with the school's mission
Resource Allocation and Integration
8.2a Clearly defined process provides equitable and consistent use of fiscal resources
8.2b Budget reflects decisions directed by an assessment of need
8.2c District and local school board of education analyze funding and other resource requests
8.2d Resources are allocated and integrated to address student needs
Standard 3 - Academic Performance - Instruction
Instruction
3.1a Evidence that effective and varied instructional strategies are used in all classrooms
3.1b Instructional strategies and learning activities are aligned
3.1c Instructional strategies/activities are consistently monitored...diverse student population
3.1d Teachers demonstrate content knowledge
3.1e Evidence that teachers incorporate the use of technology
3.1f Instructional resources are sufficient to deliver the curriculum
3.1g Teachers examine and discuss student work
3.1h Homework is frequent and monitored, tied to instructional practice
Legend
Green 4 - Exemplary level of development and implementation
Blue 3 - Fully functional and operational level of development and implementation
Black 2 - Limited development or partial implementation
Red 1 - Little or no development and implementation
Standard 6 - Learning Environment - Professional Growth, Development, and Evaluation
Professional Development
6.1a Support for the long-term professional growth of the individual staff members
6.1b The school has an intentional plan for building instructional capacity
6.1c Staff development priorities..alignment..goals for student performance
6.1d Plans for school improvement directly connect goals for student learning
6.1e Professional development is on-going and job-embedded
6.1f Professional development planning connect student achievement data
Professional Growth and Evaluation
6.2a Clearly defined evaluation process
6.2b Leadership provides the fiscal resources for the appropriate professional growth
6.2c Employee evaluation and the individual professional growth plan to improve staff proficiency
6.2d A process of personnel evaluation which meets or exceeds standards set in statute
6.2e The school/district improvement plan identifies specific instructional needs
6.2f Evaluation process to provide teachers..change behavior and instructional practice
Standard 9 - Efficiency - Comprehensive and Effective Planning
Defining the School Vision, Mission, Beliefs
9.1a Collaborative process used to develop the vision, beliefs, mission
Development of the Profile
9.2a Planning process involves collecting, managing and analyzing data
9.2b Use data for school improvement planning
Defining Desired Results for Student Learning
9.3a School and district plans reflect learning research, expectations for student learning
9.3b Analyze their students' unique learning needs
9.3c Results for student learning are defined
Analyzing Instructional and Organizational Effectiveness
9.4a Strengths and limitations are identified
9.4b Goals for building, strengthening capacity
Development of the Improvement Plan
9.5a Steps for school improvement aligned with improvement goals
9.5b ACSIP identifies resources, timelines
9.5c Evaluating the effectiveness of the ACSIP
9.5d ACSIP is aligned with the school's profile, beliefs, mission, desired results
Implementation and Documentation
9.6a ACSIP is implemented as developed
9.6b School evaluates the degree to which it achieves the goals and objectives for student learning
9.6c The school evaluates the degree to which it achieves the expected impact
9.6d Evidence of attempts to sustain the commitment to continuous improvement
l

 

 

Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP), Act 1467 of 2003, Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105, Ark. Code Ann. 25-15- 201 et seq., and Act 35 (Rules).
 
Pursuant to the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) Rules Governing the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP), and the Academic Distress Program, schools failing to meet Adequate Yearly Progress as determined under these rules shall be classified subject to the following consequences: Beginning with the 2006-2007 school year, schools designated in year three, four, or five school improvement shall participate in a scholastic audit conducted by the Department of Education (or its designees).
 
Focus on Student Academic Performance
The scholastic audit report contains many important findings school and district leadership should review. It will be the task of school leadership to read and prioritize the results from this report to plan for improving student performance. To ensure that the implications of this report and the recommendations are understood and implemented, the following additional actions should be taken:
  • Disseminate the findings and recommendations of this report broadly to constituents for discussion to aid in determining priorities for planning. Use the report for learning, reflection and action.
  • Build greater understanding of new approaches to professional development and address the ways that the school community will have to work differently to improve instruction.
  • Acknowledge and address the fact that not all current practice provides adequate opportunity for the school staff to carry out the new demands of their work, to analyze data and diagnose student needs, to determine the efficacy of their own practice, to align their instruction to new curriculum standards and to collaborate regularly with peers.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Introduction
The Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) conducted a scholastic audit of Whitten Elementary School during the period of 12/06/2009-12/11/2009.  This school's last performance rating identified its classification as being in School Improvement Year 5.

The scholastic audit team activities included a review of the documents collected for the school portfolio and profile: classroom observations (88), and formal interviews and informal discussions with teachers (34), students (152), parents (63), the family resource/youth services center director, central office personnel (4), support staff members (32), counselors (2), the principal, and school board members (2).

The Standards and Indicators for School Improvement rubric was the primary assessment instrument used during the visit.  The team also compiled results from perceptive surveys, leadership assessments, and efficiency reviews.  All of these results were considered in the development of this report.  The scholastic audit report was based upon examination of the documents provided in the school portfolio, team experiences, and observations.

The specific findings and recommendations are organized under the headings of Academic Performance, Learning Environment, and Efficiency.  Each of the nine standards for success in Arkansas's schools is addressed in the following pages.

The co-chairpersons of the team were Charlotte Earwood and Blake Decker.  The other team members were Lori Altschul, Gloria Clay, Shari Coston, Harold Davidson, and Dr. Brenda Martin.

Academic Performance
The following Academic Performance Standards address curriculum, classroom, evaluation/assessment and instruction.
Standard 1: The school develops and implements a curriculum that is rigorous, intentional, and aligned to state and local standards.
Standard 2: The school utilizes multiple evaluation and assessment strategies to continuously monitor and modify instruction to meet student needs and support proficient student work.
Standard 3: The school's instructional program actively engages all students by using effective, varied, and research-based practices to improve student performance.

Learning Environment
The following Learning Environment Standards address school culture; student, family, and community support; and professional growth, development and evaluation.
Standard 4: The school/district functions as an effective learning community and supports a climate conducive to performance excellence.
Standard 5: The school/district works with families and community groups to remove barriers to learning in an effort to meet the intellectual, social, career, and development needs of students.
Standard 6: The school/district provides research-based, results driven professional development opportunities for staff and implements performance evaluation procedures in order to improve teaching and learning.

Efficiency
The following Efficiency Standards address leadership, school structure and resources, and comprehensive and effective planning.
Standard 7: School/district instructional decisions focus on support for teaching and learning, organizational direction, high performance expectations, creating a learning culture, and developing leadership capacity.
Standard 8: There is evidence that the school is organized to maximize use of all available resources to support high student and staff performance.
Standard 9: The school/district develops, implements and evaluates an ACSIP that communicates a clear purpose, direction and action plan focused on teaching and learning.

l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary Findings in : Academic Performance
Standard 1 : Curriculum
Based on interviews conducted by the Scholastic Audit Team members and their inspections of pertinent documents and materials, it was concluded that in Standard 1 there were 1 indicators (14%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 1," 6 indicators (86%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 2," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 3," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 4." A brief description of the evaluation of the indicators follows.

Performance Rating:2

1.1a There is evidence that the curriculum is aligned with the Arkansas Academic Content Standards and Student Learning Expectations.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of Pacing Guides
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
The implemented curriculum is aligned with the Arkansas Curriculum Frameworks in all grades.  The kindergarten through second-grade teachers collaboratively developed curriculum documents for math, literacy, and science and pacing guides tailored to Whitten Elementary School.  A Total Instruction Alignment document from the Northwest Arkansas Education Services Cooperative serves as the guide and reference.  Grades three and four are using a Total Instruction Alignment document created by the Great Rivers Education Services Cooperative.  These curriculum documents have not been adjusted to meet the learning needs of students at Whitten Elementary School.  Most teachers are aware of the Arkansas Academic Content Standards and utilize curriculum maps to pace student learning expectations. The implemented curriculum does not always intentionally promote mastery of student learning.  The written curriculum is age and developmentally appropriate.  The implemented curriculum is not consistently age and developmentally appropriate.  Most lessons are textbook-driven.  Student Learning Expectations and objectives are posted in most rooms.  The posted objectives do not consistently reflect the lesson being taught.  There are few curricular connections made within or between content areas.
1.1b The district/school initiates and facilitates discussions among schools regarding curriculum standards to ensure they are clearly articulated across all levels (K-12).
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of Professional Development Documents
Review of Department Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Weekly grade-level team meetings are held to discuss horizontal alignment of the curriculum.  There are minimal opportunities provided by the district/school for teachers from different schools to meet regarding vertical alignment of the curriculum.  Fourth- and fifth-grade teachers from Whitten Elementary and Anna Strong Middle School met in October to discuss vertical curriculum alignment.
1.1d There is evidence of vertical communication with an intentional focus on key curriculum transition points within grade configurations (e.g., from primary to middle and middle to high).
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of Department Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
The district facilitates few opportunities for vertical communications within and among schools to address transition points in all subject areas.  There is limited intentional discussion between fourth-grade teachers from the elementary school and fifth-grade teachers at the middle school.  Students are semi-departmentalized in third and fourth grades in preparation for transitioning to middle school.  There is no systematic process in place to monitor the effectiveness of the curriculum at key transition points between grade configurations.  Fourth grade students transitioning from Whitten Elementary School to Anna Strong Middle School participate in a middle school orientation session, meet the teachers, and learn about the differences between elementary and middle school expectations for student achievement.   Middle school policies and procedures are discussed.  During a tour of the campus, students visit classrooms, gymnasium, labs, and the cafeteria.  The middle school counselor meets with fourth grade students to help them choose the elective class they will take.
1.1e The school curriculum provides specific links to continuing education, life and career options.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Curriculum Documents
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Observations of Classrooms
The school curriculum provides connections to continuing education and career options.  Some teachers incorporate discussions of careers within the context of content-area lessons.  Twice a month, the counselor visits the kindergarten through fourth-grade social studies classes and teaches lessons that focus on career awareness.  Students learn about jobs that are available in the area, talk about future career choices, and learn vocabulary words associated with specific vocations.  Students explore college choices and discuss the courses that will best prepare them for college.  The curriculum includes limited opportunities for application of skills, knowledge, and processes that prepare students to be self-sufficient, productive citizens.
1.1f In place is a systematic process for monitoring, evaluating and reviewing the curriculum.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Department Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Review of District Policy Manual
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
The district has a curriculum policy and school leadership has implemented procedures to address curriculum issues.  The curriculum is monitored and adjusted to address areas of concern.  There is an established curriculum committee.  Two instructional facilitators work with teachers in weekly grade-level meetings to monitor, review, and revise the curriculum.  No formal process has been adopted to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of the curriculum.
1.1g The curriculum provides access to an academic core for all students.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Master Schedule
Review of District Policy Manual
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Observations in Classrooms
The written curriculum is designed to provide all students with access to an academic core that is aligned to the Arkansas Academic Content Standards.  The implemented curriculum is not always challenging and seldom elicits higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills that result in high academic performance.  Student Learning Expectations and lesson objectives, based on the Arkansas Academic Content Standards, are posted in most classrooms.  Few teachers refer to the objective throughout the lesson and most students cannot state what they should know and be able to do as a result of classroom instruction.

Performance Rating:1

1.1c The district initiates and facilitates discussions between schools in the district in order to eliminate unnecessary overlaps and close gaps.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of ACSIP
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
There is minimal district-initiated collaboration and discussion between Whitten Elementary School and Anna Strong Middle School to eliminate overlaps and close gaps in the curriculum.  Fourth- and fifth-grade teachers from Whitten Elementary and Anna Strong Middle School met in October to discuss vertical curriculum alignment.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary of Recommendations in : Academic Performance
Standard 1 : Curriculum
The instructional facilitators should continue to provide professional development in the creation of comprehensive curriculum documents that are aligned with the Arkansas Academic Content Standards.  There should be a school-wide format for the curriculum that supports student learning at high levels, incorporates research-based instructional strategies, and provides opportunities for cross-curricular and multicultural connections.  Third and fourth grade teachers should develop curriculum documents for all subjects tailored to Whitten Elementary School.  All kindergarten through fourth-grade curriculum documents should be rigorous and relevant, providing students with real-world experiences.  Curriculum documents should include concepts such as enduring understandings, essential questions, task analysis, key vocabulary, instructional strategies, methods of assessment, materials and resources, and evaluation procedures.  Each of these concepts should be fully defined for all grade levels and content areas.

The district should provide time for horizontal and vertical articulation of the curriculum.  Teachers within a grade should compare the curriculum maps in all subject areas, looking for opportunities to make cross-curricular connections (horizontal articulation).  When possible, sequencing of content-area topics should be adjusted so that students experience the related curriculum in the different subjects during the same time period.  For example, if fourth graders are studying the geography of Africa in social studies, their reading class could be studying the biography of Nelson Mandela.  In addition, the district should implement a systematic process for sequential grades to compare curriculum with the purpose of eliminating gaps and overlaps (vertical articulation).  For example, grades three and four should not both have mastery of the multiplication tables as a curriculum goal.

School leadership should monitor teacher lesson plans for implementation of the district curriculum in all subject areas.  Classroom Walkthroughs should be used to validate that the approved lesson plans are effectively implemented.  Specific, constructive feedback should be given to teachers in a face-to-face and timely manner.  On-going and job-embedded professional development should be provided on an individual basis to teachers needing assistance in implementing the written curriculum appropriately.  A system should be developed within the school that uses multiple indicators of student performance to evaluate, monitor, and make recommendations for any needed revisions to the curriculum.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary Findings in : Academic Performance
Standard 2 : Classroom Evaluation/Assessment
Based on interviews conducted by the Scholastic Audit Team members and their inspections of pertinent documents and materials, it was concluded that in Standard 2 there were 3 indicators (38%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 1," 5 indicators (62%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 2," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 3," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 4." A brief description of the evaluation of the indicators follows.

Performance Rating:2

2.1a Classroom assessments of student learning are frequent, rigorous and aligned with the Arkansas' Academic Core Content Standards.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Classroom Assessments
Review of Student Work
Review of Target Tests
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, and Students
The local school board has not adopted a policy that addresses classroom assessment.  Quarterly assessments for mathematics and literacy are administered to all students in grades kindergarten through fourth.  The district math and literacy facilitators, along with teams of teachers, developed the assessments for grades kindergarten through second, while grades three and four use the Target Test provided by Great Rivers Education Service Cooperative.  These assessments are aligned with Arkansas Academic Content Standards.  The primary sources for additional classroom assessments are textbook ancillary materials.  Most assessments do not require students to demonstrate what they know and are able to do at a rigorous level.  Many assessment items incorporate lower-level thinking skills and utilize multiple choice and matching as the primary question format.
2.1b Teachers collaborate in the design of authentic assessment tasks aligned with core content subject matter.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Department Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Review of Classroom  Assessments
Review of Lesson Plans
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, and Students
Quarterly assessments in literacy and mathematics were collaboratively designed by the curriculum facilitators and teachers in kindergarten through second grade.  Common tests on specific topics in mathematics were collaboratively developed and are administered approximately three times each quarter.  Grade-level team meetings are seldom used to collaboratively design authentic assessment tasks.  Most classroom assessments utilize multiple choice or matching questions that do not require student demonstrations of what they know and are able to do at higher levels of learning.  Open response items are seldom included on classroom assessments.  Teachers do not consistently provide students with a variety of choices in the forms of assessments.  There is no established process for school leadership to review and provide feedback on teacher-created classroom assessments.
2.1e Multiple assessments are specifically designed to provide meaningful feedback on student learning for instructional purposes.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Assessments
Review of Student Work
Review of Lesson Plans
Interviews with  Administrators, Staff, and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Most classroom assessments are based on ancillary materials included in adopted textbook series.  Some assessments are teacher-created and follow the same format as the textbook assessments.  Few teachers provide a variety of assessment tasks from which students have an opportunity to choose their own way to demonstrate knowledge or capacity to perform a given task.  Some teachers analyze assessment results to determine skills that students have not mastered.  These skills are identified for re-teaching and reinforcement until the student demonstrates mastery.  Few teachers design modifications to instruction to increase the success of students not achieving mastery on specific skills.  Most teachers assign homework on a regular basis.  Some teachers do not require students to submit their homework once completed.  Not all teachers return student homework.  Some teachers assign grades to student work that reflect completion of the task without evaluating quality or correctness of the student work.  Teachers do not consistently provide students with written feedback intended to improve student performance on assessments or homework assignments.
2.1f Performance standards are clearly communicated, evident in classrooms and observable in student work.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Assessments
Review of Student Work
Review of Rubrics and Scoring Guides
Review of Student Performance Expectations
Interviews with Teachers and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Rubrics posted in most classrooms establish the number of multiple choice questions a student must correctly answer to achieve different performance levels.  These rubrics seldom clarify for students how to improve their academic performance.  Student writing samples are posted in some classrooms, showing the differences in work identified at various performance levels.  "Basic" and "Below Basic" work is often organized under a heading of "Work in Progress."  Strategies for improving work to meet proficiency requirements are sometimes recorded on student work.  These strategies are not consistently reinforced in classroom instruction.  Most classroom assessment tasks are designed at the knowledge and comprehension levels of Bloom's Taxonomy, providing students minimal opportunity to demonstrate the characteristics of rigorous work.  School leadership expects teachers to communicate with families about student progress at least every five weeks.
2.1g Implementation of the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) is coordinated by school and district leadership.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Local board of education policies
Testing schedules
Examples of communications
Agenda and Minutes of training sessions
Interviews with staff, parents, students
Signed Assurance documents
Individual Education Plans
504 Plans
Implementation of ACTAAP is coordinated by school personnel.  There is no local school board policy regarding the administration of the ACTAAP Benchmark exams.  The school counselor conducts training for staff members in all areas of test administration and security prior to the week of testing.   A testing schedule is developed and communicated to staff, families, and students along with information concerning the role families should play in good test-week procedures.  Appropriate accommodations for special education and designated 504 students are implemented during the week in the same way they have been for classroom assessments throughout the school year.

Performance Rating:1

2.1c Students can articulate the academic expectations in each class and know what is required to be proficient.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Rubrics and Scoring Guides
Review of Student Performance Expectations
Interviews with Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Most students cannot verbalize the objective being taught in the classroom.  Few students understand what rubrics are or their function in classroom instruction.  Progress reports are the primary source of information for parents and students to determine the proficiency level of students' classroom work.  Rubrics posted in some classrooms generally identify the number of questions that need to be correctly answered for students to score at one of the identified levels.  Most rubrics are not task-specific and do not reflect the requirements of quality work for different subject areas.  Students are not taught to systematically evaluate and reflect upon their own work for the purpose of improving individual learning.
2.1d Test scores are used to identify curriculum gaps.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Assessment Data
Review of Target Test Data
Review of Department Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Review of Professional Development Documents
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Results of student assessments are not used to identify curricular gaps or implications of needed changes in instructional practice to increase student performance.  The district and school leadership use ACTAAP test results to establish goals during the ACSIP planning process.  The ACTAAP Benchmark test results are not disaggregated to the classroom or individual student levels to identify student learning needs.  Goals in the ACSIP are developed for the school-wide population and do not reflect the needs of sub-populations or individual students.  Stakeholders are not intentionally involved in data analysis of assessments.  Instructional facilitators assist grade-level teams in informal analysis of quarterly assessments that sometimes result in a change in curricular materials or instructional strategies for particular skills.
2.1h Samples of student work are analyzed to inform instruction, revise curriculum and pedagogy, and obtain information on student progress.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Assessments
Review of Department Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Review of Student Performance Expectations
Review of Professional Development Documents
Interviews with Staff and Students
District and school leadership have not provided training to teachers in procedures for analyzing student work.  Student work is not systematically analyzed to revise curriculum, instruction, or assessment practices.  Some teachers review student work for the purpose of determining mastery and creating a checklist that indicates which students should receive re-teaching or reinforcement of particular skills.  Teachers do not use student portfolios to measure growth over time.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary of Recommendations in : Academic Performance
Standard 2 : Classroom Evaluation/Assessment
Teachers and facilitators should collaboratively create classroom assessments that are standards-based, rigorous, and authentic.  Currently the majority of classroom assessments are formatted as practice for the Benchmark exams' multiple choice sections.  Students are not required to show their work as a step in responding to multiple choice and matching-type fill-in-the-blank questions.  While the ACTAAP short answer questions are multiple choice, they are more rigorous and authentic than those used in Whitten Elementary School classroom assessments.  Students should be required to show their work and/or justify their answers so that teachers can modify instruction in order to correct students' misunderstandings.  Assessment tasks should require students to use higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills rather than low-level recall.  Open-ended and open-response assessment items should be a regular part of classroom instruction and assessment and not reserved for infrequent formal testing.  Daily classroom questioning should also be conducted at higher-order thinking skill levels.  In order for teachers to guarantee the success of each student, questions should be addressed to specific students rather than to the whole group.  All students should have equal participation in lessons.  Students should be asked to justify their answers, whether they are correct or incorrect.  School leadership should establish procedures for monitoring the effective use of classroom assessment techniques requiring higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills from all students.

Students should understand and be able to articulate the curriculum goals for each lesson throughout the school day.  This information should be posted in student-friendly language and verbally stated to students as the lesson begins.  The teacher's expectations for what the student will know and be able to do should be clearly communicated to the students, and students should be able to communicate this in their own way both before and after  instruction.  Teachers and students should have an understanding of what quality work looks like in various subjects and presentation forms.  To create an understanding of quality work, school leadership should facilitate the development of commonly-held standards for, and examples of, high-quality work.  Teachers and facilitators should work collaboratively to develop rubrics that describe the expectations for proficient work on open-ended tasks in all content areas.  Student work samples on open-ended tasks and accompanying rubrics should be posted in classrooms.  Students should be taught to use rubrics as a tool to reflect on, evaluate, and improve their own work.  School leadership must provide on-going, job-embedded training in the effective construction and application of rubrics and on the implementation of a rubric-based analysis of student work.  The Great Rivers Education Service Cooperative is a resource for these instructional strategies.

The primary purpose of student assessment should be to inform teachers and school leadership of needed changes in curriculum and instructional strategies.  Data should be disaggregated to the sub-population and individual student level in order to learn what students know and are able to do.  The end result of data analysis should be appropriate changes in curriculum, instructional strategies, and assessment techniques.  Changes to curriculum should be made when gaps are identified.  Instructional strategies should be modified when what is being done in classroom instruction is not producing the desired results for students.  Assessment strategies should change when analysis does not give the staff the information needed to make informed decisions.  District and school leadership should provide long-term, sustained training in disaggregating data and using the results to identify gaps between the taught and tested curriculum, levels of student achievement, and effectiveness of instructional strategies.  Decisions about necessary changes should include immediate modifications, as well as long-term changes.  Results from a variety of student assessments should be used in this process, including ACTAAP, Target Tests, district quarterly assessments, and classroom assessments.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary Findings in : Academic Performance
Standard 3 : Instruction
Based on interviews conducted by the Scholastic Audit Team members and their inspections of pertinent documents and materials, it was concluded that in Standard 3 there were 3 indicators (38%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 1," 5 indicators (62%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 2," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 3," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 4." A brief description of the evaluation of the indicators follows.

Performance Rating:2

3.1b Instructional strategies and learning activities are aligned with the district, school and state learning goals and assessment expectations for student learning.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Student Work Samples
Review of Arkansas Academic Content Standards
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Observations of Classrooms
Not all instructional strategies are aligned to the district curriculum.  Few learning activities require students to complete assessment tasks similar to those on the state assessments.  These assessment tasks lack open-response questioning and do not demonstrate rigorous levels of student work similar to the expectations of state-level Benchmark exams.
3.1c Instructional strategies and activities are consistently monitored and aligned with the changing needs of a diverse student population to ensure various learning approaches and learning styles are addressed.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Academic Improvement Plans
Review of Classroom Walkthrough Documents
Review of Student Work Samples
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, and Students
School leadership conducts Classroom Walkthroughs to monitor the effective use of classroom instructional practices.  School leadership does not provide teacher-specific feedback that would assist teachers in modifying instruction to meet student needs.  Teacher-developed lesson plans are checked weekly.  The process includes school leadership initialing lesson plans and returning them to teachers.  Minimal written feedback is provided to teachers on the submitted lesson plans.
3.1d Teachers demonstrate the content knowledge necessary to challenge and motivate students to high levels of learning.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Classroom Walkthrough Documents
Review of Master Schedule
Review of Professional Development Documents
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Individual Professional Growth Plans
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Observations of Classrooms
District and school leadership recruit highly-qualified staff.  Two teachers are not licensed in their assigned areas.  Teachers participate in a minimum of 60 hours of professional development as required by ADE guidelines.  School leadership provides limited opportunities for on-going, job-embedded professional development throughout the school year.  Professional development opportunities are not intentionally focused on improving classroom instructional strategies that challenge and motivate students to high levels of learning.
3.1f Instructional resources (textbooks, supplemental reading, technology) are sufficient to effectively deliver the curriculum.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Curriculum Documents
Review of Instructional Resources Inventory
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, and Students
Observations of Classrooms and Common Areas
Most classroom instruction is textbook-based.  A variety of instructional resources is provided in most content areas to support implementation of the written curriculum.  Few teachers consistently access the available resources to expand the use of instructional resources beyond the adopted textbook series.  The majority of instructional resources do not reflect diversity.  Not all instructional resources are age or developmentally appropriate.  The media center provides students and teachers with some instructional resources that support the implementation of the school's written curriculum.
3.1h There is evidence that homework is frequent and monitored and tied to instructional practice.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Student Handbook
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Student Work Samples
Review of District Policy Manual
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Some students can articulate the purpose of homework.  Most teachers assign homework four nights per week.  Some teachers do not monitor student progress through homework completion.  Many teachers do not provide written feedback beyond assigning a grade to the assignment.  Homework is not consistently used as an extension of what has been taught in the classroom and seldom connects to real-world experiences.  The local school board has adopted a homework policy.

Performance Rating:1

3.1a There is evidence that effective and varied instructional strategies are used in all classrooms.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Classroom Walkthrough Documents
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Most classroom instructional strategies are teacher-directed.  Few teachers utilize student-centered, culturally-responsive instructional strategies, such as cooperative learning, learning centers, and hands-on activities, to meet individual student learning needs.  Most classroom activities do not accommodate students' preferred learning styles or multiple intelligences.  Whole-group instruction and worksheets are the primary instructional strategies used throughout the school.
3.1e There is evidence that teachers incorporate the use of technology in their classrooms.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of District Policy Manual
Review of District Technology Plan
Review of Student Work Samples
Review of Classroom Walkthrough Documents
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
Observations of Classrooms
Most teachers do not consistently incorporate technology into classroom instruction.  Technology is not equitably allocated to all teachers and students in all classrooms.  One interactive whiteboard is located on campus.  Most kindergarten through second-grade classrooms have a cluster of computers available for student use.  Few third- and fourth-grade students have access to classroom computers.  Students attend a reading or math lab once per week and take Accelerated Reader tests on computers in the library.  School leadership has not established an expectation that all teachers incorporate technology into classroom instruction on a consistent basis.
3.1g Teachers examine and discuss student work collaboratively and use this information to inform their practice.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Committee Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Review of Master Schedule
Review of Lesson Plans
Interviews with Administrators and Staff
District and school leadership have not provided training to teachers in procedures for analyzing student work.  Teachers meet with the principal and instructional facilitators on a weekly basis to discuss academic concerns.  This time is not intentionally utilized to analyze student work that will lead to the modification of instructional practices.  Some teachers review student work for the purpose of determining mastery and creating a checklist that indicates which students will receive re-teaching or reinforcement of particular skills.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary of Recommendations in : Academic Performance
Standard 3 : Instruction
School leadership should ensure that all teachers receive training in developing and utilizing varied instructional strategies and activities.  Strategies most likely to impact student learning include recognizing similarities and differences, graphic organizers, differentiated instruction, inclusionary practices, cooperative learning, double-entry journals, reading/writing workshops, and manipulatives.  These effective strategies should be implemented, observed, and measured by student performance at all times.  Training should provide teachers a variety of instructional strategies that can replace textbook-driven instruction.  Teachers should use teacher-generated materials specific to the standards being addressed instead of textbook-provided ancillary materials.  Resources on research-based instructional strategies can be found at the Great Rivers Education Service Cooperative.  One source for brain-research related high-yield strategies is "Worksheets Don't Grow Dendrites" by Marcia Tate.  Another possible resource is "Classroom Instruction that Works" by Robert Marzano.

School leadership should develop a comprehensive professional development plan that equips faculty and staff with strategies for maximizing academic learning time through the use of bell-to-bell instruction.  This training should include
- questioning techniques, such as ask, pause, call;
- using rubrics with open response items;  
- incorporating the best practice lesson line that includes modeling, providing guidance throughout the lesson, allowing for independent practice, and providing closure;
- effectively using the pacing guides to plan lessons; and
- creating effective lesson plans.
School leadership should continue to require lesson plans be submitted weekly, and provide meaningful feedback on lesson plans to individual teachers as a means to improve instructional practices.  School leadership must consistently monitor classrooms for student engagement and provide assistance for redirecting student behavior.  Teachers must adjust their feeling tone with students and find other methods for redirecting student behavior, such as praise and acknowledging students that are on task.  School leadership can provide training for teachers through the Great Rivers Education Service Cooperative.

School leadership should explore possible sources of funding for increasing student-level access to technology in classrooms.  School leadership should actively pursue the movement of existing computer resources from Strong Elementary to Whitten Elementary School to expand available technology resources in third- and fourth-grade classrooms.  School and district leadership should collaborate with the school staff to research the effectiveness of a variety of electronic resources, selecting those that hold the greatest promise of increasing student achievement.  In addition to using technology as an integral part of the delivery of instruction, teachers should also provide students the opportunity to use technology to expand their learning opportunities and demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum in a variety of contexts.  School leadership should monitor lesson plans for weekly integration of technology in order to enhance instruction and learning.
l
Scholastic Audit Summary Report
 
WHITTEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 
12/06/2009 - 12/11/2009
 
Summary Findings in : Learning Environment
Standard 4 : School Culture
Based on interviews conducted by the Scholastic Audit Team members and their inspections of pertinent documents and materials, it was concluded that in Standard 4 there were 3 indicators (27%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 1," 7 indicators (64%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 2," 1 indicators (9%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 3," 0 indicators (0%) evaluated as "Evaluation Category 4." A brief description of the evaluation of the indicators follows.

Performance Rating:3

4.1i Multiple communication strategies and contexts are used for the dissemination of information to all stakeholders.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of District Policy Manual
Review of District and School Web sites
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms and Common Areas
The local school board has adopted a policy that addresses parent and community communication.  The school uses a variety of communication strategies to disseminate information to school stakeholders.  The school Web site includes a calendar of upcoming events, staff e-mail addresses, and pictures of school activities.  Some school information, including the weekly cafeteria menu, is submitted to the local newspaper, "The Courier Index."  The school sends take-home notices to parents/guardians.  The school marquee informs the community of upcoming events.

Performance Rating:2

4.1a There is leadership support for a safe, orderly and equitable learning environment.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of District Policy Manual
Review of Student Handbook
Review of Perceptual Surveys
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms and Common Areas
District leadership does not consistently provide support for the maintenance of the physical structure of the school in order to provide a safe, healthy, orderly and equitable learning environment.  Four fire extinguishers are located throughout the building.  Some playground equipment pieces have been discarded and remain in a pile on the playground area.  Long periods of rain result in water levels rising above the walking paths and flooding the areas around the portable buildings.  These water levels sometimes rise beyond exterior doors into the hallways and classrooms near the doorways.  The local school board has adopted a student discipline policy that is included in the Student Handbook.  Many classrooms have behavioral and classroom expectations posted on the wall.  Few teachers consistently enforce these expectations.  Use of the school-wide intercom is limited to emergencies and afternoon dismissal announcements.  In October, 2009, district leadership collected approximately 189 responses to a perceptual survey regarding the learning environment.  School leadership collected approximately 60 parent surveys, administered in November, 2009, as part of the preparation for the Scholastic Audit.  Results from these perceptual surveys have not been analyzed for use in planning and decision-making to provide a safe, orderly, and equitable learning environment.
4.1c Teachers hold high expectations for all students academically and behaviorally, and this is evidenced in their practice.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of Lesson Plans
Review of Student Handbook
Review of Classroom Walkthrough Documents
Review of Assessments
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Few teachers communicate high academic expectations for all students.  Assignments do not consistently require higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills.  Classroom instructional strategies used by most teachers focus on lower levels of Bloom's Taxonomy that do not engage all students throughout the lesson.  Behavioral expectations are posted in many classrooms and are communicated to students.  Consequences for inappropriate behavior are not consistently applied to all students.  Many teachers shout directions and corrections at students.  Some teachers make comments and assign consequences that demean students.
4.1d Teachers and non-teaching staff are involved in both formal and informal decision-making processes regarding teaching and learning.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Mission, Vision, and Belief Statements
Review of School Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Many instructional staff are aware of the school's mission statement.  This statement does not consistently guide decision-making throughout the school.  Some classified staff members are aware of the school's mission and are invited to serve on school committees.  Most classified staff members collaborate with teachers when making decisions in their areas of responsibility related to student learning.
4.1f The school intentionally assigns staff to maximize opportunities for all students to have access to the staff's instructional strengths.
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of District Policy Manual
Review of Master Schedule
Review of Teacher Licensure Records
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms
Students have equitable access to all classes.  Art, music, physical education, and computer lab classes are offered in addition to the core content classes.  The district adheres to ADE regulations regarding student/teacher ratio.  Few attempts are made to match teacher strengths with individual student needs when assigning students to classes.  Teaching assignments are seldom adjusted to impact student learning.
4.1g Teachers communicate regularly with families about individual student progress (e.g., engage through conversation).
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of District Policy Manual
Review of District and School Websites
Review of Classroom Newsletters
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms and Common Areas
The local school board has adopted a policy on parent communication.  The school communicates with families through the school Web site, take-home notices, and parent-teacher conferences.  Some teachers create class newsletters that include practice exercises and upcoming test information.  Teachers are required to send progress reports to parents once every five weeks throughout the school year.  Few teachers include students in conferences when they report their progress to families.
4.1j There is evidence that student achievement is highly valued and publicly celebrated (e.g., displays of student work, assemblies).
Finding for this indicator is based on:
Review of ACSIP
Review of Student Work Samples
Interviews with Administrators, Staff, Parents, and Students
Observations of Classrooms and Common Areas
Each semester, the school hosts an honors program designed to celebrate the students' academic successes.  This program includes the Principal's Honor Roll, A-B Honor Roll, and Most Improved Students.  Student work is posted in most classrooms, and work scored as "Advanced" is showcased in the hallways of the school.  Some displayed work includes limited teacher feedback.  Student work, rubrics, and scoring guides are not consistently used to guide student learning and self-reflection.
4.1k The district/school provides support for the physical, cultural, socio-economic, and intellectual needs of all students, which reflects a commitment to equity and an appreciation of diversity.