Posts Tagged ‘Exhibit 1’

Exhibit 1: Educator Learning: Tracking Student Progress

Exhibit 1, Artifact 3–email to KHS faculty

Exhibit1, Artifact 2– COLLABORATION SHEET-1

Exhibit 1, Artifact 1–SMART Goals 2011-12

EDU 6600: Communication and Collaboration

Laurie James’ Exhibit 1: Educator Learning: Tracking Student Progress        

Exhibit type A: Educator Learning. Identify a school improvement goal and show how related educator learning can be planned based on the needs of the school (data that illustrates the need via student achievement, faculty input, and/or community sources) leveraging effective designs for school based collaborative strategies.

CONTEXT: The data that illustrates the need for tracking individual student achievement is based upon: (1) District requirement for each school to submit an annual Comprehensive School Improvement Plan, (2) Legal requirements to provide Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) to student’s with Individual Education Programs (IEPs) as well as to, (3) Comply with newly articulated mandates from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) via our special education administrator’s directives. The first identified school improvement goal related to Exhibit 1 is: Kingston High School Improvement Goal # 2: Decrease drop-out rate from 9th grade to graduation. Objective A: Increase the number of students on track to graduate with class. Objective B: Decrease the number of students receiving F’s, especially in the 9th grade. The second required school improvement goal is to increase documentation related to progress reporting on students’ IEP goals, in accordance with OSPI mandates as outlined by our district’s special education director, in September of 2011.

Each PLC group in our school was required to complete new “SMART” goals for the 2011-12 year (Artifact #1). These were due to the Leadership Team—October 24th, and will be compiled into our 2011-2012 School Improvement Plan–prior to submission to the school board. Our Special Education PLC team agreed to include within our SMART goals—requirements set forth by OSPI—regarding collaboration:

….The general education teacher and the special education teacher must collaborate on a regular basis to monitor and assess the student’s progress toward achieving the IEP goals. This communication should be documented. The special education teacher is responsible for keeping progress documentation in order to assess progress in coordination with the general education teacher. The general education teacher should request consultation with the special education teacher if additional assistance if needed in order to implement the goals for the student….(NKSD, Special Education Director, 2011)

PLANNING, ENGAGEMENT, ANALYSIS, RESEARCH-BASED: The approach I have initiated and intend to follow through with for planning, engagement, and analysis of the use of the newly designed “Collaboration Sheet for Special Education and General Education Teachers” (Artifact # 2) is to ensure that each of my colleagues (fellow IEP case managers) and I, strategically communicate with each general education teacher, regarding each student on their respective lists. The information noting areas of qualification (located in the center of the document) will be taken into consideration when implementing accommodations and modifications across any/all subject areas (if applicable). The information on the right-hand side of each form will be used for tracking performance on specific IEP goals in the areas of reading, writing, and/or math—with English and math teachers, respectively. Notations will be made to document conversations, emails, interventions used, and progress made. This ongoing documentation on the “Collaboration Sheets” will become especially critical as we near the end of each quarter and considerations are made regarding student grades. Process outlined in an email to KHS staff (Artifact #3). Please note: Although the information pertains to each member of our SE PLC and we each collaborate with general education teachers, the email is written from me personally, since I am the team member who coordinates the specific and individualized lists.

As I consider the above described school improvement goals and exhibit, I relate most readily to the section in Zepeda’s Chapter 8, entitled, Getting Down to Brass Tacks. Zepeda reminds us that although many different approaches can be used for evaluating educational programs as well as professional development, “….there are some generally accepted evaluation processes that are particularly applicable to educational programs: selecting a focus, establishing an evaluation agreement, collecting data, organizing and analyzing the data, and reporting the results to stakeholders” (p. 48). Clearly, the issues involved in fully implementing student IEPs, including tracking of progress, use of accommodations and modifications, and communication to all required parties of the IEP team, relate to the above outlined processes. Additionally, I see correlation between legally required IEP processes and the information presented in Figure 2.10:

What Evaluation Reports Can Do (p. 56): 1) Demonstrate accountability 2) Convince 3) Educate 4) Explore and investigate 5) Document 6) Involve 7) Gain support 8)Promote understanding and 9) Promote public relations


September 6, 2011      Provide student names with corresponding case manager to GE teachers

September 14, 2011    Provide IEP information, accommodations and goals to GE teachers

October 23, 2011        Submission of PLC Smart Goals to KHS Leadership Team/School Board

October 26, 2011        Individual collaboration sheets to GE teachers, data to case managers

Ongoing:                    Both GE and SE teachers review and track progress throughout each term with consultation during planning time/before/after school, as required.

November 9, 2011       End of Term 1—post grades for review by November 15th

January 31, 2012        End of Semester 1—post grades for review by February 5th

April 13, 2012             End of Term 3—post grades for review by April 18th

June __, 2012              Team will review student data and tracking procedures with GE

June 15, 2012              End of Semester 2 – post grades for review by June 21st

RESOURCES: It is anticipated that the work for this exhibit will be conducted during the parameters of the school day—during planning time, before and after school, and during weekly Professional Learning Community sessions.


Attachment 1 — KHS, Special Education PLC Smart Goals 2011-2012

Attachment 2 – GE / SE Collaboration sheet example

Attachment 3 – Email to KHS faculty


Zepeda, S. (2008). Professional Development: What Works. New York: Eye on Education.